Basic Building Blocks of Ancient Israel

There are restrictions in the Torah on whom a man may take as a wife. (Lev. 18:5ff) He may not marry (or have sexual relations with):

• his mother or any wife of his father
• a daughter of either of his parents
• his grandchild
• a stepsister, half-sister, or sister-in-law
• an aunt from either of his parents' families
• any daughter or granddaughter of his wife from her previous marriage
• his wife's sister while his wife is still living
• any woman who is someone else's wife (Ex. 20:17)

Since men and women were segregated much of the time, how did men in ancient Israelite society meet women whom they might wish to marry? They could meet at the feasts to which all able-bodied men were required to attend, but which most women who were free or able to attend would attend as well. They might meet while working in the fields (the way Boaz met Ruth). Many met their wives at wells. (Moshe, Yitzhaq's representative, and Yaaqov) This also highlights the fact that many unmarried women were shepherdesses, though not every shepherd was a woman. Since wells were held in common by several local clans, meeting a wife at a well often meant people married their distant cousins. There was a pattern of marrying relatives in Avraham, Yitzhaq, and Yaaqov's case, partly because of the negative religious influence others around them would have had. (Ex. 34:11 forbids us to marry pagans, for they will tend to turns us away from YHWH, as seen in Deut. 7:3. There are spirits attached to any cultural heritage, and they will ensnare those who become united to one who still practices them. Usually the woman's practice wins out, since women are by nature more spiritual than men. A man from outside Israel may not marry an Israelite woman unless he becomes part of Israel, but he cannot just join the nation at large; he must attach himself to a particular, already-established house. He might only have been an Israelite for a few years, but if he is committed to that household, its honor extends to him and no one can ever remind him that he was once not an Israelite.

A man is said to "take" (choose, receive, or acquire) a wife. (Deut. 24:1) The wife calls her husband ba'al (owner), as he has title over her. That means her children are his, and she serves his house, but he does not have a right to sell her like any other possession he owns (though he can sell one of his children to pay a debt). A man may purchase another man's daughter to be his wife, but if he does he is never permitted to divorce her or diminish her inheritance, no matter how many other wives he takes.

The bride price (mohar) does not buy her. It is paid to her father (to whom the proposal is made for marriage rather than to the woman herself), but it belongs to the wife as "insurance" in case she is ever widowed or divorced. (Gen. 31:14-16) It is stored up or invested by her family until such a time as it is needed. The minimal bride price (paid for humiliating a virgin) is 50 sheqels of silver. (Deut. 22:28ff) The bride price might not be monetary. Kalev offered his daughter to whomever would capture a city (Josh. 15:16; Judges 1:12), and David paid Sha'ul more than his asking price of 100 Philistine foreskins! Yaaqov provided seven (and, as it turned out, really 14) years of labor for his father-in-law as Rakhel's bride price. Additional gifts were often given to the family of the bride to compensate them for the loss of her help in the household. (Gen. 24:52ff; 34:12)

The proper protocol was that the groom-to-be proposed marriage to the woman's father, who then discussed the matter with all her brothers and made inquiries to screen him before it would ever go any further. If they all agreed, her parents would then ask the woman herself if she was interested in marrying the man. Then the choice was up to her, though arrangements had often already been made.

There are two stages to a Hebrew marriage. The first, betrothal (aras), is like engagement, but much more binding. The woman is already "under contract" and responsible to be faithful. Neither party can back out of the arrangement without deep dishonor to both families. The second stage is the wedding (be'ulah), when the husband has the right and responsibility to consummate the marriage.

Betrothal and Wedding Ceremonies

The Talmud says that the minimum age for a male to marry is 13, and 12 for a female—the same as the traditional age for bar or bat mitzvah. This was from very close to the time of Yahshua.

One who is betrothed to a wife but has not yet taken her may be excused from the army. (Deut. 20:7) This is a privilege one is not even given if he has a newborn child. Later the Torah added that one should not be called into the army or any civic duty for a year after his marriage. (Deut. 24:5)

The betrothed woman is considered his wife, and if she is found willingly consenting to lie with another man, she and the other man are both to be executed (Deut. 22:22-27), for she belongs to another and has broken this covenant to which YHWH Himself has been a witness. (Mal. 2:14; Prov. 2:17) The groom, however, is not considered her husband until the second stage of the marriage; her father is still her ba'al until that point.

Joseph Good notes that when Yahshua told His disciples, "In My Father's house are many chambers. I am going to prepare a place for you; I will come again and receive you to Myself…" (Yochanan 14:2-3), He was speaking in the terminology of the betrothal ceremony. The ceremony also included the presentation of tokens of intent, such as a ring and bracelets. (Gen. 24) The bride is then veiled to let all know that she is now set apart to a ba'al. This stage of the marriage could last up to 13 years, but usually was one to two years—until the groom's father determined that all was ready, which meant the groom himself did not know exactly when it would end either. (Compare Mat. 24:36.) He would be building the khuppah (wedding canopy) and the kheder (bridal chamber), and the bride would be learning to make herself beautiful for her husband and how to be a capable wife.

(2nd stage) Consummation (be'ulah/kiddushin) One thing that stands between the two ceremonies (aras and be'ulah) is celebration by the people. One enters the covenant by an oath, though in Scripture the marriage is seen more as civil (before the people of Israel) than religious as such, though YHWH certainly has a hand in it all. Those He joins together, no one is to separate. (Mat. 19:6) Yahshua cited this concept to show that some of those supposedly most religious were actually entering into marriages for reasons of political advancement rather than marrying the ones YHWH had chosen as best-suited for them.

Both bride and groom would wear white. The bride wore a crown of gold, and the groom a garland of olive branches that is placed on him by his mother. (Song of Songs 3:11) He is "on display" before the other women.

The bride also wears a veil, for she is seen as a queen, to be most highly honored on that day. (Song 4:1-3) If she is not the first wife, she has certain rights—to receive the same ring and the same amount of jewelry as other wives. She is brought in wearing embroidered clothes, accompanied by unmarried companions with gladness and rejoicing. (Psalm 45:14) The groom comes out from his father's house, where there has already been some measure of celebration, in a procession with his friends and brothers and much baggage, to be greeted by musicians. (1 Maccabees 9:39)

Joseph Good adds that the Passover was YHWH's covenant meal with Israel. Moses led them away from one master to another. The blood of the lamb was the bride price. Mt. Sinai, being lifted up off the ground so they could go UNDER it (Ex. 19:17) was their khuppah.

A written contract called the ketubah is signed.

There were two witnesses at the wedding. (Compare Z'kharyah 4; Rev. 11:3.) One (much like today's "maid of honor") escorts the bride to the khuppah, and the other (much like today's "best man") accompanies the groom.

The father of the groom gives a feast for his son (Mat. 22:2). The bride is entitled to a feast that lasts seven days. (Gen. 29:27) If someone is being honored very highly, the feast can last 14 days. (Tobit 8:20)

On the first night of the feast (Gen. 29:23), the couple goes into the wedding chamber for the yikhad (consummation—becoming one). Now he is finally her ba'al. The "friend of the bridegroom" (Yoch. 3:29-30) stands outside and listens for the groom to call out to him that the marriage has become complete. He then relays this information to the guests who are already celebrating at the father's house (Yoch. 14:2), and of course this takes the celebration to a higher level.

The laws in Torah regarding borrowers are very similar to the mohar (bride price), because the groom is essentially borrowing the bride from her family. Like a bank that holds the note for a loan that is not yet paid off, the family holds the groom responsible to take proper care of their daughter. They could "recall" her if they feel she is not being treated rightly; the children that result from the marriage belong to the father regardless. The parents keep the proof of the woman's virginity at the time of the yikhad—the blood-stained sheet. If the husband, discontent with the wife for some other reason, falsely accuses her of not having been a virgin at the time of the wedding, the parents can bring the blood as proof. (Deut. 22:13-15) It was common to have the legal marriage document signed only by the male, according to archaeological findings at Elephantine and around the Dead Sea, though a few signed also by the wife have been found. Usually all it had to say was, "I take this woman for my wife" (with both of their names). Merely "taking" a woman without a legal document may be what makes the difference between her being a concubine and being a full-fledged wife. If a man seduces a virgin who is not betrothed, he is required to marry her. (Ex. 22:16)

Annulment or Divorce

If a woman was married because her husband first raped her, he is never permitted to divorce her (Deut. 22:28), for he humiliated her and married only for selfish reasons, rather than with the benefit of the whole community in mind. If a man made a false accusation that he did not find his wife a virgin when they married may also never divorce her. (Deut. 22:18)

How seriously YHWH takes adultery (which always involves another man's wife, as contrasted with fornication, which can involve an unmarried woman) is seen in Genesis 20:3ff and 26:7ff, where YHWH was ready to destroy a king and all his subjects because he had taken Avraham's wife into his harem, though he did not know she was h is wife. In adultery, both parties are to be stoned to death. (Lev. 20:10; 22:23) When one is suspicious that his wife has committed adultery, a test is administered (Numbers 5), but if she admits to wronging her husband, there is no requirement in Scripture that one divorce her, except in the case of a priest's daughter, in which case she has profaned her father and must be burned alive (Lev. 21:9). This is fornication, for adultery would require that she be stoned.

There are many warnings in Proverbs about the "strange woman" who forsakes her companion. (e.g., 2:16ff). She is compared to a deep pit and a narrow well—both very hard to get out of once entered. (23:27-28) Chapters 1 through 9 compare the righteous union that leads to life with this path, which leads to death. Wisdom is personified as a woman (1:20), and the strange woman also symbolizes one who turns away from the Torah, for adultery is a common way YHWH describes His people's idolatry. Paganism is a flattering adulteress who is beautiful, but will destroy us.

If someone divorces his wife and marries another, he cannot go back and take the first wife again if the second marriage ends. (Deut. 24:1-4) This is one of many things YHWH says would make Israel common like all the other nations rather than set apart. But if the woman never actually married another man, or if the first marriage was annulled in the betrothal stage, before they had consummated the marriage, the first husband can take her back. This theme figures importantly in the saga of YHWH and Israel, for like Gomer, Hoshea's wife, she has "fooled around" on Him, but never actually married any of her lovers, so YHWH does plan to take her back, as he says so often throughout all of the prophets.

Levirate Marriage (Yavam)

YHWH killed a man who refused to fulfill this obligation to his brother. (Gen. 38:9ff)

If there is no brother-in-law, the deceased husband's uncle is the next of kin, then his uncle's son. (Lev. 25:49) We see this "nearer kinsman" issue in the book of Ruth, as Boaz had agreed to serve as Ruth's redeemer, but a certain Ploni Almoni had the first right to redeem both Naomi's land and provide a son for Ruth's deceased husband. Through levirate marriage, an outsider like Ruth who married into Israel could also remain part of Israel.

If a widow had no family to go back to, but had a son, his inheritance would serve to support her as well. If she had only daughters, the land inheritance would be lost unless her daughters marry within the tribe to protect the inheritance. The Land was divided in a specific way for a particular purpose, and YHWH did not want it to move from tribe to tribe. The brother-in-law who fulfills his role also ensures that she remains attached to her late husband's land. If she was not attached to some head-of-household, anyone could take advantage of her. There were no police as such. The males of her family would serve in this role. If she is childless and without a covering of any kind, she is a "true widow" (e.g., 1 Tim. 5:5-9) has YHWH's special concern (Ex. 22:22) and would be cared for by the people of Israel through the mediation of the Levites. A priest's widowed daughter with no child would go back to her father's household. (Lev. 22:13)

The Position of Women

In ancient Israelite society, women were never permitted to divorce their husbands, or even leave them. If abused, her (father's) family could defend or avenge her. Religious authorities could beat lawbreakers (and some still do). Without a supportive community to hold her husband accountable and pressure him to treat her rightly, she had no recourse, for the cohesion of the overall society is preserved by keeping everyone in order under a clear chain of command. This also establishes the parallel that Israel has no grounds to divorce YHWH no matter what He brings on us.

A male indentured servant goes free every seventh year. (Shemoth/Ex. 21:1-11) A female servant does not. However, 21:8 says, "If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, he must allow her to be redeemed; he has no authority to sell her to a foreign nations, since he has dealt treacherously with her." This strongly suggests that for a woman to be sold as a servant, she had to become a literal part of the family—either the wife of the purchaser or of his son. (v. 9) Essentially she is surrendering her bride price to the one she will work for. He is not permitted to treat her any worse than any other wives he may have. If he does, she is permitted to leave freely. But notice that she is only eligible for ransom if she displeases him. She may not be ransomed by her family otherwise.

A woman captured in war may be taken as a wife, but she must have her hair (her glory) and her fingernails (symbol of her past culture) removed, and she must be allowed 30 days to mourn the loss of her family. (D'varim/Deut. 21:10ff) If he ends up not being pleased with her, he may let her go free but may not sell her or treat her harshly, because she has been humiliated. (21:14)

A woman's status was greatly enhanced as she bore children (as we see in Rachel and Leah's competition), especially sons, who are the heirs and buildingblocks of Israelite society. (Ruth 4:11) If a man has more than one wife, and the firstborn is the son of a less-favored wife, he is still responsible to leave the normal inheritance of the firstborn (double portion) to him.

A woman only receives an inheritance if she has no brothers. (BaMidbar/Num. 27, 36)

If a wife was unable to bear children, she had the right to give her maidservant to her husband to bear him children in her name. In that case, the maidservant was legally childless; the children belonged to the actual wife. (Seen in the case of Bilhah and Zilpah, handmaids of Rachel and Leah)

If she makes an unwise vow, her husband (if married) or father (if not) may annul it on the day he hears about it; otherwise he is responsible to see that she fulfills it. If she cannot, he must. A widow or divorcee is fully responsible for vows she makes. (BaMidbar 30:3-6)

The ultimate definition of what a woman is to a man is in B'reyshith/Gen. 2:18. It says she is a helper suitable for him—that is, corresponding to him, a counterpart that "opposes" him by "leaning against him" to support him and helps him stay balanced. This shows that YHWH does not intend for any of to be loners. It is the first thing He says was not right about His creation. Her strengths must be in his areas of weakness to make up for the gaps in his strength; if they are both alike, they will compete with each other for supremacy. (3:16)

Widows

If they were unable to work, food was still not just brought to them at home; they were designated a place to sit, stationed at a public place where others could come make their donations and be blessed in the giving. (We see an example of this in the lame man who sat every day by the gate called Beautiful, where Kefa and Yochanan met him and gave him the gift of being able to work again. One was only licensed to beg if there was nothing else he could do. This was not dishonorable, but rather was an open door for Israel to do the right thing. If there is any way one can work and he does not, receiving public welfare only undermines the integrity of the community.)

In the diaspora, where many communities were in urban settings, Sha'ul/Paul drew some parallel principles from these practices, which he established as rulings for believers in messiah. (1 Tim. 5:3ff) Young widows are not to be supported by the community coffer; they are to remarry. (Marriage is assumed in this culture.) Older widows are to be cared for by their own family. If they have no family at all, then the community supports them if they have proven deserving by their past service to their family or community. This way everyone remains responsible. If there is any way someone else can be taking care of them, they are not enrolled on the public dole list (v. 9), which was administered at the synagogue or other civil meeting place. This list was only for qualified widows, fatherless, blind, deaf, or lame.

Children (Yeladim)

Only Israel was monotheist at that time. As for everything else, Israel was to look to YHWH for the fertility that the land, animals, and people needed. He promised that if we did things His way, none of us would ever miscarry (Ex. 23:25-26) and that none among us or our livestock would be barren. (Deut. 7:14) This was a huge blessing, but our attitude today has shifted 180º from that viewpoint, so that we seek to develop more and more ways to remove fertility! Sterility carried a great stigma, whereas to have a child in old age was counted a supreme blessing. Most of the names of the tribal patriarchs are related to the blessing their birth would bring.

Having a son was considered important for many reasons: The father's name is perpetuated, which would not be the case with a daughter, for she will leave the home and become part of another's household to perpetuate her husband's name. A son protects his family's possessions and lands, for if someone has no heir, it seems as if YHWH is taking back His blessings. Sons are a way of extending one's life, for they are seen as extensions of oneself. What my son accomplishes, I am seen as having done. He must also uphold his father's reputation.

Sons usually carried on the same trade as their fathers. That this practice also carried on into very recent years is shown by surnames like "Baker", "Smith", "Miller", or "Cooper". This was their name because it was what they did, and sons were generally expected to learn that family trade.

Childbirth

If a child is born "on the knees of another", this is an idiom for adoption, but often they literally got into this position using a birthing stool to allow the newborn to actually pass between the legs of the adoptive mother. (Gen. 30:3) In Mesopotamia, women in labor crouched over benches made of bricks and stones. There is an opening in the bench, and the midwife crouches in front of it and catches the baby as it is born. A similar symbolism could be practiced by adoptive fathers. (Gen. 48:12; 50:23) It was considered an honor for a tribal chief, for example, to have his wife adopt a servant's child, because he would then have a higher place in society, though his parents were usually the ones to actually rear him.

The prophets often use childbirth as an object lesson for YHWH's dealings with Israel, showing that men, too, were very familiar with women's painful experience of the birth process. He speaks of bringing distress on people that cannot be ignored, like birth pangs. (Yeshayahu 13:5-8; 37:3; Yirmeyahu 4:30-31; 6:24; 2 Kings 19:3; Hos. 13:13, 21; Rev. 12:2, etc.)

At birth, a child had his umbilical cord cut, was washed in water, then rubbed with salt (to draw pores shut, make him cry to get his lungs functioning well, and possibly to toughen his skin against the harsher climate he lived in), then wrapped in cloths (Y'hezq'el 16:4; Iyov 38:8) --not one large cloth, but tightly with many strips so he almost appeared mummified. This may have felt more like the womb to the infant. Males are to be circumcised on the eighth day. (Gen. 21:4; more on this later.)

When the child was weaned (typically at 3 years old), there was a great feast. (Gen. 21:8)

Birth Order

We can glimpse the importance of birth order in the account of Yoseyf and his brothers. (Gen. 43:33)

The birthright is the right to inherit the father's authority. When the father dies, the eldest son becomes the head of the household, and receives twice the inheritance of the other children, unless he does something to forfeit his rights; then it passes to the second son. Or, as in Esau's case, it can be sold. (Gen. 25:31ff) In Israel the right of the throne went to Yehudah (the line through whom Yahshua came), because his three older brothers lost their rights for various reasons. Yoseyf, however, received the birthright, being the eldest of Yaaqov's other wife. (1 Chron. 5:1-2)

The firstborn receives a double portion since he is the "beginning of his father's strength". (Gen. 49:3) So an inheritance had to be divided by the number of sons one has--plus one. With this extra portion came the responsibility of upholding the family's welfare if they should ever fall into poverty or debt. YHWH upholds the right of the firstborn even if his mother is not his father's favorite wife. (D'varim/Deut. 21:15-17) This inheritance is slightly different from the birthright, which has to do with being the priest to the family.

The firstborn is dedicated to YHWH since YHWH killed the firstborn in Egypt for Israel's sake. (Ex. 13:2ff) This does not mean he is sacrificed as the idolaters did. In fact, He said anyone who does this must be put to death by his own family. (Lev. 20:2ff) The deity He specifically mentions in this connection is Molekh, which means "the one who rules". The modern equivalent of this would be turning our children over to the "powers that be" or in ways that would make "the system" think they own them, when in fact they belong to YHWH and Israel. Another parallel would be letting the children be the ones that rule—something they are not capable of doing, yet which the world wants to "empower" them to do.

Rather, YHWH says we can redeem the firstborn unless we wish to let them serve Him for life as Hannah did with Shmu'el. Otherwise, the Levites substitute for them, but there is a price to pay for this. (Num. 3:12) YHWH does not allow us to delay in bringing the ransom price. (Ex. 22:29; 34:20) If one is born a descendant of Levi and especially of Aharon, he has a privileged and responsible position that everyone else in Israel knows they do not have. He is a servant of YHWH, and with that comes special honor. The lines are clear. He put strengths and weaknesses in each tribe for different purposes. People today believe they have more authority than they actually do, but this is built on a platform that cannot remain standing long. True authority is based on merit and YHWH's choice.

All of mankind can be represented by two men, Adam and Yeshua. Adam was the firstborn, but lost his birthright because he breached the agreement by sinning. Yahshua, like Adam, was called the Son of Elohim, and so He was the "younger brother". He accomplished what Adam should have originally done, so He merited the birthright. In the account of Pharaoh's slaying of the firstborn, the excuse the midwives gave Pharaoh of why they did not kill the baby Hebrew boys was that they were born quickly; i.e., the women walking more closely with YHWH had an easier labor. (Ex. 19) This may refer back to the curse of having greater difficulty in labor given in Genesis 3:16.

Naming

Moshe was given a prophetic name, meaning "drawn out" (Ex. 2:10), and YHWH later said He knew Moshe by name. (33:12, 17) This means more than just that He knew who he was; He recognized that Moshe had been given the right name, for he was the type of man who could draw Israel out of Egypt. Yaaqov asked the one who wrestled with him what his name was. (Gen. 32:29) Knowing it would give him insight into the essence of this powerful stranger. He thought he could get a better grip on him if he knew what to call him.

Children were often named according to historical occurrences. After Eli died, his daughter named her newborn son Ichavod ("the glory has departed", 1 Shmuel 4:21). Leah's and Rachel's children reflect their rivalry for Yaaqov's heart:

• Re'uven = "See, a son!" (Leah's desperate cry to be loved)
• Shim'on = "hearing" (YHWH heard her prayer)
• Levi = "to be joined to" (the Levites join people to YHWH)
• Yehudah = "to praise" (thinking her husband would praise her.)
• Yissachar = "My hiring" (because she paid for the occasion to conceive him.)
• Z'vulun = "To dwell with" (She wanted her husband to stay with her permanently.)
• Dinah, the seventh child and Dan, the seventh son, both mean "judgment".
• Yoseyf = "YHWH will add" (or, "there will be another"—I won't just have one son!)
• Ben Oni ("son of my pain"), renamed Ben Yamin = "son of the right hand" (or, "son of [many] days".)

During the early period of Israel's history, as evidenced by the births of the 12 patriarchs, a child was named at birth. Later, we see evidence of at least sons being named on the eighth day at their circumcision. (Luke 1:59) Possibly the delay was to seek insight into the spirit of the child by how he acted and inquiry of YHWH about what he was meant to become.

The mother often named the children, but the father had authority to confirm (Luke 1:60-63) or overrule (Gen. 35:18). Avram named Ishmael (Gen. 16:15), probably because his mother was a slave and had no right even to name her child. Moshe named his son Gershom because it reflected the fact that he was in exile at the time. (Ex. 2:22) Essentially, who names the child comes down to whichever is listening more closely to YHWH and discerning the times.

By Yahshua's time it was accepted practice to name someone after another relative. (Luke 1:61)

A king's name often became a title to his dynasty: Pharaoh, Caesar, Avimelekh (which means "my father is a king"!)

Many kings of nations included the name of their elohim in their name: Akhaz-YAH, YEHO-shaphat, BEL-shazzar, Ben-HADAD, Eth-BAAL, NEVU-khadnetzar. Sometimes the king was then seen as somehow possessing the essence of that deity. Other people also were given such "theophoric" names: Dani-EL, ELiYAHU, YEHO-shua. When someone gave his name, someone could immediately make some assumptions about where he came from and what his practices were. Place-names were also based on the name of the local deity: Baal-Peor, Mt. Nevo, etc. Yaaqov named the place where he encountered the unknown wrestler PeniEl, or, "the face of Elohim."

People usually lived their whole lives within a few miles of their birth, so "last names" were not needed. They usually appended their father's name: Y'hoshua ben-Nun, or that of a prominent ancestor (Yoseyf ben-David), or one's clan (the Makhirites, the Rekhavites).

When people were taken captive in war or siege, their names were often changed by the conqueror: Daniel to Belteshazzar, his three friends Chananyah, Misha-el, and Azaryah to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. These names are based on the names of the elohim of the conqueror, Babylon, and reflected the captor's new authority in their lives and his wish that they would assimilate. Esther's name change was to protect her identity until the right time, but she continued to be referred to by her Gentile name, possibly because it was more unique than Hadassah and clarified just who was being spoken about—"the" Queen Esther.

When other peoples or their prevailing cultures occupied Israel, people sometimes appended foreign names to their Hebrew ones: Yochanan Marcus, Flavius Josephus, etc. Sometimes other prevailing languages influences their names in part: Bar-nabas, Bar Kochba, Shimon Bar-Yonah (Aramaic form instead of the Hebrew "ben"; later we see the Arabic "ibn" used in Jewish names because of the context in which they lived). In other cases, Hebrew people took Gentile names for themselves or gave their children Gentile names: Stephanos, Nicanor, Philip. Sometimes this was to gain more prestige or favor, and sometimes it was just a natural byproduct of several generations of living under occupation, whether forced or invited.

If YHWH intervened and changed someone's name (e.g., Yaaqov to Israel), it meant He was changing the direction of their path. He was no longer to be thought of as a thief, but as one who wrestled with Elohim and prevailed. In the same spirit, Moshe changed Hoshea's name (which simply meant "salvation") to Y'hoshua ("YHWH saves").—and Yahshua changed Shim'on's name to Kefa ("a rock" or "pebble"). Rav Sha'ul called himself Paul ("little one" or "workman") after a major event changed the way he viewed himself.

Circumcision

The ceremony is a household one, not connected with the priesthood or temple (predating both). No priest need be present, and there was no particular custom of celebration; that came when the child was weaned. (Gen. 21:8)

The technique was to use a sharp stone (Ex. 4:25; Y'hoshua 5:2), often flint, since it can be sharpened like a knife. It was already the late bronze age when the command was given, and surgeons in Egypt had been using bronze for a thousand years. But the state-of-the-art knives were not used, since the custom was an ancient one, and the idea was to do it in the way one's ancestors had done it.

Why on the 8th day? (Lev. 12:3) The body doesn't produce enough vitamin K for the blood to coagulate quickly until that day, and the level of prothrombin (which speeds healing) is the highest in one's whole life on this day! It can be done on the Sabbath. (Yochanan 7:22) As at Sukkoth, the 8th day (Shemini Atzeret, or the "8th conclusion/encore") is very significant because it symbolizes a new beginning after the cycle of 7 is complete. A boy is circumcised on the 8th day to speak of a "new beginning", a renewal of covenant.

If done to an older child or adult, it is very painful (Y'hoshua 5:8), and worst on the third day. (Gen. 34:24) As in this account, it was linked to marriage. Some Arabs still circumcise just before marriage, and in the traditional Judaic ceremony, circumcision is called the gateway to the khuppah (wedding canopy). Gentiles who want to marry Israelites must be circumcised. Israel is a set-apart people chosen for a task, and it is a reproach to give their daughters to uncircumcised men. But they can become Israelites this way.

Even slaves bought by an Israelite household had to enter the covenant and obey its laws. (Gen. 17:10-14) Its importance to Israel is highlighted by the fact that to eat the lamb at Pesakh (Passover), one must be circumcised. (Ex. 12:43-48) The Egyptians rarely did it (Yirmeyahu 9:25-26); a few circumcised mummies have been found, but probably owing to Hebrew influence through Yoseyf, etc.

"Circumcision" also applies to the fruit of a tree. (Lev. 19:23) Uncircumcised lips indicate an inability to speak properly (Ex. 12:30), for the word for the foreskin in Hebrew (orlah) literally means "excess" or something that hangs over, that keeps one from performing the natural function of the organ. We are told in Yirmeyahu 6:10 that uncircumcised ears keep us from delighting in YHWH's words. An uncircumcised heart is a symbol of having no understanding. (Yirm. 9:25-26)

Education

Education was chiefly the responsibility of parents until King John Hyrcanus (of the Maccabees' dynasty) established mandatory formal schooling for children c. 130 B.C.E. This was the first such law in history, since elsewhere school was only for the privileged classes.

It is the duty of every Israelite to recount what He has done to the next generations. (Ps. 71:18; 78) Fathers and elders are especially commanded to teach the Torah's commands to their sons and grandsons, as well as the national history of Israel, especially at Passover (Ex. 10:2; 12:26; 13:8; Deut. 2:7; 4:9; 6:7; 32:7, 46). Monuments and rituals were designed to make children ask questions and thus create occasions to relate YHWH's works (Deut. 4:9; 6:7, 20; Y'hoshua 4:5-7) As they walked past them on long pilgrimages (1 Shmuel 1:21), there would be plenty of time to tell the complete story. It was often made exciting and easier to memorize through the means of song. (2 Shmuel 1:17; Ex. 15) Even teaching the child a trade was seen as for the purpose of keeping him from disobeying YHWH's command not to steal.

Anciently children were taught the book of Leviticus (the center and heart of the Torah) by age 5. They were to be conversant in all the Scriptures by age 10, and then instructed in its applications by the Bar/Bat Mitzvah at 12 or 13.

The Hebrew word for "teach" (lamad) literally means to prod with a sharp stick! Another term used in Deut. 6 means "bring [the matter] to a point".

Parents commonly used the shevet (which means "rod", but also the staff of a shepherd or king), for it drives foolishness from them and brings rest and delight to the parents (Prov. 13:24; 22:15; 29:15-17). YHWH describes His own chastening in terms of a father's (Deut. 8:5; 2 Sam. 7:14; Prov. 3:12). It is not to be done out of anger, but with the discipline (warning, instructing, turning, correcting) of the child in mind. (Deut. 8:5) If he continues to act perversely, blows may be used (2 Shmuel 7:14) to avoid a far worse punishment. (Deut. 21:18ff) Indeed, "father" and "teacher" were often interchangeable terms. (2 Kings 2:11ff; Jdg 17:10; Gen. 45:8)

Levites are especially duty-bound to teach Israel (Mal. 2:7), and Israel the whole world. Prophets taught the kings (2 Kings 12:2) Schools of the prophets (2:3-5) mainly taught the "sons of the prophets" Torah (the foundation for YHWH to work with), not how to foretelling or speak in tongues. If a great teacher invited one to study under him, it was considered an insult to refuse. (1 Kings 19:19ff)

Young children were taught to write. (Judges 8:14) There were special schools for scribes/recorders (Yirm. 36:4; 2 Sam. 8:17; 20:25; 1 Kings 4:3). Archaeologists have found countless commonplace potsherds and even walls used for practice. Women also learned to write. (1 Kings 21:8) Isaiah was told to write his visions (ch. 8). Unlike most ancient nations in which writing was forbidden to the masses and often even to kings, being limited only to the cultures' religious priests, in Israel writing extended to the majority of the population so that they could have a foundation from YHWH's word, since the whole nation is to be a "kingdom of priests". (Ex. 19:6)

The Corpse

Psalm 18:5 speaks of she'ol (the abode of the dead) as a place of sorrows. The mighty are weakened when they come there. (Yeshayahu 14:9-10) It is a place of "lowering" and humiliation (Ps. 16:10), and is equated with the "lower parts of the earth"—i.e., at the foot of a mountain. (Y'hezq'el 32:17-18, 24) It is paralleled with a pit. She'ol comes from the verb sha'al, which means to ask for, beg, borrow, or enquire. It is a place that we enquire about, but it borrows us until the resurrection, for the righteous are not abandoned to it forever. (Psalm 16:10) One is kept there "in storage", so to speak. Yahshua released some from it upon His death. (Eph. 4:8ff; 1 Kefa 3:18-19)

The custom of closing one's eyes at his death was already common by Yoseyf's day. (Gen. 46:4) Death is seen as a state of sleep; it is temporary. A dead body is treated with care because of a belief in the resurrection. In the cave of the letters, we see people buried fully clothed, for they were clearly expected to come back and were treated with respect. To rob a grave would be punishable by death.

Kings were honored with a huge fire in their memory. (Yirmeyahu 34:5) Their bodies were not burned; incense was (2 Chron. 21:19), symbolic of the fact that though we had suffered a great loss, YHWH had taken a great aroma to heaven. Archaeologist Gabi Barkay found each king's burning mound in a different location, except that of the evil Yehoram, for whom this was not done. (2 Chron. 16:14)

Burial

If someone is not buried, it is counted a curse. Having the birds and dogs eat one's flesh is a severe desecration (1 Kings 14:11), and one is counted like dung on the surface of the ground. (Yirmeyahu 16:4) When we see television images of Muslims dragging bodies through the streets, it is evidence that they still have the same beliefs. Being thrown outside the city like a dead donkey (Yirmeyahu 22:19) is seen as a guarantee that this person will not have eternal life, which is why they do it to their enemies. David rewarded those who risked their lives to "steal" Sha'ul and Yehonathan's bodies from their enemies, and honored the by taking their bones to their ancestors' tombs. (2 Shmuel 21:12) If someone's body is burned, it is considered a disgrace; YHWH did not forgive those who burned the bones even of the king of Edom. (Amos 2:1) Annihilating the royal seed like this was seen as eternally destroying one's enemy. This may be why Sha'ul and Yehonathan's bodies were burned, but their bones were saved. (1 Shmu'el 31:11-13) Being left in the open field was especially heinous to the Egyptians, who spent their entire lives preparing to be treated well at death. (Y'hezq'el 29:5)

Israel, in contrast, is not about death, but about life. (Deut. 30:19-20) Therefore, touching a corpse renders one ceremonially unclean. We see Yoseyf weeping over and kissing his father's corpse immediately after death to express closeness to the deceased (Gen. 50:1), though this was later forbidden to the priesthood. It is a picture of getting too close to what is not Torah.

Israelites were not embalmed or mummified, except in the case of Yoseyf, who lived in Egypt and specifically asked that his body be taken back to the Land of Israel when his people returned there. For this reason as well, he is the only ancient Hebrew whom we ever see having his body placed in a coffin. Israelites were normally carried on a stretcher or bier to be buried. (2 Shm. 3:31) In Israel, only kings were buried within cities. (2 Chron. 16:14).

We are told that the mighty are buried in a "separate place". (Y'hezq'el 32:27) They were not buried in a common grave, but in sepulchers, often with their battle-gear and armor (Egyptians saw the possessions buried with them as to be used right away, but Israelites at the resurrection.). This is one difference between she'ol (the low place where many are seen as thrown together in death, and kings are only buried when disgraced like Yehoiaqim) and a kever, which is a private tomb belonging to one family. Here the togetherness is positive, for one wanted to die near his home (2 Shmuel 19:37) and be "gathered to his fathers" (Gen. 49:29). There is a literal practice behind this idiom. One's body was placed on a shelf cut into the tomb; there were often several shelves in case several family members died in one year. After the flesh decayed, one's bones were placed in a hollowed-out space under the shelf where his ancestors' bones had been deposited the same way in previous generations. The blood tie continues beyond death. To be deprived of this was a curse (1 Kings 13:21), except where YHWH wanted the connection to one's past broken, as in the case of Avram. The most common thing found buried with people is an oil lamp, possibly to light the tomb when the next family member was buried.

Between 100 B.C.E. and 100 C.E., the bones were placed in ossuaries like the famous one labeled "Yaaqov, son of Yoseyf, the brother of Y'shua". (See photo at right.) Many have floral patterns on them. They were commonly dug out of soft rock (commonly limestone). Tombs can be dated by their style. They had a narrow opening and widened out inside; a naturally-wide cave mouth would be mostly filled in at the front.

Mourning

• Tearing one's garments. (Gen. 37:31-35; 2 Shmu'el 1:11ff) Some even went naked (Mikha 1:8), recollecting that we came into the world naked and we have no right to anything that we have lost. (Iyov 1:20ff) Clothing is an expression of one's status; to tear it expresses an admission of the temporality of all we have acquired. It is a confession that these fancy things mean nothing when YHWH has taken something truly important (a loved one) away from us.
  
  
• Putting on sackcloth (burlap or other rough, itchy material with the purpose of irritating, to bring us back into touch with this bitter reality that humanity is still under this curse of death because of sin and that we have suffered a real loss)
  
  
• Weeping tears, sighing (Y'hezq'El was told to refrain from these when his wife died, as a sign, 24:16ff)
  
  
• Fasting until evening (2 Shmuel 1:11ff; Esther 4:16)
  
  
• Taking off one's turban and sandals, going barefoot, and pining away (Y'hezq'el 24)
  
  
• Shaving one's head bald (Iyov 1:20; Yeshayahu 22:12; Yirmeyahu 16:6-7), possibly also to look like a newborn—or particular parts of one's head, or cutting oneself (both later forbidden by Torah, Deut. 14)
  
  
• Not washing or anointing one's body or changing one's clothes as usual (2 Shmu'El 12:19-22; 14:2)
  
  
• Covering one's lips (Y'hezq'El 24)
  
  
• Eating the "bread of sorrow" (Y'hezq'El 24) and an alcoholic "cup of comfort" (Yirmeyahu 16:7) --probably brought by friends because if the relative had died in the tent, any uncovered grain within it would have become defiled and have to be thrown out and the house itself counted unclean for seven days (Num. 19:14), so the mourner might have nothing to cook. (This is alluded to in Deut. 26:12, where we are told we may not give any of the third-year tithe, which has been set apart to YHWH, on behalf of the dead, for this would profane it. It also explains why Israelite settlements are often identifiable by a pattern of ditches lined with rocks and covered with stone. This was probably a place to keep food separate--and cool—where it would not be defiled in such an instance.)
  
  
• A seven-day period of mourning is customary, especially for an honored father (Gen. 50:7ff) or a king. (1 Shmu'El 31:13; 1 Chron. 10:12) Hence the custom of friends coming from near and far (Iyov 2:11-13) to "sit shiva' (seven days and nights)", a custom probably also alluded to in Yochanan 11 that survives among Jews to this day. The purpose is to comfort the one who most keenly feels the loss (Gen. 37:31-35) and to express the fact that they, too, share the loss.
  
  
• Falling on the earth before YHWH and putting dirt, dust, or ashes on one's head (Y'hoshua 7:6; 1 Shmu'El 4:12)
  
  
• Howling like a jackal (Mikha 1:8), wailing in the streets—very noisily, but probably unaccompanied by musical instruments, for they are more symbolic of joy. A common pattern was to say "Ho!" (Amos 5:16), followed by the person's name or "my brother". (1 Kings 13:30) The most bitter lament was when an only son died (Yirmeyahu 6:26; Amos 8:10), for then there was no heir left to the very deeply-bereaved parents.
  
  
• Mourning was usually followed by singing of laments. Yoshiyahu's lament was written down, taught to Yehudah, and used on many later funerary occasions.(2 Chron. 35:25), including that of the fallen heroes in the time of the Maccabees.
  
  
• Every family would mourn separately and the women separately from the men. (Z'kharyah 12:12ff) This allowed one to be freer to express his full emotions, which undoubtedly had a cathartic effect that people try to achieve through therapy today).
  
  
• David cursed those who had killed his companion and forced them to mourn for him as well! (2 Shmu'El 3:27ff)

Many of these same things are done when any very bad news, especially about the nation's welfare, is received. (Mikha 1:8) Many of them are also practiced during times of repentance (Iyov 42:6; Yonah 3:5), most notably the period so designated, leading up to Yom Kippur. (Lev. 23:27ff) David began fasting when his baby became ill, for part of the intent of mourning is to beg YHWH for sympathy.

Prophets often sang when giving prophecies of doom. (Y'hezq'El 32:15-16) Each had his own style for which he was known, and they probably used songs recognizable as dirges. There were established tunes that evoked the theme of mourning, much as "Amazing Grace" is sung at many funerals in the Southern U.S. today and is used to call up that feeling in films.

Though YHWH commanded different mourning rituals to be used on certain occasions, He did not prescribe any of them; they were chiefly cultural and community events—civil rather than religious as such. Today funerals are held in churches and people buried in graveyards. Ancient Israelite funerals did not call on prophets or priests, but rather paid professional mourners (both male and female), for they would make the event an especially fine affair. It was probably purposeful that Israel did not draw a religious connection at a time of death, for almost every ancient people had a cult of the dead, giving religious significance to their ancestors, as eastern cultures still do today. YHWH does not want us to connect His Kingdom with death, but with life. Of course there were overtones of the resurrection, but there was not necessarily anything blatantly about YHWH in it. Of course, with Him as our people's Elohim, everything we do centers on Him in one way or another. But Israelite laments as recorded in Scripture spoke of where the deceased had been, what they had done, the fact that they are no longer with us—but not where they are going.

When leaving Egypt, the men of war in Israel (aged 20 to 50) numbered just over 600,000. Extrapolating from this, it is estimated that the entire people numbered from 2.5 to 3 million. About 450 years later, when David took a census, there were 800,000 who drew the sword among the House of Israel, and 500,000 within Yehudah (indicating that there was already a division of sorts before Yaravam led the secession), for a total of 1.3 million men of war. This would indicate approximately 5 to 6 million altogether within Israel proper—about the same number of Jews in the Land today, so it was relatively crowded, though, like today, there were still wide open spaces.

Archaeology shows that at the time the Northern Kingdom was expelled, the population was reduced to about 2 million, and as the Assyrians and Babylonians harassed and murdered more, by the time Yehudah was taken into exile, only about a million remained in the Land. (Steve Collins documents that many from the Northern Kingdom had fled the Land when they knew the Assyrians were coming, and survived in colonies set up earlier by Shlomo, Ahab, etc.)

Towns and Cities

Of course, there were larger cities. Yet even Samaria, the capital of the Northern Kingdom, had a population of only 30,000 when captured, and in Yerushalayim's heyday (the Second Temple period), only 30,000 actually lived within the walls.

Most cities were on hills for defense purposes. Roads that ran between farms and sheepfolds would bypass cities, not go through them, for safety reasons. Many people would live their entire lives within a few miles of their birth, except to travel to the pilgrimage festivals. There was little reason to go anywhere else. They had to stay near their crops and herds to defend them from predators. Even craftsmen still usually had farms.

Divisions of the Population

In the wilderness, the whole nation was under Moshe's authority. When Israel settled down in the Land, sadly, we thought of ourselves less as part of a household and more as part of a city. Closest neighbors were still from the same tribe, but they assumed they'd offend YHWH, so He would not protect them from their enemies, and so built walled houses. By Yahshua's day, though the language retained many idioms more proper to a nomadic lifestyle, few still lived in tents. The emphasis on family never completely fell away, but people came to be known by who their neighbors were rather than who their father was (Eliyahu the Gil'adite, Yahshua of Natzereth, Sha'ul of Tarsus). Moshe knew this would be the tendency, so YHWH gave us laws to keep people in close quarters from killing one another! These would have been less necessary in the times of the patriarchs, when people spent more time with their flocks and herds and were glad to be back together again when the day was done or when it was time for a feast. This urbanization was not forbidden, but the drift away from tent-dwelling was our downfall. We no longer fully experienced the seasons, or felt our dependence on YHWH as keenly.

YHWH wanted those willing and inclined to give to be those who ruled His people. They were called Nedivim--"generous ones" or volunteers. (Num. 21:18) Levites were always seen as special, but this was YHWH's doing. As the ruling structure shifted from the father to choosing the wisest in a town to make its decision, new categories began to emerge and others were heralded as "special":

• Z'qanim (literally, "bearded", hence, "elder"—not necessarily old, but they had to have a certain level of maturity/experience)
  
  
• Sarim (princes in actual positions of royalty or from noble families), who would consult the elders for wisdom. (Judg. 8:6, 16)
  
  
• Khorim ("white/those dressed in linen")--"gentle" men who did not do manual labor or stay in the sun long (Yeshayahu 34:12) Wherever he went as a fugitive, David remembered how the elders treated him, and when he despoiled a town, he sent tribute-gifts back to them out of gratitude for their hospitality. (1 Shmu'el 30:26) As the monarchy grew centralized, the king thus had "cronies" in the whole land so he could have a support network when he needed allies. He kept his eyes open for strategic cities to garrison his troops in. Such a town would become influential, but they would suddenly have new "bosses" from outside—an administrative class who had the king's ear. These nobles could move things for him locally while he was remote.
  
  
• Nasi (one "lifted up"), held in respect for deeds or wisdom, raised to a higher place of authority by those over--or under—him.
  
  
• Proven heroes were called g'dolim ("great ones"). A gibbor khayil (able warrior) might also be distinguished by his equipment, especially if he made it himself or paid to have the best available made for him. If he had an iron sword, he was a hero because he could cut through an enemy's bronze shield. Those both valiant and with better bows were more in demand.
  
  
• Nagadim ("reporters" or "publishers"—or those whose voices were heard because they stood out and commanded respect)

Even in King Shlomo's day, we are warned about the rich. Even then the lines were being drawn (and much of what he compiled was probably more ancient still). He counsels us not to eat too much when in a wealthy man's house (Mishley/Prov. 23:1ff), because if he is feeding you, he probably wants something back from you. That may be how he got rich in the first place—off others. He tells us not to work too hard to become rich, for we will probably do things deserving punishment in the process. (28:20) It's better to have the truth and to enjoy the blessings that come with that instead. "The rich man is wise in his own eyes, but the poor who has discernment will search him out." (Prov. 28:11) And this from one of the richest men who ever lived!

On the other hand, being wealthy, he had some worthwhile insights about recognizing one's superiors: it is wrong that idiots rule while the rich do not. (Qoheleth/Eccles. 10:5) The crooked do sometimes gain higher positions than they should by using others. That is why many despise the rich. But rulers should not be lower than servants; people should know their proper place and walk in it with dignity.

By Roman times, people were either at the "top of the pile" or the bottom; there was no longer any middle class; "the rich got richer and the poor got poorer". Mat. 22:16 mentions the Herodians—those who lived richly because they patronized Herod, but they were under his thumb. All whom he did not favor ended up very poor, though they worked very hard; Yahshua prays, "Give us this day our daily bread", because most to whom He spoke did not have any more than that stored up. So He spoke of these realities in many of His parables. (e.g., Mark 13:34; Luke 16:19-22) He said it was very hard for the rich to enter the Kingdom (Mat. 19:23), possibly because one had to step on so many others to get to that point; He contrasted storing up for oneself with being "rich toward YHWH" (Luke 12:16), and said that those who had their comfort now would be those who mourn later. (Luke 6:23) His brother Yaaqov (James) also warned us not to automatically give the best seat in the house to the best-dressed, since they are the ones who oppress the rest of us.

Foreigners

• A nokhri is the one mentioned above, who is someone passing through Israel or who deals with Israel in some way. He might have a summer house in Israel, and is friendly toward her, but does not necessarily spend much of his time there. He may be a traveling merchant or a guest for some other reason. Not much is expected of him; he is not punished for owning idols, though he may not bring them into YHWH's land. In turn, he cannot expect much from Israel except standard minimal hospitality.
  
  
• A ger is a sojourner or exile living more or less permanently in the midst of another people. YHWH requires Israel to offer him special protection since we lived as aliens in Egypt. Avraham called himself a ger in the Land. (Gen. 23:3,4) Moshe called himself a foreigner in Midyan after 40 years there. (Ex.2:22) Ruth was a ger in Moav. A ger does not own land, so is usually poor, but may lease it until the yovel year (Lev. 25:10). Often a hired hand, he must be paid on time. (Deut. 24:14) He is to be judged with the same legal procedures as the native. (Lev. 24:22) He is permitted to eat of the corners of the field and, along with widows and fatherless, glean what is deliberately left (Deut. 24:17-21) or eat volunteer crops that grow the sabbatical year. (Lev. 25:6) He is even provided food from Levitical storehouses. (Deut. 14:29; 26:12) If circumcised, he may eat the Passover. (Lev. 22:10) He is a free man (not a slave) voluntarily dwelling in Israel, but does not have full civil rights. He is assimilating; but something still prevents him from being a "citizen". He may just not have married into an Israelite household. Much is expected of him: he may only sacrifice at the sanctuary (Lev. 17:8-16) He may not have idols or illegitimate relationships. (18:26)
  
  
• A toshav ("settler") is often mentioned as a subcategory of ger, that is, a ger toshav, but when they are mentioned in isolation there are some noteworthy differences. More is expected of him than of a nokhri (he can be stoned for blaspheming YHWH's name, Lev. 24:16), but he does not have strong religious leanings toward the people he is among, but lives on the land. He could be called an "expatriate"; he still maintains many foreign customs. He is not given some of the rights the others enjoy; like a ben nekher (nokhri) he may not eat of the Passover lamb, nor may he eat what is holy even if he lives with a priest. (Ex. 12:43ff; Lev. 22:10) But like a ger, he may flee to a city of refuge if he inadvertently kills someone. (Num. 35:15)
  
  
• There is a different kind of outsider: a zur ("stranger"). He is more than simply someone unknown; in fact, its usage rather suggests someone who is known to Israel by virtue of having once been part of it, then turned away—someone not so much "strange" as "estranged", and who considers YHWH's words strange. (Hos. 8:12)

A ger toshav most often immigrates to Israel to learn from her, intending to adopt her ways, and often goes on to become a full-fledged Israelite. In most cases, his children are considered Israelites. He does not have the right of redemption unless he has attached himself to an Israelite household (cf. Deut. 1:16)—in which case, he is no longer a ger. In the kingdom, the stipulation for a ger to be considered the same as a native-born, having rights of inheritance as well, is that his children are born among us. (Ezek. 47:22)

Someone may even undergo circumcision, but still not be able to become an Israelite due to other mitigating factors. (Deut. 23:1-8) But on the other hand, those returning from the Northern Kingdom need not prove to Yehudah that they are physically of Israelite descent; most Jews cannot actually prove that since there were so many pogroms in which their mothers were raped. At first Paul called his students Gentiles, but then they were treated more like gerim toshavim. But by the time he was accused of bringing Gentiles into the Temple (Acts 21:28), they were already Israelites. Paul calls his audience "former Gentiles". (Eph. 2:11) Once we are learning and practicing Torah, we are in the door, and are already more Israelite than most who have always known they were Hebrew.

Common Occupations

The most salient example of a sakhir is our own ancestor Yaaqov. He agreed upon his wage with Lavan, for whom he worked. (Gen. 29:15ff) The first seven years (which turned out to be 14) his wage was to marry Rakhel. After that, he decided to stay on and set a new wage—certain types of animals born to Lavan's flocks. (Gen. 30:27) If this was another 7-year contract, (a precursor to the Torah's requirement that a contract be terminated or renegotiated after seven years), he dropped out of it after 6, because Lavan had deceived him, changing his wages 10 times (apparently without Yaaqov's prior knowledge).

Possibly partly in direct response to Yaaqov's experiences with Lavan, YHWH takes a personal interest in the sakhir and protects him from being oppressed by requiring that he be paid the same day since that is what he is counting on. (Lev. 19:13; Deut. 24:14) Those who exploit a sakhir (as with any poor or needy person) are only YHWH's "black list" along with sorcerers, adulterers, and perjurers. (Malakhi 3:5) Yirmeyahu (Jeremiah) warns us not to utilize our neighbor's services without paying him. (22:13) Paul also turns it around and warns us not to take advantage of a master or neglect to treat him with the proper respect just because he is a believing brother. (1 Tim. 6:2)

He is not owned like a slave, but he is liable to be judged or punished if he wrongs the person who hired him. Like a foreigner, if he works for a priest, he is nonetheless not permitted to eat of the holy things of which a priest may eat. (Lev. 22:10) But he is not necessarily a foreigner. He may be an Israelite brother, and even a landowner.

Why would a landowner become a sakhir? His crops might fail and he would thus need another way to pay his debts or provide for his family. His father might have leased the land he inherited out for 50 years, and he does not currently have access to it. He might have made bad business decisions, or had too few children to work his land or tend his flocks.

Most often the sakhir is an agricultural worker, but not always. Yahshua mentions the practice of finding day-laborers at the local marketplace in one of His parables. (Mat. 20) On a side note the parable shows us that, by His day, at least some wages were paid out in coinage.

A different type of sakhir is the yearly wage, The price of release of someone who sold himself as a servant is based on how many years are left until the yovel (50th) year. (Lev. 25:50-53) The account of a Levite who wrongfully did this with his services (Judges 17:9) shows that prior to Israel's united kingdom was 10 sheqels of silver per year, plus a suit of clothes and his sustenance. If he is killed by someone else's animal, the one who hired him is to be paid 30 sheqels of silver. This is some indication of what he was worth to his master. (Ex. 21:32; compare Mat. 26:15) Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 16:14 implies that he was hired for exactly one year at a time. Most employers would prefer the annual rather than daily laborer, because he would be more interested in getting the job done right, since he had to stay with it longer. The wise employer would tie his wage to the success of the venture—i.e., a share of the crop—because then he would be better motivated to perform well.

(b) Craftsmen (Khoreshim)

The term khoresh actually means a "fabricator", and in the most precise sense, "engraver". We see numerous types mentioned in Scripture. Some include the term khoresh and others do not:

• Ofeh: Baker (Hoshea 7:4). They were usually men, though of course women baked at home.
• Yotzer: Potter (Yeshayahu/Isa. 29:16). The term means "one who shapes" or "forms".
• Worker of fine flax (Yeshayahu 19:9)
• Khoshev: Weaver of fine textiles (Yeshayahu 19:9; Ex. 35:35)
• Khoresh Nekhoshet: Bronze-worker (1 Kings 7:13ff)
• Roqem: Tapestry-maker or embroiderer (Ex. 35:35)
• Tzoref: Goldsmith or smelter (Yeshayahu 40:19)
• Raqakh: Perfumer (Nehemyah 3:8). Josephus says that most of them also made the alabaster bottles to contain their product.
• Fuller (Yeshayahu 7:3): a special term referring to making a sheep's wool "full" by shrinking it with water, stomping on it, pressing it out, and cleaning it with soap. His field was located at the end of an aqueduct in Yerushalayim.
• Cheesemaker (known by the valley by the same name in Greek--Tyropean--that runs through the middle of Yerushalayim)
• Tentmaker --made famous by the Apostle Paul as well as his friends Aquila and Priscilla (Acts 18:3)
• A tanner would live and work outside the population center because of the stench from the dog-excrement he used to obtain the type of acid that worked best for his trade.

Also, as families grew larger, each family member had a smaller percentage of the clan's homestead, they either had to combine their farmland or sell the other kinds of resources they found on their land to exchange for more food. If someone could make a sword well, he could afford more food more quickly. If he found copper on his land, instead of making it available to others in his community, he might become greedy and hoard it to make more and more swords to sell, and class disparity widened. If a king heard of his skill and ordered a large quantity of swords, he would have to employ others to get the job done quickly enough.

Hired workers might live in the same house as the one they worked for, because one's workshop was generally part of his household. Sometimes families clustered around a common trade. In 1 Chron. 4:21 we read of the "families of the House of the Linen Workers (Beyt Avodat haButz)".

Often all of the craftsmen of a particular trade would cluster in the same part of town to share or access resources more easily as part of a guild. We see an example in Scripture when someone is dispatched to get some bread from "the Baker's Street" (Yirmeyahu 37:21) How little things had changed even by Sherlock Holmes' day! (An ancient shopping mall was even discovered at Caesarea Philippi.) We see goldsmiths and merchants clustered in the same part of town (Nekhemyah 3:31ff), in symbiosis because of the convenience of merchants bringing gold back from their travels and merchants making products out of it for them to sell on their next trip.

Sometimes a whole village would specialize in a particular craft because of the local resources. If there was a forest nearby, they might start a bronze-works, because they would need a lot of firewood for fuel. If there was a lot of high-quality clay in their area, they might all be potters. If sheep were regularly sheared in a particular area, weavers would set up their looms there. The name "Valley of the Craftsmen (Khoreshim)" indicates that everyone who lived there was a craftsman or metal-worker. (Nehemyah 11:35) The potter needed a field in which to throw broken shards when an air bubble or other problem would cause the pot he had made to break. (Yirmeyahu 19:1) The Potsherd Gate was very close by too, because land was at a premium in the walled city, and no one would want a lot full of sharp broken pottery near their home if they had children who would play outside.

Of course, Yahshua was known as the carpenter's son. (Mat. 13:55) But this might not mean what it seems to mean. A carpenter would know wood-working, but be more familiar with stone masonry, because stones were much more plentiful and last much longer. Since most people built their own homes, it was usually the public works for which specialized craftsmen would be hired. It was more of a specialty to be able to do wood-paneling, etc.; Shlomo had to hire them from Levanon , as many there were skilled in this area because of the huge trees that grew there. If this is what Yoseyf was, then Yahshua more than likely learned the same trade, for they were usually passed from father to son in a family business. But a carpenter was also a common idiom for a rabbi or teacher, and that could just as well be what Yoseyf was. He might even have been both kinds of "carpenter".

Craftsmen hired by the king—the cream of the crop--would move to wherever his workshop was. One huge pottery works of this type has been unearthed by archaeologists at Netanim-Gadarah. This pottery had HaMelekh (the king) stamped on the handles much like a brand name today. These pots have also been found in other locations. A cupbearer (Gen. 40:1; Nekhemyah 1:11) might be the one in charge of the royal winery.

One's job rather than his ancestry came to define who one was, for one's hours would be filled with this specialization. We can see an example in Acts 10: "Shim'on the Tanner". (Today we see the same idea reflected in many surnames: Miller, Cook, Baker, Smith, Fisher, Carpenter, Cooper, Hunter. ) As kings began to take additional lands (Y'hezq'el 45:7-10; 46:18), the drive for power separated Israel from her Land, and foreign kings also conquered, so that after the return from exile, most of the land was no longer divided by tribe, but was owned by whomever could pay for it.

(c) Merchants

In the most ancient times, there were no Israelite merchants on a grand scale. People would sell their wares or skills within the village, but not on the national or international level. Caravans of traders would pass through Israel from other nations. (Gen. 37:28) The only Israelite exception was the kings. Traveling traders would do so on the king's behalf. Shlomo had a large-scale trade, especially with Tzur (Tyre) and Egypt; Pharaoh even gave Shlomo a city as a dowry for his daughter! (1 Kings 9:10ff)

People from other nations were brought in as skilled laborers for Shlomo's grandiose building projects. (1 Kings 5:13ff) He enslaved foreigners who lived in the Land of Israel, including 70,000 carriers and 80,000 who quarried stones, with 3,300 overseers. But there really were no international corporations as such until well into the 1600s C.E. , and even then if they wanted to be funded, they had to be under the king or queen's authority.

Eventually other tribes of Israel were unjustly enslaved by King Shlomo. His mistreated his brothers, even when they asked for relief. (1 Kings 12:1-20) He enslaved his own brothers to impress visiting rulers from outside. (1 Kings 10:1ff) But it was his son's unbridled greed that finally brought about the separation of the two Houses of Israel.

Yehoshaphat built a merchant fleet, but the ships were wrecked. (1 Kings 22:48) Two kings could make a trade treaty, allowing their people to trade with one another as well. (1 Kings 20:33ff)

But in general, middlemen were unheard of in Israel. People bought directly from the craftsman who made an item. There were no "dealers". So where did this idea come from? Babylon. The term "merchant" was never used of an Israelite until after the captivity there was over. (Nekhemyah 3:31) Then, amazingly, we see those who came back to rebuild Yerushalayim actually loading donkeys to bring into the city to sell on the Sabbath! (Nekhemyah 13:15ff) How could those who were involved in such a noble task stoop so low? Probably because importers from Tzur were also there, and thus would have a corner on the market that day. They would get all the sales.

The term "Canaanite" came to be an idiom for a merchant or trader (Hos. 12:7), because that was what they were famous for. They made money off articles that already existed—which someone else made! I.e., their wares were not things they had made themselves. Already they were known for their craftiness. Eventually this idea spread to making money off the animals needed for sacrifice. And thus was born the idea of a salesman. Yahshua picked up on Zekharyah's theme and drove out the moneychangers. (Mat. 21:12) This business had no place in Israel, let alone YHWH's set-apart sanctuary! All of Yahshua's actions were precursors to the Kingdom, when there will no longer be a "Canaanite" (merchant) in the House of YHWH. (Zekh. 14:21)

So we can see that in Scripture, merchandising is looked on negatively. We are warned to come out of Babylon, lest we share in the punishment for her sins. (Rev. 18) She does not only traffic in spices and luxurious items that no one even needs, but also in the "bodies and souls of men". Part of the restoration is the removal of the middleman—including those in charge of religion, who could controls which parts of the truth made it to the people. They could influence the people to want to "buy" the things most lucrative to themselves, thereby ensuring a profit.

When we gave up our direct connection to our labors to become those who convince others to buy what someone else labored for (the selling of convenience), we gave up our souls. One purpose of coming together as the community of Israel is to disconnect from that Babylonian/Tyrian system, learning instead to do things on our own, earning our profit through the labor of our hands so we have something to give others. (Eph. 4:28)

Throughout their exile, the Jews were often forced by others to become middlemen, having had no alternative left to them, but still within their own communities they always found ways to get things for one another "at cost", so as not to give the god of greed everything it wanted. We need to walk in balance, which right now means weighting things more heavily away from that system. Like those who could not eat solid food after nearly starving in the Holocaust, we cannot do this all at once, but we can start changing our attitude and becoming a city of refuge for others who are still in exile but who want to move away from Babylon.

(d) Slaves (Evedim)

Israel left behind the cruel Egyptian form of slavery, but the Bible never condemns slavery as an institution. It is seen as a fact of life, even if not the ideal. Slavery in Israel, however, was not like the modern kind of slavery we are familiar with from American or European history or in present-day Africa, especially Muslim countries. (It is not a dead institution; it is still very common for sheikhs to kidnap women and buy poor or orphaned children as slaves.)

As with the Latin servus, the Hebrew term for slave (eved) simply means "one who serves". The term does not always apply in the strictest sense of someone who is another's property (being bought or sold). Avraham (Gen. 26:24), Kalev (Num. 14:24), David (2 Shmu'el 3:18), Iyov, Yaaqov, and Yeshayahu are some examples of men who were called YHWH's eved. The Messiah Himself was called YHWH's eved (Yeshayahu 42:1), and He said His evedim would be honored by His Father. (Yoch. 12:25ff) So the term can mean what we think of as "servant", but still carries the connotation of being under the authority or power of another.

How were slaves acquired in ancient times?

1. They were taken in war.
   Girls were included in the list of plunder taken by Sisera's army along with clothing, etc. (Judges 5:30) The Amaleqites killed none of the women, but took them all away as "spoils". (1 Shmu'el 30)
   
   What about the Israelites? They, too, divided the plunder of "man and beast" and gave some to the priests. (Num. 31:26) YHWH said that those outside the Land of Israel who accepted Israel's offer of peace (i.e., surrendered) would be placed under tribute and would become Israel's servants. (Deut. 20:10) David made the Moavites his slaves, but did not take them all home, but required a portion of whatever profit they might gain. (2 Shmu'el 8:2) But he put the Ammonites to work making bricks. (2 Shm. 12:19) But when YHWH used the Efrayimites to punish the sins of the king of Yehudah, they then carried away 200,000 of their own brothers as slaves along with spoils, and YHWH told them through the prophet Oded to return them, for it angered YHWH that they would enslave their fellow Israelites. (2 Chron. 28:7ff)
   
   
2. Traders brought them.
   YHWH generally takes a dim view of casually bartering human lives for merchandise (Y'hezq'el 27:13; compare Rev. 18:13), but said it is perfectly allowable for an Israelite to buy slaves from other nations (since if following the Torah one would prosper and would need additional hands to assist with the work), but not from within Israel. (Lev. 25:44ff) He was angry at Gaza and Tzur delivering Israelites to Edom as slaves. (Amos 1:6, 9) Children of strangers born among us might be bought if the family needs to sell them to survive, but not taken. (25:45) This is a strange concept for us, but was common in ancient times. It is practiced even now in former Soviet countries when people are starving, especially with daughters.
   
   
3. They were born into the household.
   A distinction is made in Scripture between slaves who were bought and those who were home-born. The latter tend to be more loyal to the household, having grown up in it. One could buy a married slave along with his wife, or could marry a slave he had bought. If a master gave the slave a wife who bore him children, the wife and children remained the property of the master if the male slave received his freedom. This is probably the most common reason a slave would have his ear nailed to the door in a ceremony that linked him permanently to the house. (Ex. 21:2)
   
   A concept unique to Israel was that a slave was treated much like a member of the family. He had to keep the Sabbath with the family. (Ex. 20:10) A day off every week for a slave was unheard of anywhere else in the world! Also, no "slave quarters" have been found either in the Scriptural text or by archaeologists; slaves did not live in a separate culture of their own, but in the house wit the family. The slaves of the priest could eat of the food the priest brought from the Temple for his family. (Lev. 22:11) Every slave brought in from outside was also exposed to the Elohim of Israel and though remaining a slave, could become part of the people of Israel. If circumcised, he could eat of the Passover lamb with the family. (Ex. 12:44)
   
   
4. They sold themselves to pay off a debt.
   But slaves from within Israel are brothers and are not to be ruled over with rigor; one may also not sell a fellow Israelite as a slave. (Lev. 25:39) There is a limit to the duration of slavery; an Israelite is not a slave for life. Those who sell themselves go free in the fiftieth year (the yovel). They may also be redeemed at any time by family members. (Lev. 25:48-49)

How many slaves might someone have? A Roman household averaged five, while a Greek household had three on average. We see Gid'on take ten of his slaves to help him pull down an idol, implying that he had more than this. (Judges 6:27ff) Naval had many slaves, and Avigail came to David attended by five of her maidservants. (1 Shmu'el 25:42) Ziva, a rich man, had 15 sons and 20 servants. (2 Shmu'el 9:10ff) After the Babylonian exile, there was one servant for every six freemen. (Neh. 7:66-67)

The more sons and servants someone had, the more powerful he was considered, for they were all available to protect the household if necessary. Those with more riches would be better-armed, and might own a horse or even a chariot. (People went to war by villages.) Avraham took 318 servants born in his household with him to rescue Lot. They were called his "trained men". (Gen. 14:14)

Slaves could also own slaves.

How much was a slave bought for? Yoseyf was sold for 20 sheqels of silver; later the Torah specified that if an ox gored a slave, his master was to be paid 30 sheqels of silver by its owner. (Ex. 21:32) Yahshua was also sold for this amount. Persons are always paid for in silver.

Slaves could be inherited from a father.

Before Israel existed, evidence has been found that slaves were marked with a brand or tattoo. This may be the background to Yeshayahu/Isaiah 44:5, which says, "another will write on his hand, ‘Belong to YHWH'." This is a sign of ownership. (Compare Rev. 13:16, where each follower of the Beast—both slave and free—is marked with "the number of his name"—possibly much like the number tattooed onto Jews during the Holocaust.)

The opposite was the case in Y'hezq'el 9:3ff, where those who sigh over the abominations are marked so they will escape judgment. This is the opposite of the historical pattern. Usually it was the slave owner who escaped trouble because he was wealthy enough to buy his way out. But now it is those who are slaves (to YHWH) who will avoid being judged.

What rights did a slave have in ancient Israel?

His master would be punished if he strikes him so that he dies immediately. (What the punishment is was not specified, and would be up to the local judges to decide on the merits of the case.) If he survives for a day or two, however, there is no punishment, since the slave was his property. (Ex. 21:20)

But if his eye is destroyed or his tooth is knocked out, he is allowed to go free. (21:26) This may have been because his eyes and his teeth are what someone who might later buy him would look at first, so this is his value and worth. (There were set prices for slaves according to their degree of strength and health.) In ancient times tiny basalt grains would fall into the flour when it was milled, and this would wear down people's teeth quickly. The age at which a person died can be estimated by how far they are worn down when their skeletons are found.

One who sold himself into slavery to work off a debt could be redeemed either by a kinsman or by himself. In the latter case, he might have a side job or work as an artisan and split the profits with his master so that he could save up enough money to buy back his own freedom. (During Roman times, many slaves were literate and could run companies on behalf of their masters when absent, while others were treated little better than dogs.) We see that Sha'ul's servant had money by which he offered to pay Shmu'el for his services. (1 Shmu'el 9:7) In this case he is not specifically called an eved (slave), but na'ar (young man), which has the connotation of being a very young servant. He might be a free man attached to a wealthy man as an apprentice or a protégé.

Every slave received the protection of the house he was connected to. One was often better off as a slave of a wealthy house than as a freeman on his own. He ate at the table of the house, and received clothing and shelter. Slaves were attached to the name of the house just as the children were. One was respected more if he came from a certain house, even if he was a servant, and he might be less likely to be harmed if from a prestigious or powerful house. He as a slave might be treated better than the head of some other households, and, more importantly, could partake of the covenant of Israel. He got to rejoice with the family at festivals (Deut. 12:12), could eat of the family's tithe (12:18) and had to go up to Yerushalayim at the pilgrimage feasts. (16:11, 16) He was not a second-class citizen during YHWH's festivals.

He had a day off (the Sabbath) even if he was not an Israelite. (All permanent slaves were circumcised upon entering the household. (Gen. 17:12)

If the master had no son, he might even become heir to the householder. (Gen. 15:2) "One born in my house" was an idiom for a slave. A slave born in the household was considered closer to being blood relations with the family than one who was bought, for the one born in the household would have been circumcised on the eighth day.

A wise servant could share an inheritance and would take precedence over a son who brings shame to his family. (Prov. 17:2) What YHWH is looking for in Israel now is servants. Even Yehudah cannot rest on the laurels of being a son. Servanthood (being the one who does the work) is more important; it is what made Yahshua a son.

If a man had no son, he might even give his daughters to a slave of his for the sake of continuing his line. (1 Chron. 2:34) Since he owned the slave, a slave's children were automatically his.

The master must not despise his cause if he has a complaint, or YHWH would do the same to the master. (Iyov/Job 31:13) A slave must be treated as one wants YHWH to treat him. Of course, this includes proper discipline; he must be corrected with more than words—with some degree of harshness--or he will not respond, though he understands the concept, and if he is pampered from his youth, he will end up being like another son rather than a servant useful to the master. (Prov. 29:19-21)

The Talmud says only a slave should wash another's feet, and even then only a slave of low caliber, and certainly never a Hebrew slave! This is why Kefa was so repulsed by the thought of Yahshua washing his feet. He was showing that the highest position goes to the one who will take the lowest place—on the level of a Gentile slave!

The Torah does not allow a slave's sons to go free if his wife was given to him after he was enslaved. Slaves were probably never to marry free women, unless to carry on the master's bloodline. But the slave himself could be given his freedom at any time. There was not usually a hostile relationship between masters and servants.

A female slave, or "maidservant", is called an amah in Hebrew. Generally she was a personal attendant for a woman, as Hagar was to Sarai. (Gen. 16:1) She usually belonged to the woman, not so much the husband, though Lavan was said to own some maidservants, which he gave to his daughters when they married Yaaqov. (Gen. 29:24, 29)

As we see in this case, it was not uncommon for maidservants to bear children for the husbands of their owners, especially if the latter could not bear children. (See also the case of Avimelekh in Gen. 20:17) Either way, the children legally belonged to the mistress (or master), unless they allowed the maidservant to marry. But she also could not choose to reject the husband chosen for her, who was usually a slave also, unless she was given to one of the master's sons, in which her status was then raised to that of a daughter, and her children would be free. If a free man wanted her as a wife, he could buy her. Any children born while she was still owned belonged to the master.

Maidservants were very common for people who could afford them. Avigail (the widow of a rich man) had at least five of them. (1 Shmu'el 25:42) It was not unusual to have maidservants nurse children (which probably meant they had already had children of their own). There was a different term for wet nurse: meyneqah (based on yanaq, which means "to suckle").

A child of privileged parents often had a meyneqah, who was essentially the personal servant of the child to assure his well-being from infancy (as we see in the case of Mephibosheth, whose nurse, though a slave, seemed more concerned for his safety than his mother did. (2 Shmu'el 4:4) A special bond developed between the child and the one whose face they looked at while being suckled. Often the nurse remained the child's companion into adulthood, as we see in the case of Rivqah. (Gen. 24:59) When Yoash was hidden from his wicked aunt, his nurse was hidden with him. (2 Kings 11:2) They were kept together, so she often served as a mother figure, though actually a "nanny".

A master could arrange the marriage of a slave. If he was then freed, his wife and children remained with the master. (Ex. 21:4) The husband could be permitted to buy their freedom as well. If the slave is Hebrew, and he brought a wife and/or children with him into slavery, he could take them with him when he went free, but an amah who was sold into slavery by her father (usually done to pay a debt) does not go free in the sabbatical year, unless she has been displeasing to the master or mistress (in which case she can be redeemed) or the master who had married her had treated her as lesser than any of his other wives. (21:7)

Runaway slaves from other nations are to be given hospitality by Israel. (Deut. 23:15ff) They can choose which tribe to settle among, and are allowed to become part of Israel. This is very fitting, because at one point the whole nation was made up of "runaway slaves". A Hebrew slave who runs away to a foreign city can be extradited and recovered. (1 Kings 2:39ff) Moav is commanded to hide the outcasts and not betray the escapees from Israel (Yeshayahu/Isaiah 16:33ff). So the mercy toward foreign slaves was built right into Israelite culture, because we will need the same one day. Metaphorically, we are all runaways who used to be enslaved by self, the Church, the rabbis, or the Babylonian system. YHWH redeemed us, so He has a right to our children.

A master could free a slave at any time, or a relative could redeem him. (Lev. 25:47) If a slave woman is taken as a wife, she becomes a free woman. (Deut. 21:13) If she is a concubine, she is not a free woman. Male slaves are all set free after seven years or in the fiftieth year. They go back to the land that was originally theirs. A freed slave is called a khofshi.

Kings often owned slaves. The most common purpose was for forced labor. (1 Shmu'el 12:3) Sometimes one king gave slaves to another as a gift. (1 Kings 9:26) Shlomo used all the Kanaanites who were left in the Land as forced labor. (9:20) Those Y'shoshua rashly promised to spare were made woodcutters and drawers of water. (Y'shoshua 9:17ff) This was a common task of slaves. (Deut. 29:10) Some were given to the service of the Temple. After the exile, the slaves of the state were connected to the Temple. (Neh. 7:46, 57, 60) They were thus included in the covenant of Israel with YHWH.

(1) City-states
When Y'hoshua conquered the land of Kanaan (an area the size of New Jersey or Massachusetts, or just one-third the size of South Carolina), he defeated 31 different kings, and there were still some areas left unconquered until later. So it is obvious that none of these kings ruled over a very large area. They are described as the "king of Yerikho", the "king of Y'rushalayim", etc. In other words, each ruled over one strongly-fortified city. They also ruled over the territory and villages surrounding that city, which would include farmland and pastureland connected to that city. The people who lived outside would come inside the walls for protection when attacked, if they had enough advance warning.

The 31 kings in Kanaan were grouped in six different alliances--the Kanaanites, the Hittites, the Emorites, the Hiwites, the Prizzites, and the Yevusites. They were mainly along ethnic bloodlines.

A city-state might be ruled by a local dynasty or by foreign captors. It was common for a city to be taken by a foreign power, and the city to remain intact. The headship changed, but the population remain the same—a Hittite city with Kanaanite rulers, for example. The people had to have somewhat of a flexible, transient mentality rather than strong local pride, because they would come to belong to another people and be made to worship another deity, and thus their everyday culture, traditions, and lifestyle would change while they still lived in the same place.

A city-state's army would be made up of both local men trained as professional soldiers (attached to the crown--palace guards, etc.) as well as hired mercenaries. Kanaanites from one city might fight against other city-states of the same ethnicity, but usually they were allied along ethnic lines. (Y'hoshua 13:3 mentions five rulers of the Filistines acting together to increase their military power; in Genesis 14, four kings attack another group of five kings.)

(2) Empires
When one king rose to great prominence through the military domination of other kings, and held dominance for a long time, an empire was formed. Great empires existed concurrent with many small city-states. The first empire was Bavel. Egypt rose soon afterward and held dominance for centuries. It was common to enlarge their empires by attacking city-states.

Why? What would they do with these additional possessions?

One of the biggest reasons they would capture a city was to control a trade route, especially if it was at a major crossroads as Megiddo was. This city was captured by many peoples in succession for that reason. Not only did this mean they could tax those who passed through and obtain exotic products; they would also have access to the news, ideas, and technology that rubbing shoulders with people from other parts of the world would bring. They could find out more effective building methods, improve their weaponry, or open up new markets for their own raw materials when they found new uses for them.

The second main reason to capture a city was to incorporate its army into the empire's. A particular city might be known for its excellent archers, so they would take it to enhance their own army. In Egypt's army, only the officers were Egyptian; they drafted others as soldiers. They had armies specialized in every type of weapon, terrain, or season. The soldiers in an empire's army, therefore, would not be uniformly dressed. They would wear the garb of their own city-state, but fight together.

Rather than replacing their local deity with those of the empire, they often simply added more elohim. When making an alliance, they would exchange elohim, so a non-Israelite city-state would have one major deity and many minor ones.

When taking a city, they would not usually kill the inhabitants. They would either make the king swear allegiance and let him keep ruling (with a representative from the empire stationed there to report back on his behavior, as described in the Amarna Letters), or they might put their own governor in place—one more likely to remain their vassal. Scarab beetle images found in a tel indicated such subservience of a city-state to Egypt, where that symbol was prominent (The scarab was linked to the idea that the Egyptians controlled life itself as the sun appeared to be a great ball rolled across the sky like the scarab's dung., especially if it appeared on the royal seal of the city. )

(3) Nation-States
Lesser than empires but greater than city-states were the nation-states. Sometimes a nation represented a group of cities conquered by a stronger king who could nonetheless not conquer as many as an emperor could. But more often a nation bore a common ancestry such as the Edomites, Moavites, or Arameans, who were mainly confined to a particular territory. The armies came from the citizenry, and were mainly defensive, rather than aggressive. Israel was brought out of Egypt "by her armies".

Genesis 36 gives us the interesting example of the Edomites, whose capital moved around as each chief died, for it was not a hereditary dynasty (though all the chiefs were Edomite), but rather the rule of the strongest city-state king by the consensus of the whole alliance. The city ruled by the strongest king when the former chief died would now become the capital of all Edom. They were kings for life, but did not pass this position on to their sons.

In Israel, Sha'ul was also chosen because of his prominence, being a head taller than anyone else in Israel. (1 Shmu'el 8:5) Note that the people demanded a king "like those of all the nations"—not city-states or empires. There were already elders, and they came to this consensus that they wanted a common king, after over 400 years of living as loosely-unified tribes that sometimes fought one another.

Government as it took shape in Israel

Israel was not the first nation to have twelve tribes. Avraham's brother Nahor had twelve sons. (Gen. 22:20ff) Yitzhaq's wife Rivqah came from this household. Ishmael also had twelve sons. (Gen. 25:12) Esau's descendants had twelve chiefs, though they were not all brothers. (Gen. 36:15) Amaleq made 13—so there were one too many. Yaaqov's sons were the fourth set of twelve, but all of these descended from Avraham's father.

After the hardship caused by the plagues in Egypt pushed the Israelites to regather back in Goshen, it was easy to identify the twelve tribes. By the time they crossed the Yarden River with Y'hoshua, they had strong tribal identities, and indeed this is the primary way they were identified at this time. (Y'hoshua 24) Someone would identify himself as a Re'uvenite sooner than as an Israelite. When they settled in the Land by their tribes, they still did not see themselves very clearly as one unified nation.

Y'hoshua cites Terah and Nahor (Avraham's brother and father), as well as Esau, as he recounts their common heritage to show why all the tribes belong together. They now also had a common salvation from Egypt, but they were still not doing well enough at worshipping the One who had brought them out. Y'hoshua meant to change that. But he appealed to their pride or defensiveness as a motivator when he told them he did not think they could handle such a responsibility as worshipping YHWH. But three times they said they would do it, as a witness against themselves.

Y'hoshua laid on them a new law. Thus he ratified a "new covenant", as the One who bears his name later would. So much of the Torah said, "When you come into the Land…", but now they were there, so the format of the covenant had to change slightly. But they agreed to this common instructin to live by.

The Era of the Judges

There were many minor judges, such as Othniel (Judges 3:9), Tola, who "ruled" for 23 years, Yair, who "ruled" for 22 years (Judges 10), Yifthakh, (Judges 11:29), Shimshon (Judges 13:24). We say "ruled" in quotes because they were not like kings, but rather were military leaders whom all of Israel could rally around because they were strongest in their tribe. There was no political system of organized rule, but they were very influential. Whenever the judges died (judgment was removed), the nation walked in the wrong direction again, and got into deep trouble. They had to be delivered so many times because they kept falling back into their neighbors' paganism as soon as one leader died. So YHWH would again subject them to a foreign ruler.

They were still just a group of Israelite tribes. Most were doing their own thing. They had some of the judges in common, but no common leader like Moshe and Y'hoshua had been. So they were not well unified.

The Spirit of YHWH (not just the spirit of Zionism) would come upon the one YHWH was raising up (Judges 14:5, 19), allowing them to do heroic feats in making war. This is how YHWH placed rulers in Israel—according to their willingness to surrender to His Ruakh and make war on those who oppress Israel.

One day a man was anointed physically before the people, not just in spirit. (1 Shmu'el 13:24) D'varim (Deuteronomy) 17:14ff had predicted that YHWH would be the one to choose the king, but only after the people first chose to have a king. He gave rules for what the king could and could not do. He warned them of the cost of having a king. (1 Shmu'el 8:4ff) Their children would be drafted into the army or conscripted for other duties.

The United Kingdom?

The first king turned out to be the opposite of what YHWH said a king should be. The tribes all had their representative and he was chosen by lot, but not all the tribes accepted Sha'ul. (1 Kings 10:17ff) Others felt they could be a "real nation" now that they had a king like other nations had. But Sha'ul was a picture of the Counterfeit Messiah, who comes before Yahshua's kingdom and brings unity to those seeking to do things their own way. YHWH considered this treason, but still decided it would be better to choose for them than to let them choose. YHWH had a king in mind, but it was not yet time for the one He had chosen. The people still demanded a king immediately, so they got less than the best.

The king was a judge who ruled the whole nation, not just one tribe. He brought the strongest from all tribes into his army, forming a professional army enhanced by tribal militias. The best kind of unity is one that begins out of families and tribes—seeds growing separately that can grow up and be twisted into one "three-fold cord" that cannot be easily broken. Under Sha'ul there was still not a true centralized government, for there was still enmity between tribes, and tribal rulers were still able to decide whether or not to support Sha'ul. The king had some say over the whole Land, but the government was still not well-organized.

David changed the picture dramatically.

Having a king at all was mainly due to the Filistines' enslaving Israel; they had to join together to have adequate military power. The Spirit of YHWH rested on Sha'ul, as it had upon the judges, for the sake of war. When David was anointed, the Spirit of YHWH rested on him from that day forward. (1 Shmu'el 16:13)

It does not directly say David was anointed as king; Sha'ul was still the king at that time, and David honored him and maintained allegiance to him until he died, despite how Sha'ul treated him, because YHWH had chosen him. Sha'ul made David a captain at first (1 Shmu'el 22:2); after their falling-out David was captain over 400 men who were in debt, oppressed, or discontent. They brought their whole households with them. He did not let them keep complaining about their troubles; he turned them into an army to fight against the status quo. This was a substantially-sized army in those days, as the typical army was comprised of a single household with all its servants as militia.

A few chapters later David already has 600 men. (1 Shmu'el 27) David was an excellent example of being crafty as a serpent. He knew how to play people against one another for a higher purpose. Because of his reputation as a fighter he was even welcomed into the capital city of the Filistines, of whom he had killed tens of thousands. When pursued by Sha'ul, he fled right into his arch-enemies' stronghold. Of course they were glad to have such a warrior on their side now. But he gained a whole city for his tribe by telling the king it was too much trouble to support him in the capital city, and asked for an outlying city—one the Filistines had captured.

Despite his hurt pride, Sha'ul knew he could not beat the Filistines without David, and he certainly did not want to fight them both at one time! Therefore he backed down from pursuing David.

Surprisingly, by the time Sha'ul died, Israel was already considered two two kingdoms. At the same time David was claiming the throne in Hevron, Ish-bosheth ("man of shame") was being anointed by General Avner, and the other tribes followed him. (2 Shmu'el 2:8-9) There was already a great divide between Yehudah and the rest of the tribes. This actually went back much further to the time Yehduah had gone off on his own after Yoseyf was sold into Egypt. (Gen. 38)

Yehudah was told to go up against the Kanaanites (Judges 1), and Shim'on joined them. They made a mutual defense treaty. (1:3) At that time the House of Yoseyf was said to go up against Beyth-El. This much earlier than Sha'ul, Yehudah was already seen as being a separate entity from Israel, and the House of Yoseyf already operated as a unit, despite being two tribes.

When D'vorah was judge, some other tribes were reprimanded for not coming to aid their brothers in the battle, but Yehudah is not even mentioned. (Judges 5) This strongly suggests that already by that time, Yehudah had so distanced itself that no one even expected Yehudah to join in. All through history Yehudah has done its own thing, and was hardly considered a part of Israel at all. This is why it is surprising that Yehudah has chosen the name "Israel" for itself now that it has the Land back. This also tells us that we need to build strength with what we have, because we never know which of our brothers will come to our aid in a crisis. Of course, there will be great dishonor on those who do not, and they will not share in the victory; if you do not have your name and your honor, you have nothing.

The first 7.5 years of David's reign were only over Yehudah. Therefore, Ish-bosheth, not Yaravam, was the first king of the Northern Kingdom. Then he made a covenant with the elders of Israel. (2 Shmu'el 5:3) Thus he was made king over them, too, in addition to Yehudah, and reigned 33 years over both. But when David took his ill-chosen census (2 Shmu'el 24:1), a distinction was still made between them; Yehudah was counted separately from the rest of Israel.

Israel and Yehudah continued to be at odds all the way through the Kings and Chronicles, so there never has been a true unity between them. David and Shlomo had something of a dual monarchy, with one man ruling two kingdoms simultaneously. Interestingly, though, after Avshalom's revolt, Yehudah (who was th first tribe to crown David) was the last to recognize him as king again when Avshalom was dead. This is a prophecy about Yahshua, for He was first called the King of the Jews, and the Glad News is "to the Jew first", but YHWH turned His vineyard over to another nation. (Mat. 21:33-41) Since the Jews were excluded from the Church councils as the false messiah system was taking over His "throne", it has been rare for Jews to be believers until very recently. Now they are beginning to recognize their own king again.

71 elders had been chosen in the wilderness (Y'hoshua 24:31), and the later Sanhedrin was patterned after this. They represented the 70 who entered Egypt, with one added. Some of them outlived Y'hoshua, but when they died off, they were not replaced. There was not such a "Sanhedrin" again until the Greek era, but David appointed elders. The Sanhedrin was not the best model either, for they usurped authority that was not theirs. The Sanhedrin could be chosen by the people but appointed by the leaders.

David subjugated Moav, Aram, Ammon, Amaleq, Tzobah, and Edom. (2 Shmu'el 8) They brought him tribute. He was starting to form not just a nation, but an empire.

Shlomo ruled from the Ferath (Euphrates) to the border of Egypt—not quite as far-reaching as Egypt's empire had been, but he took over what had been much of their empire when their power was diminished. Assyria and Babylon were not yet world-class powers, allowing united Israel-Yehudah to rule most of the Near East above Egypt. Shlomo appointed 12 governors, and each of them was responsible to bring the food for the king's household one month out of the year. (1 Kings 4:12) Shmu'el had warned about such oppression, and indeed it was coming to pass. This would be the downfall of the United Kingdom.

The Government of Israel in Exile

Exile to Assyria was the end of the Northern Kingdom's political identity (excluding the promised restoration). They were literally no longer a people, for they were scattered into many locations. Yehudah's political state was ended when conquered by Babylon, but the identity as a people remained, and thus the idea of a government was not lost. Kings were still treated as special even in exile, and the people remained aware of the royal line.

Yehudah became part of the Babylonian empire, and thereafter the Persian. Though Persia restored their land and allowed Hebrew culture to operate freely again, they no longer had an autonomous political position. They lived in a location that was too strategic for the other empires to ignore, so they always ended up being a military staging point for the major empires that followed. The degree of subjugation to other empires varied according to the political climate. On the local level they went back to the old ways based on heads of the extended family and elders in villages mostly made up of kinsmen, but they never had a king or elders as before the captivity.

There was never a complete return from exile, as most of the best and brightest remained in Babylon. Scholars were respected there and treated well, and there was religious freedom; life was easy, and they preferred this over coming back to fight for the welfare of their fellow tribesmen.

After the Persians, the Greeks won the hearts of many Jews through the spread of their culture. Alexander the Great came very close to allowing them political autonomy, because he respected them. After his death, the Seleucids and Ptolemies, heirs to parts of his empire, changed this. The Seleucids, under Antiochus I, were deeded the land of Judea by Alexander. Three generations later, Antiochus IV forced Greek culture on them, and the Jews revolted under the Maccabees.

The power of the priesthood had increased after the exile in the absence of a king. (See the books of Ezra and Nekhemyah.) The Maccabees, who led the long war against Greece, were actually priests themselves. After their victory, they took over the high priesthood, though they were not Tzadoqite and this was illegal. They reconquered some of David and Shlomo's holdings (especially Edom and Syria), and were themselves made kings. They became known as the Hashmonim (Hasmoneans), and had a large degree of autonomy for several generations. It would seem that they had restored the throne to Yehudah, but they were not of the Davidic line, and again theirs was an illegitimate throne, though they recovered much of Yehudah's lost heritage. But the books of the Maccabees show that even they paid homage to Rome through taxes and tribute, since they had turned to Rome for help in winning the battle against the Greeks. In Rome's way of seeing things, that assistance obligated the Judeans to Rome forever and made them a vassal of Rome. Granted, Rome did not meddle in internal matters at first, but with each generation the Hasmonean dynasty became more corrupt, they finally stepped in and placed Herod the Great in power.

Herod, who was half-Jewish and half-Edomite (then called Idumean), was one of the shrewdest politicians who ever lived. He knew how to please most of the people to some degree most of the time. He obtained his position in a way that raised no questions at first. He married a Hasmonean princess who was directly in line for the throne, then had all the heirs to the throne who would precede her assassinated. But he was indisputably a vassal of Rome. At first he was called a king, but once Rome became more involved in local matters in Judea, out of deference to Caesar he called himself governor. After this the local officials were all either Herod's descendants or others sent in by Rome rather than Judeans.

The Sanhedrin was again a token that appeared to evidence political autonomy, but the scepter had departed from Yehudah; the Jews could not issue the death penalty, and so had no ultimate authority. After the Temple was destroyed in 70 C.E., Hadrian was ready to give back a large degree of autonomy and even started rebuilding the Temple, but it was not enough for some and they revolted again, so he cracked down severely in 135 C.E., ousting all Jews from Yerushalayim and renaming it Aelia Capitolina. The province was renamed Palestinium (after the Filistines) to deliberately obliterate all memory that this had once been a Jewish place. For a long time they succeeded. Though some Jewish presence still remained in the Land, the largest communities of Jews were now in Babylon and areas that are now Iraq, Iran, and Jordan. The Muslims brought some persecution there, but not nearly so much as the Christians, who had become lawless; there was more kinship between Jewish and Muslim teachings until the relatively recent dispute over the Land of Israel.

However, the structure of Hebrew culture continued on in exile, held together by a strong recognition for heads of households. And the fact that they held the rabbis, as corrupt as they were, in high esteem meant there was respect for a common leadership.

There were exceptions; other than the Karaites, who rejected rabbinic authority, the S'fardim also adhered to different halakhah (rules of how to "walk out" the Torah) than the Ashkenazim. There have even been inquisitions among Pharisaical rabbis. There have been as many types of Judaism as there have been versions of Christianity. Some groups in Africa retained mainly Jewish beliefs yet recognized Yahshua as having been the Messiah. (This has been something they were forced to give up when immigrating back to Israel in modern days.) In the Dark Ages, Torah-teachers became joyless and harsh. The Ba'al Shem Tov came along, reminding Jews that the Torah commanded us to rejoice and he wanted to bring the Torah to every Jew when the norm was for only rabbinic scholars to have access to it (much like the catholic Church). Because of this threat to rabbinic power, his followers, the Hasidim, were tortured and killed, but his views eventually became predominant.

The rabbis have been non-priestly religious teachers who have ruled on matters of daily life in most exiled communities, leaving room for local rulings on some issues. But since Y'shua, there has never been a recognized "King of the Jews", but this has left more room for YHWH to be King as was originally intended. Though he never had an autonomous political throne during His first appearance, Yahshua kept the hope of the restored kingdom alive throughout two more millennia. The Davidic dynasty is still in effect when the nation repents.

The Kingship

In Israel and Yehudah, the incumbent king was seen as having been chosen by YHWH. This line of reasoning was common in most ancient cultures. Rulers' names were often changed to reflect the name of the elohim who had put them in power. But YHWH called a Persian king His servant and His anointed. (Yeshayahu/Isaiah 44:24ff) He, not the local deity of a kingdom, is seen as the one choosing who will reign in that nation. Paul endorses this viewpoint by saying that anyone who is in authority had to have been put there by YHWH. (Rom. 13:1) Even if they were wicked, this was seen as YHWH's choice and something the people deserved. This recognition did not mean that rivals to the throne did not still try to jockey for the position, though, since their own desires came into play as well.

In a dynasty, the eldest son was expected to be the next king, but it did not always turn out that way. In 1 Kings 2:13ff, David's eldest son admits that though all Israel had expected him to be king, YHWH had chosen his younger brother instead. The "soap opera" that ensues, though, tells us much about assumptions and customs at that time. Adoniyah went to Shlomo's mother with the request that Shlomo give him Avishag as a wife. When Shlomo heard this, he asked why she did not go ahead and ask that Adoniyah be given the throne as well, and had Adoniyah executed. Why? Avishag was the virgin chosen to warm David on his deathbed as he suffered from a condition that made him feel very cold; nothing else worked. (1 Kings 1) She would have been present to hear every bit of instruction David gave in his final days, and he might have even shared some of his secrets with her. As the last woman to share David's bed (though not in a sexual way), she would have been held in high esteem, and if Adoniyah became attached to her, he could probe the inner workings of David's mind from someone who was in the know. Shlomo immediately saw through this treasonous power play.

Adoniyah had assumed the king would not refuse any request of his mother's. The king bowed to her when she approached his throne. If anyone had his ear, she did; it was her political ambition to which he owed his throne. In that sense, she was more powerful than he. In a king's household, if he had five wives, he would essentially have five families, all living together. There was jealousy among them, especially among the different wives, who each wanted her son to be the next king, and would use various means to manipulate the king. In some of the historical accounts (e.g., 2 Kings 23), the names of the kings' mothers and the mothers of their brothers are mentioned, showing the extent of their influence. Sometimes this was a natural carry-over from their having come from already-influential families into which kings would marry because the connections would strengthen their own position. Rich families often had their own armies, and if a king married into that family, he would assumedly never be militarily threatened by that army. If one of these families had connections in a neighboring country, a king might be able to march his armies through it in the name of his son-in-law.

Contrast Miryam, Yahshua's mother. She must have known that her husband-to-be was in the direct line for the kingship of Yehudah, but we see no evidence of designs on her part. She is astonished when told her son will be the king. Yahshua, too, seems almost impolite in his dealings with her at times—possibly to remind her that He was to be about His father's business, not even his mother's, so that she would not try to exert political influence over his decisions. We do, however, see the mother of Yochanan and Yaaqov, two of his closest disciples, follow this pattern and ask Yahshua to let her sons be next in command in His kingdom. (Mat. 20:20ff)

There was really no such role as "queen" in Israelite society. Athalyah ended up in the position of "king" because she (assumedly) had killed all the brothers of her late husband's deceased son, who had been king. (2 Kings 11:1) Though Yoshiyahu her grandson was hidden away and came to light six years later, meanwhile she brought Ba'al-worship to Yehudah—a tendency when females ruled. It does turn out that she was related to Ahav and Yezevel, rulers of Israel, who promoted Ba'al worship exclusively there, so in effect, two women from the Northern Kingdom were actually ruling the Southern as well during Athalyah's reign. This tendency when a king's mother retains too much influence may be why YHWH emphasizes the need for a man to leave his mother and cleave to his wife.

In Yehudah, the incumbent king was the one who would name his successor. The one who did end up king often killed anyone else who might have a right to the throne, especially those who had a different mother than himself. (See 2 Chron. 21 for an example.)

King Yoshiyahu (Josiah) was killed in battle because he meddled in the affairs of other kings, though they had warned him that the particular dispute did not pertain to him. He had not expected to die, and therefore did not name an heir to the throne, so the people chose his son Yehoakhaz as successor. (2 Kings 23:29ff) He was not the eldest, and turned out to be an evil man, so the Egyptian emperor in whose line of fire his father had died captured him and put his elder brother, Elyaqim, on the throne in his place. He exercised another prerogative—that of changing the name of the king he had set on the throne. Interestingly, he replaced the "El" in his name with a derivative of YHWH's name, calling him Yehoyaqim. He thus gave him a more noble name, possibly because that would make the people respect him more. (Yehoakhaz might have originally been chosen because he had YHWH's name in his own, and his elder brother did not.) He still chose a legitimate heir to the Davidic line, though this may have just been a shrewd political move. But still, this was someone he could control. This effectively made Yehudah a vassal state to the Egyptian empire.

Interestingly, in another list of Yoshiyahu's sons, another elder son is mentioned, but Yehoakhaz is not! (1 Chron. 3:15) It appears as if he had never existed! Yehoyaqim--or his mother --may even have ordered this since Yehoakhaz was evil, but we are told in Yirmeyahu 22:11 that Yehoakhaz was another name for Shallum—the last of the four sons listed. So the youngest was the one chosen first here.

The same chapter lists three sons of David and Bath-sheva (here spelled Bath-shua) before Shlomo (1 Chron. 3:1), while 2 Shmuel 12 portrays Shlomo as having been conceived seemingly very soon after their illegitimate son died at seven months old, as part of David's comforting of his bereaved wife. At least one of the scribes who wrote conflicting accounts had to have a reason to change the record.

Shlomo began to reign while his father was still alive because David was very ill; Yotham the son of Azaryah (Uzziyah) began to reign before his father died because he had been struck with leprosy and could no longer function in a public role. Yehoram became king when his brother died because his brother had no male heir (2 Kings 1:17ff), another evidence of the fratriarchal aspect underlying Israelite society. One's uncle is called by the title "beloved" (dod) in Hebrew; it was like a second father-son relationship.

Coronation of the King

Yom T'ruah, the Feast of Trumpetings, is in both Scripture and tradition seen as the time of a king's coronation.

From the accounts of the coronations of Shlomo (1 Kings 1:32ff; 1 Chron. 29) and Yoash (2 Kings 11:10ff) we can identify several common elements of the coronation ceremony in Yehudah:

1. He is anointed by the High Priest (or possibly another priest on some occasions). This symbolizes the transference of power or authority from one man to another. Apparently the Tabernacle was pitched by the Gihon Spring on the eastern slope of Tzion (1:39), because that is where David sent Shlomo to be anointed. (There would have been ample running water there for the priests to do their immersions.) Yoash stood by a pillar in the Temple. David and Sha'ul had been anointed by Shmu'el, who, though an Ephraimite, was raised in the Tabernacle and after Eli's death, became more prominent than the actual Levitical priesthood, to the point that Sha'ul had not hesitated to kill priests who harbored David. Since he was the firstborn son who was not redeemed, he had the right to be a priest as well. The prophet Nathan also accompanied Tzadoq the priest at Shlomo's coronation.
   
   
2. He is given possessions that belonged to his ancestor David. Shlomo was given his mule. Judges and their sons rode on donkeys (Judges 10:4; 12:14), similar to mules, so this symbolized that the king now had the right to judge all Israel. Yoash was given the crown and the testimony or witness (eduth)—possibly the Torah scroll David had written. Shlomo was not given David's crown until David died, for there is a hint in 1 Kings 1:36 that this was a test period to see whether YHWH would confirm David's choice of the son of a woman he had once committed adultery with. If he remained alive until then, it meant YHWH had approved this. Yoash was given David's spears and shields.
   
   
3. Acclamation: with shouting and rejoicing, recognition by the witnesses of his accession to the throne, which included applause. This is the background for Psalm 47, which begins, "Clap your hands, all you people…for YHWH is…a great King over all the earth!" They also used flutes.
   
   
4. Homage: The people would bow down before him. This is the right of one whom YHWH has empowered. It is sometimes translated as "worship", and in our modern world where we seldom do homage to kings, this confuses people into equating Yahshua with YHWH, when in fact He is to be bowed down to—"worshipped" in the old sense of acknowledging worth—as the King that YHWH has anointed. But even Daniel and Mordekhai, both famous for their refusals of idolatry, bowed down to kings of other nations. They knew the difference. (Kings were brought tribute in the form of gifts, not blood, as was brought in worship to YHWH.) The king of Israel was known as the "Son of Elohim". (Psalm 2) This is why Yahshua is called by this title. David also had everyone bow their heads to YHWH at the time of Shlomo's accession.
   
   
5. Celebration and music, including trumpetings with the shofar and other trumpets
   
   
6. Slaughterings: At Shlomo's coronation, 1,000 bulls, 1,000 rams, and 1,000 lambs were slaughtered. At Yoash's coronation, the unauthorized usurpers to the throne and anyone who followed them were slaughtered!
   
   
7. Enthronement at the palace of David: The whole entourage followed the king there for the ceremony. Shlomo later had his own throne built that had six steps (1 Kings 10:18ff), with the throne itself being the seventh, symbolizing Yahshua's kingdom after 6,000 years. David's throne, on which Shlomo first sat, is called the throne of the Kingdom of YHWH in 1 Chron. 28:5. YHWH is always king of Israel, no matter what man is on the throne. (His prosperity would depend on how well he lined up with YHWH's plan for Israel.) So when Yahshua is allowed to sit on His father's throne, it is David's throne for both reasons. (Rev. 3:21; Luke 1:32)
   
   
8. Feasting: on all those animals that were slaughtered.

In both cases there was a surprised usurper elsewhere in the city, who found that this "coup" by the rightful heirs to the throne had been arranged without their knowledge.

What the king receives at his coronation:

1. A New Name or Title

   Throughout the Near East, when a king took the throne, he took on the name of his nation's supreme deity in one way or another. For example, a Pharaoh was given five names, the last two being the name of the elohim his family was most attached to and the supreme deity of Egypt, Ra. These names are called "theophoric", that is, giving tribute to the deity. Iyzevel's name is another form of theophoric name, meaning something like "Ba'al exalts."

   Who would give them these new names? An emperor ("king of kings") could change the name of a king whom they conquered or made a vassal. For example, Pharaoh changed the Judean king Elyaqim ‘s named to Yehoyaqim, as mentioned above. (2 Kings 23:34) In the same way, the "emperor" of Babylon changed Mattanyah's name to Tzidqiyahu. (2 Kings 24:17)

   Why didn't they give them Babylonian or Egyptian names? Possibly to still give some honor to YHWH while the kings were still in their own land. But it's possible that they simply followed an existing Jewish custom of changing or adding another name to a king at his accession to the throne. There is evidence that there was such a custom.

   From 2 Shmu'el 12:24-25 we see that while David gave Shlomo one name, the prophet Nathan gave him another—Y'didiyah (meaning "beloved of YHWH"). Was the latter a name given him by the prophet not at his birth but at his enthronement? Shlomo also had another name or title: Qoheleth (the Hebrew original translated "Ecclesiastes", meaning, "one who calls an assembly"). And it could be that the "other" writer of proverbs, Lemuel, was just another name for Shlomo, as he is called a king, yet there was no king in Israel who had this as his primary name. It simply means "in reference to Elohim". (Or it may be a foreign king from whom Shlomo collected these particular proverbs, possibly favorites of his.)

   In 2 Shmu'el we are told that Golyath of Gath was killed by one El-khanan ("Elohim has shown favor") son of Yaarey-oregim of Beyth-Lekhem. But everyone knows David of Beyth-Lekhem killed Golyath of Gath! Does this indicate that David had another name (as did his father), or that someone else from the same hometown killed someone else from the same town as Golyath who had the same name? It could be that "Golyath" was not a personal name, but a title, indicating a category of figurehead-heroes. The word "Golyath" is thought to mean "splendor".

   As seen above, Shallum was also known as Yehoakhaz. (Yirm. 22:11; 2 Kings 23:30) Azaryah (2 Kings 14:21) was also called Uzziyah (2 Chron. 26:1) So it is clear that it was common for kings of Yehudah to have more than one name.

   In Genesis 20 we see Avraham interacting with a king of the Filistines named Avimelekh. A generation later, we see Yitzhaq interacting with him as well. (26:1) Or is it the same man? It seems strange that an aging king would still be interested in adding another wife to his harem. It appears more likely that this was a son or grandson of the first-mentioned Avimelekh. The name means "my father is a king", which sounds like a claim to the throne in itself. It may be that a whole dynasty of kings was named Avimelekh.

   Bilaam the prophet is called "son of Be'or". This might seem straightforward enough, but we see another "Ben-Be'or" (Bela) reigning over Edom in Gen. 26:32. Thus we deduce that Bilaam was either a ruler himself or that Ben-Be'or was somewhat of a dynastic family name.

   Of course, anything we see about kings of ancient Israel has some bearing on how we view the coming King of Israel. We might expect that part of His coronation will include the conferring of an additional name or names. And indeed, Scripture bears this out: Yahshua promises that He will write His own new name on one who overcomes! (Rev. 3:12; compare 2:17)

   What might that name be? Some prophecies tell us what the Messiah's name will be called, though Yahshua was never called by these names in the Renewed Covenant accounts: Immanu-el (Yeshayahu 7:14), Pele Yoetz El Gibbor Avi-Ad Sar-Shalom. (9:6) These mean "Marvelous counselor, mighty heroic warrior, everlasting father, prince of peace". Many people are thrown off by the second and third phrases, reading them as "mighty God" and as Yahshua being His Father. But El means "mighty one" or "judge", and is part of many Hebrew people's names. Avi-Ad could be read as "permanent patriarch", indicating that he will remain the head of that household forever. This is borne out by the next verse (9:7), which tells us, "Of the increase of his dominion and of peace there will be no end."

   Originally these were names for someone born in Yeshayahu's own day—probably King Hizqiyahu. Even today, Prince Charles of England has a similar long list of titles, including Prince of Wales and even King of the Jews! (This is based on a tradition that Yirmeyahu took a daughter of the last king of Yehudah to Britain and that her descendants continued to rule on that throne.) But as a secondary, prophetic reference this verse was even seen as Messianic by the rabbis before the Christian era. Just as throughout the Near East, attributes of the supreme deity of a land were ascribed to the reigning king, these titles do not equate Yahshua with YHWH, but show that He is a representative of the reign of YHWH in the physical realm. Recall that the throne of David and Shlomo was itself even called YHWH's own throne (1 Chron. 29:23) and the kings of Yehudah were named His son on their coronation day. (Psalm 2)

   Another title for the Messiah is "Dvar YHWH"--the Word of YHWH (Rev. 19:13; compare Yochanan 1:1) He is also called King of Kings, indicating that He will in actuality be an emperor over the other kings of the earth. So He has a long list of names, mainly representative of YHWH, because He is the man YHWH has chosen to be a picture of His own reigning.

   And according to Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 62, when the Messiah returns, the name of the city of Yerushalayim itself will be changed—to Kheftzibah ("my delight is in her").

   More titles of the kings of Israel:

   • Messenger of Elohim: often translated "angel"—someone from another realm--but it is just as commonly used of a human representative. (2 Shmu'el 14:17, 20) If people believe Billy Graham is a messenger from Elohim, why couldn't David be? So it does not mean his descendant the Messiah is superhuman if He, too, is called the "Angel of YHWH".
     
     
   • Savior (Psalm 72:4, 13): The king will save the needy, so he is a "savior" (2 Shmu'el 19:9) so Israel can remain free. There is one savior—at a time—that is, whoever is the king at that time. YHWH raises up deliverers any time Israel cries out to Him. (Judges 3:9, 15) (2 Kings 13:4) Yahshua is indeed salvation, but salvation is of YHWH.
     
     
   • YHWH's Anointed (Mashiakh): Every king of Israel is called the Messiah. What YHWH is doing with Yahshua is not new. The Torah and the prophets do not speak of the expectation of a Messiah except as the continuation of the Davidic kingship. Under a particular righteous king, the dead would be raised, the blind would see, etc.
     
     
   • Son of Elohim: It was common for kings in the Ancient Near East to be considered to be born of his supreme deity. Since YHWH has no physical children, He needs to adopt a human to be His underruler. When YHWH says a human king is His son, it is a legal adoption formula similar to Sha'ul's oath to David, "You will be my son-in-law." (1 Shmu'el 18:21). According to Hammurabi's code (which tells us much about the context into which Scripture came), a divorce or adoption could be legally accomplished just by stating it as a fact ("You are my son"), if the proper permission and authority was there. (Hos. 1:9; 2:2; 1) Now the king has authority over YHWH's household, Israel. Do not read anything deeper into this; the tendency to do this has led us astray into paganism. It is not saying the king becomes divine. YHWH promised that He had chosen to become "Father" to David's son. (2 Shmu'el 7:12ff; 1 Chron. 22:9ff; 28:6) It goes beyond Shlomo, and can only be fulfilled by Messiah, but we have the problem of v. 14, which threatens to chastise this son if he commits iniquity. Thus it must apply to the whole line of David. When it is said that Yahshua will be called Son of the Most High (Lk. 1:28ff), the context is sitting on David's throne. When YHWH said, "This is My beloved Son" (Mat. 3:17; 17:5), it was to identify Him as the king of Israel.
     
     
   • Firstborn: This is a variation on "Son of Elohim". This is said of David's seed. (Psalm 89:23ff)

2. He is given an Insignia:

   The eduth (2 Kings 11:2) is a scroll given to each king. A related word is used in 2 Samuel 1:5 of a bracelet presented to a king at his coronation. (David was given the bracelet that belonged to Sha'ul along with his crown. It was another symbol of authority in the ancient Near East.) In the context of Yom T'ruah (Rev. 4-5), the Son of Man is presented with a scroll, bracelet, and signet ring from the Ancient of Days. (Dan. 7:13) "The testimony/eduth of Yahshua is the spirit of prophecy." (Rev. 19:10) This is the context and key to understanding the book of Revelation: the coronation of the Messiah-King. A related concept is the hoq (decree), a scroll containing those prophecies which would be fulfilled in that particular king's day, as well as names and titles given by YHWH to that king. David's announcement that today YHWH has "begotten" him is called a hoq. (Psalm 2:7)

Coronation Psalms:

While all psalms were "official" songs for Temple ceremonies, several psalms were specifically written for the above-mentioned celebration upon the king's accession to the throne:

• Psalm 2 describes how YHWH will uphold the king He has set up when other nations try to rebel. He will rule with a rod of iron—an unbending standard. He says to "kiss the son"—i.e., appease the king, or in today's terminology, "kiss up" to him.
  
  
• Psalm 89 speaks of the covenant YHWH made with David, who would become "the highest of the kings of the earth".
  
  
• Psalm 101 appears to be an oath made by the king at his coronation to uproot evil and keep YHWH's kingdom pure.
  
  
• Psalm 110 was written by David, probably for Shlomo's coronation, as he was the only successor on the throne in his lifetime. He bowed down before his own son. Yahshua asked how David could call his son his master. It was because of the promises of YHWH to his descendants; it was expected that the kingship would become greater and greater. Each time the dynasty continued, the nation would expect that this one would be the Messiah—that the promises that all enemies would be cut off would now be fulfilled. In one sense, it was true Shlomo had a reign of shalom. His enemies were made his footstool, but it was only a taste of what is yet to come, because not every nation was subject to him. He is called a priest after the order of Melkhitzedeq: not of the order of Aharon, but a much more ancient order, for Melkhitzedeq is thought to be Shem, the son of Noakh. Other sons of David were priests ("officiators") in areas outside the Land of Israel, where the Levitical priesthood did not have jurisdiction. (2 Shmu'el 8:18) The one who ruled from Yerushalayim would be of that order.

Expectations of the King:

David's prayer for Shlomo (Psalm 72) includes the hope that his reign will bring justice for the poor, peace, the flourishing of the righteous, that he needy would be redeemed from violence, that other nations would serve him and bring him tribute--and attributes the success he will experience to YHWH (v. 18) They are "royal rhetoric", though that is not all they are.

These are all things that are said about Yahshua's kingdom, but they are for any anointed of YHWH to some extent. What must be in the forefront of our thoughts about Yahshua is that He is the King—and will have a physical kingdom. People will still complain about Him as they do about any king, and there will be violence, though none will overcome Him. A rod of iron causes pain! Do not discard the literal and overspiritualize His roles. This psalm says that prayers are to be made for the king. If the Messiah were divine, why would we pray for Him?

The Kingdom is not so much about His "coming back" as our "getting caught up" to Him—arriving where He already is in time, ahead of us. For now, He is the only one who has gotten there. The key to getting outside time is "THE commandment"--to love YHWH with all our heart--and the one like it, to love our true neighbors as ourselves. We cannot do it without the breath (spirit) He sent back to us from there. But the more we yield to it, the closer we can move to there.

The King's Role in Worship

As we saw above, "You are a priest after the order of Melkhitzedeq" (Psalm 110:4) is one of the roles conferred on a king of Yehudah. It was first applied to King Shlomo, and the book of Hebrews confirms that it applies to Yahshua. Many far-fetched theories have been based on this, when in fact the explanation is quite simple. The word for "order" here (dibra), means "style", "manner", or "reason". I.e., "You will be a priest in the same way Melkhitzedeq was (and for the same reason)." So how was Melkhitzedeq a priest, and why?

In Genesis 4:18 we are told he was "king of Shalem" and "priest of El Elyon" (the Highest of the Mighty Ones). So He was both a priest and a king. Shalem was an early name for Yerushalayim. Melkhitzedeq's name also means "my king is righteous". So his "order" is defined by these elements: a righteous king, reigning in Yerushalayim, and somehow in the role of a priest of YHWH.

King Shlomo was the first Israelite king enthroned at Yerushalayim. He was righteous, at first. But how did he function as a priest? He built the Temple and inaugurated the use of the altar by dedicating it. We later see Yoshiyahu rededicating it. (2 Kgs. 22:3) So this is the king's prerogative. Three times a year he offered ascending offerings, peace offerings, and burned incense on the altar. (1 Kgs. 9:25) He blessed all of Israel in YHWH's name (1 Kgs. 8:14ff; 2 Shm. 6:17-18) as the high priest also did. (Num. 6:22; 1 Chron. 23:13)

The Torah tells us that a priest's role is to provide judgment and justice. (Deut. 17:9-12; 21:5) David did the same. (2 Shmu'el 8:15) Two priests were part of his "cabinet" of officials, along with generals, scribes, etc. One was the high priest; the other was related to him, but chosen as sort of a "personal priest" to David when he was fleeing from King Sha'ul. (1 Shm. 22:20ff) He was later removed from this office by Shlomo to fulfill a prophecy that none of Eli's descendants would retain authority. (1 Kings 3:12) So a king had the authority to remove a priest who held his position because of a political arrangement. Azaryah the son of Tzadoq the priest is the first in a list of "officials" (sarim) in 1 Kings 4:1. David had some of his own sons in the role of cohanim (literally, officiators), the same word usually translated priest. (1 Shm. 8:18) They did not officiate in the Tabernacle, however. They held this second kind of priesthood. Thus it is not surprising that Shlomo or any of his descendants can be called a priest, though they are not of the tribe of Levi.

Yoshiyahu restored the worship of YHWH after a long period of paganism in Yehudah (long enough that the priests could apparently no longer read; literacy in Israel was far higher than that of all nations around them, even Greece, because the common man was expected to know the Torah, but when this was no longer present as a motivation, they did not teach their sons to read). Yoshiyahu tells the high priest how to spend money brought into the Temple treasury. (2 Kings 22) So the king had authority over the finances of the Temple.

This gives us the necessary background to understand Yahshua's driving out the moneychangers out and overturning their tables, not allowing them to carry their wares through. (Mark 11:15ff; also compare 12:41-43) The result was that the priests and scribes feared Him, and at that point began looking for a way to do away with Him. Why didn't they just have Him arrested and escorted away by the guards? Because undoubtedly people had kept up with who the rightful heir to the throne of David was, though no one had exercised the authority that came with it for over 600 years, and they knew a Judahite king had the right to forbid any activity in the Temple precinct that violated the Torah. He was following in the reforms of His ancestor Yoshiyahu. The Temple officials had plenty of money, but they were truly in financial ruin, for they were "gouging" the worshippers who needed to buy animals for sacrifice from their monopoly on the market. Before His trial, Yahshua said nothing publicly about being a king, but this act was all they needed to bring the charge against Him that He said He was king. No one else had the right to do this. They knew that if He was heralded as king, their ill-gotten enterprise would be brought to an end. So His disrupting of their commerce sealed His death certificate.

No one disputed King Akhaz's right to replace the Temple altar with one that looked like an altar he had seen in Assyria. (2 Kings 10:16ff) Though this violated Torah, none of the priesthood said, "You can't do that!" The king had this right, though he abused it.

Anywhere else, a king's purpose is to be served by his subjects. In Israel, a king serves his people. We see Melkhitzedeq set the precedent by bringing gifts to the one he was blessing (Avraham). Indeed, a priest's role is mediator between YHWH and the people, so he serves both of them. Thus the order of Melkhitzedeq includes being a servant-king. Yahshua reiterated that the greatest in His Kingdom would be the one who is servant of all. He came not to be served, but to serve. (Mark 10:44, 45)

What we never see is a king doing an ordinary task of the priests. Uzziyahu tried, but was struck with leprosy for doing so when warned by the priests not to. (2 Chron. 26) The king acts in a priestly role only on special dedicatory occasions. We see evidence in Y'hezq'el (Ezekiel) 45-46 that this will again be done in the Messianic Kingdom. This helps us understand why the writer to the Hebrews emphasizes that Yahshua's sacrifice was "once and for all". He was not infringing on the prerogatives of the ordinary priests, but making special offerings—more powerful ones. No one else who was not a Levitical priest had the right to do so.

The Oil Connection

So David and Shlomo were both kings who also had a priestly function, and were also prophets (in the sense that many of the psalms are prophecies, and Shlomo gave the key to understanding prophecy in Qoheleth/Ecclesiastes: "What has been will be again." They also fed all the people, which is what Melkhitzedeq and Eliyahu did.) Over half of the writing prophets were priests. Moshe was a prophet who, like Shlomo, erected the Tabernacle, anointed the priesthood, and brought the first offerings to the altar. So these positions have some degree of interchangeability. They all require anointing with oil to inaugurate--a special oil that no one may compound for personal use, for these are all Kingdom tasks. Normally a Levitical priest did the anointing, but Shmu'el, who was neither Levite nor Judahite, also anointed kings, for he was a prophet who worked in the Temple all his life and ruled all Israel before there was a king, so he felt insulted when the nation wanted to replace him with a king, though he did not go by that title.

Oil is a picture of the Holy Spirit, which gives them all an aspect of eternity, but does not make any of them deities. Prophet, priest, and king all dispense justice and right ruling from Torah. All of these are Mashiakh's jobs. He was described by some of His followers as "a great prophet" whom many thought would be a king. (Luke 24) He holds all three positions, foreshadowed to a lesser degree by his ancestors David and Shlomo.

The Household of the King

Harem is an Arabic word with a Hebrew equivalent, from a root meaning to enclose or seal off (to other men). In other nations, a king's harem was usually guarded by eunuchs. Israelites did not make eunuchs, but polygamy was usually tolerated if someone could afford to have more than one wife. Kings usually did. This was a sign of wealth and power, but not for the reasons the modern mind would expect. It means one has the potential to have many children to carry on one's name and legacy. In a time when there were many wars and much pillaging, having a large number of sons would ensure that at least some of them would survive to provide one with heirs and preserve the memory of his name.

Israel's first king, Sha'ul, had at least two wives and one concubine. (2 Shmu'el 3:7) When David became king, he inherited Sha'ul's wives and concubine. Scripture says YHWH gave them to him. (2 Shmu'el 12:7ff) What belonged to one king became the propery of any king that conquered him. (2 Shmu'el 12:7-8) It was common for one king to even take another's wives when he conquered him. (1 Kings 20) Thus even wives of kings are seen as possessions.

To show how important it was to have a king's women, when Sha'ul's son Ish-bosheth complained that Avner had declared himself king in Sha'ul's place after Sha'ul died, Avner (who was acting king of Israel) turned the Kingdom over to David (who was already king of Yehudah). But David would not even speak to him until he promised to give back the daughter whom Sha'ul had retracted and given to another man after he began to hate David. Otherwise, David would have no honor in the eyes of the Northern Kingdom. Having the women of a royal household is seen as having authority over that household. (Mikhal's second husband followed her for a long way, weeping mournfully, until he was forced to turn back, probably upon the threat of death.)

In his first seven years as king, David had six sons through six different women: Akhinoam, Aviga'il, Maasah, Haggith, Avital, Eglah. (2 Shm. 3:2) Avshalom's mother was the daughter of the king of Gesher (a pagan king), probably in order to seal a political alliance. (1 Kings 3:1) It would assure the loyalty of the vassal state. Since he was the son of royalty on both sides, this is probably why Avshalom saw himself as more worthy than his brothers to be king.

A concubine (Heb., pilgash) differs from a wife in that she is not offered the same protections; she came into the relationship without a contract. When Avshalom revolted and David had to flee Yerushalayim, he took his wives (at least 8 by now) and children and left ten concubines there to take care of the household. (2 Shm. 15:16) So we can see that they were lowest in rank. Avshalom came and defiled them all to make himself odious to David. (16:20) By taking his father's harem, he was declaring himself king and David's conqueror. When David returned, because of the dishonor this would bring him, he ended any relations with them. He did not neglect them; they were supported, but they lived as if they were widows until the day of their death. (20:3ff) Since they did not have the rights of a wife, but were closer to being slaves, they were not issued divorce certificates so that they could marry anyone else.

King Shlomo carried the idea of marriages to seal peace treaties to the extreme. He "loved many foreign women" and married 700 princesses (sa'aroth—royal women) and had 300 additional concubines. (1 Kings 11) They were all daughters of kings, probably most of city-states. (Some of the political entities that included this as part of the treaty were well down into Africa.) This was in direct violation of Deut. 17:15ff, which stipulates that a king in Israel may not multiply wives for himself, lest they turn his heart away from YHWH. This is exactly what took place. He first allowed them to continue ceremonies to their elohim, then later he began to participate in this idolatry. We see a glimpse of his priorities in that he first built his own house, then YHWH's house (which YHWH had never actually asked for), then the wall of Yerushalayim (putting concern for his subjects last). He also specifically violated the command not to go back to Egypt to multiply horses for himself. He could add wives or horses, but not multiply them. (Part of Efrayim's repentance from such sins is the promise, "We will not ride a horse" in Hoshea 14:3!)

Ahav also turned to Ba'al worship after marrying the Phoenician princess Izevel, a pagan. (1 Kings 16:30)

Rehav'am had 18 wives and 60 concubines, and had 28 children that survived. Aviyah had 14 wives.

The more wives one has, the more responsibilities he has. So Yoash, who was focused on repairing the Temple and restoring the worship of YHWH in the Land, took only two wives. (2 Chron. 24:2ff) Any more would prevent him from carrying out his duties well. Paul made it a command that anyone who wants a leadership role in Messiah's called-out communities must be the husband of (only) one wife. (1 Tim. 3:2, 12; Titus 1:6) This also implies that they would have one wife. This is wisdom with the many temptations around us. (1 Cor. 7:2, 9) One man with one woman is seen as the ideal since creation; only the rich had more than one wife, and if we looked at the details, in many cases where there was polygamy, it was because either due to war or other reasons, there were often more women than men, and to be under a man's "covering" was important enough that he could without guilt take more women into his care. Levirate marriages (when one's brother died childless) were another reason many men had more than one wife.

The G'virah

Just as there is no feminine form of the word adon (master) in Hebrew, malkah (the feminine form of the Hebrew word for king) is never used in Scripture of an Israelite woman; only foreign women were called by this title. Thus Israel had no "queens" (except in some faulty translations). There is another term used for a royal woman: g'virah—the "great lady", about which we will say more later. Rehav'am preferred Ma'akhah over his other 17 wives, but he gave her no rank or title (2 Chron. 11:21ff), she still had no political, financial, or military power. Yet the underlying attitude toward women in the Torah is one of honor. They are appreciated, not dishonored. Anciently, if a woman was seen as a possession, it was a positive thing to her. In an environment where she might be simply taken without consequences for the one who snatched her up if she did not belong to a man, to have a marriage she had agreed upon made her feel secure.

Even in Psalm 45, which describes the wedding of a king, the bride is simply called the sh'gal (consort, from a term meaning one who will be copulated with). She is told to worship the king, and though she was the daughter of royalty, she was told to forget her father's house because the king was now the one she served. There was a much more pragmatic, less emotional approach to marriage then, with some exceptions. The main reason to marry was to have many children, because then one has more return on his labor and has someone to care for him in old age. The Hebrew term for "prosper" means "to spread out".

Yet Ma'akhah (Rehav'am's third and favorite wife and Avshalom's daughter, mentioned above) does appear later as someone very prominent in Yehudah.(1 Kings 15:2) She is listed as the king (Aviyam)'s mother.

Frequently with the kings of Yehudah, but only occasionally with the kings of Israel, the king's mother's name is listed. Queens were common in Egypt, but most Semitic nations had a "queen mother". Since in Scripture, people are usually listed in order of rank, it is most instructive to note the following lists:

"And he carried off Yehoyakhin to Bavel, along with the king's mother, the king's wives, his chamberlain (court official), and the leaders of the Land." (2 Kings 24:15)

"…after Yekhoniyah, the g'virah, the chamberlains, the princes, of Yehudah and Yerushalayim, the artisans, and the smiths had gone out of Yerushalayim. " (Yirmeyahu 29:1)

The g'virah (which we could translate as "queen mother" or "great lady") is ranked after only the king. This shows us that the most important woman in the king's household is not his wife but his mother.

"Tell the king and the g'virah, 'Humble yourselves! Take a seat, because the crown of your splendor has come down from your place of headship!'" (Yirmeyahu 13:18)

This tells us that the g'virah had much power to rule in the Land, and much influence over how the kingdom is run. We see in the above-mentioned account of Adoniyah's request for Avishag as a wife that King Shlomo's mother is very highly honored. The king is not expected to refuse a request from her. (1 Kings 2:17ff) This suggests that the concept was older than Shomo's reign, though he is the first king in Israel whose mother is documented as having royal rank. The king is usually the one in whose presence people stand up, but he stands when his mother enters the room. Not only this, but he bows and sets a throne at his right hand for her—the highest honor there can be from a king. (Psalm 110:1)

The same woman called Aviyam's mother, Maakhah, is called the mother of Aviyam's son Asa. (2 Chron. 15:16; compare 1 Kings 15:8) She was actually thus his grandmother. This shows that just because there is a change of king, the g'virah does not necessarily change.

But 15:13 tells us that because she had made an idol, Asa removed her from her office of g'virah. This shows us that g'virah is a rank and title controlled by the king, that can be rescinded if one abuses it.

We seem something of this in the life of Yahshua. His mother Miryam had enough influence over Him that, although she seems to be getting on his nerves, He still honors her request. (Yochanan 2) Eventually her position in His life begins to interfere with YHWH's priorities for Him, so He "disowns" her (Mat. 12:48-49), though He seems to reinstate her, at least in terms of His responsibilities to care for her, at His crucifixion (19:26-27). And indeed she retains a place of honor after His ascension (Acts 1:14), possibly because of the leadership of her second son, Yaaqov, over the counsil at Yerushalayim. The Catholics took this too far and gave her even more prominence than the King—a very pagan thing to do, as we saw in the case of Yizevel.

The one time the king's wife in Israel is known to have acted in the role of g'virah is with Ahav and Yizevel. What gives the brothers of a king rank is not that their brother is king, but that their mother is g'virah. After Yehu killed off all of Ahav's relatives, the brothers of the king of Yehudah (who did not know that Ahav and Yizevel were dead) come up to Shomron asking to greet the children of the king and children of the g'virah. (2 Kings 10:11ff) Only the Jews actually used this term, but they believed that there was someone in that role in the Northern Kingdom, and that in this case it was the king's wife. But this queen was a pagan princess who had brought such a concept from her homeland, and she actually, in practicality, had more power than the king because Ahav was more hesitant than she to take what he wanted when it was against Torah.

Athalyah was also able to accomplish a coup and take the rulership instead of any other potential heir to her son when he died because she already had this high rank. She killed off every other potential successor—she thought. Yehoash was hidden away in the Temple of YHWH, where she had no interest in going. Those who were faithful to YHWH were eventually about to reinstate him as king.

The Royal Children

From the story of Amnon and Tamar, (2 Shmu'el 13) we learn that the unmarried daughters of David lived in the palace, while sons of the king often lived in their own houses when grown—each in his own house. Tamar wore a coat that extended to the palms and probably to the floor as a symbol of royalty.

Some of King Shlomo's daughters married men who worked for the king in the positions of senior officials. (1 Kings 4:11, 15) Others married the sons of kings who were allied with him. Almost any vassal king would give his daughter to the sons of the conquering king.

Ahav and Yizevel's daughter married Yehoram, the king of Yehudah (2 Kings 8:17), showing that at this time in the two kingdoms' history, they were allies. This was a rare occasion, and probably had to do with the fact that they were both worshipping Ba'al at that time.

The king's children had nurses who remained their special attendants to raise them long after they were weaned. (2 Kings 11:2ff) The account of Rivqah (who was from a wealthy family) gives us information that may also have applied to the kings' children: Her nurse remained a life-long attendant. (Gen. 35:8)

There is much more information about the sons of the kings. Ahav had seventy of them, and he appointed men of high rank and esteem—the rulers and elders of Yezre'el—as teachers for his sons. The fact that Ahav sent letters to them all (2 Kings 10) indicates that his sons were not raised in their father's own house, but sent out to these tutors or mentors. Men who instructed the royal sons so they could be upright leaders would be part of any royal court. (1 Chron. 27:32)

Those sons who were not appointed to be the next king still received very valuable gifts from the king --even whole cities, and more than one city. (2 Chron. 21:3) Their provision as well as inheritance comes from the king himself. (Y'hezq'el 45:16)

Avshalom owned fields and estates that he could tax. (2 Shmu'el 14:29) He had sheep that needed more than one person to shear. But he needed David's permission to take other members of the royal household along with him when he went to shear them. (2 Shmu'el 13:24-27)

As seen above, some of the king's sons would be first officers over the business beneath the king's own, i.e., part of the court who helped run the affairs of the kingdom themselves. (2 Shmu'el 8:18; 1 Chron. 18:17) Since there was no widespread retail market until after the return from Babylon except by kings' household, it was often this type of business that the king's sons would be involved in.

When is the king's son not a son?

In 1 Kings 22:26-27 we read that someone is sent to the king's son to be put in prison. Yerakhme'el is called the "son of the king" (Yirmeyahu 36:26), but nowhere is he listed among the sons of the incumbent king, and the task he is charged with is arresting Yirmeyahu the prophet and his scribe. Why would the king have his son do these things? Didn't he have other servants to do so?

Again we see Yirmeyahu being thrown into a dungeon administered by Malkiyah, the king's son. (Yirm. 38:6) Maaseyah is called the king's son during the reign of Akhaz (2 Chron. 28:7), but nowhere else is he included in lists of this king's sons. Instead, he is paralleled with the governor of the household and the one next to the king. It appears from all of these passages that "son of the king" (ben hamelekh) is a title for the chief of police who worked directly for the king, because many with this title were involved in arresting or jailing people. Many ancient seals bearing the inscription "son of the king" have been found by archaeologists.

Ben (the Hebrew word for son) is related to the words even (building stone) and banah (to build), and is thus seen as one of the components used to build up a household, in this case those given authority by the king. Literal sons were, this of course, but other important members of the household could also be called by this title, since their roles were important as well. Ben Elohim, therefore, chiefly means one who is ordained by Elohim with power or authority, and there are several different roles for which that title was used: Adam (Luqa 3:38), angels (Gen. 6:2; Iyov 1:6; 38:7), kings of Israel (2 Shmu'el 7:14; Psalm 2:7), and Israelites in general (Hoshea 1:10; Yochanan 1:12; Rom. 8:14; 1 Yochanan 3;1) who act in obedience to YHWH (Phil. 2:15) in addition to the Messiah in particular (Luqa 1:35 et al).

In Acts 3:25, we see the term "sons" being used in the sense of "beneficiaries" of the prophets and covenants. So "son" means much more than "male offspring" in Hebrew.

The Royal Court

"Servant of the King" (eved ha-melekh) was a term that had many varied applications.

Some things that impressed the queen of Sheva about King Shlomo's court (1 Kings 10:4ff) were "who eats at the king's table, the seating of his servants, the service of the waiters and their apparel, the cupbearers, and the entryway to the palace. Note that the waiters are different from the "servants", though one would think the waiters were a sub-class of servant, so the latter term must have had a special meaning here.

When David sent a prophet and high priest to anoint Shlomo king, the "servants of their master" (David) were also sent with them. (1 Kings 1:32ff) These were people within his household who were not related to him. The same term is often used of slaves, but these servants were not menial laborers.

From the story of Bathsheva, we learn that those in active service for David slept at the door to his house.. (2 Shmu'el 11:9-11) This may have meant in a courtyard or altogether outside of it, possibly in tents. They kept life simple so they could be ready to act if he needed something. This might include a courier, a soldier, or an executioner! (2 Shmu'el 20:6) They were at David's disposal to inform, hurt, or kill as needed.

Others who are described as David's servants are men from Gath, the Philistine city where he had lived when a refugee from Sha'ul. By this time David was very rich, well-known, and feared. They knew David as a great warrior, and, impressed, attached themselves to this hero whom they respected. Those with a taste for war became his mercenaries. In this way, many great houses in Israel were established. Each nation had its battlefield specialties, and David would have picked and chosen according to their skills.

One of the most prominent servants of Shlomo (Yarav'am/Jeroboam), who was set over the Yosefite labor force (which in actuality was forced labor as well), was made king over the northern tribes after Shlomo's son took unjust advantage of them. (1 Kings 11:26-28)

"Servant of the king" was no mean designation; it was a title that ranked with priest and scribe in importance. (2 Kings 22:12) Naaman, who was called the servant of the king of Syria, was the commander of his army. (2 Kings 5) The captain of the guard—the king's personal army as opposed to the field army—had the same title. (2 Kings 25:8)

Thus we see that the title eved ha-melekh had no specific context except that one was attached to the king in some way; anyone involved in his business could be described this way.

One additional description of the "servant of the king" is that he was one who "saw the king's face". (2 Kings 25:18ff) This was said of those who were his closest associates. (Yirmeyahu 52:25) The seven men who ranked highest in the Persian Empire were called the ones who "saw his face". (Esther 1:14) In other words, they had relatively easy access to him. In many cases one had to be a ruler himself to be in this category.

This sheds more light on passages like Deut. 31:11, where all Israel is called to "appear before YHWH" or "present themselves before YHWH." It literally says, "to see the face of YHWH". This correlates with the fact that we are to be a "kingdom of priests", an entire nation that is set apart.

We know from other passages that we cannot actually see YHWH's face and live; the phrase can just as well mean "perceive YHWH's presence". But David asks, "When will I come and see the face of Elohim?" (Psalm 42:1) it connotes intimacy with Him. If the term was used only of the closest advisors and confidantes of an earthly king, it underlines the point of how YHWH looks on Israel as a special treasure. (Exodus 19:5)

Sarisim

This was another highly-ranked title of some of the king's servants. (1 Shmu'el 8:15; Yirmeyahu 34:18) Sometimes the term is translated "officers". They were at the king's beck and call when he wanted someone to be summoned and brought before him. (1 Kings 22:9) They were called upon to ensure that justice was done for a widow who had lost her land when she had left the country during a famine. (2 Kings 8:6) They were included with the king's mother, princes, and officers (2 Kings 24:15) Some had charged of the men of war. (2 Kings 25:19) At one point, a saris even lived in the Temple (2 Kings 23:11), though this was not necessarily YHWH's will.

Hizqiyahu was told that because of his sharing of too much information with foreign visitors, one day his sons would be made sarisim in the palace of the king of Babylon. (2 Kings 20:18) He understood this as a punishment. Why?

The actual meaning of the word sarisim is "castrated ones". Originally, it referred to those eunuchs who oversaw the harems and were in charge of the royal children. In both of these cases, if they were castrated, the king knew he could absolutely trust his wives or daughters into their care. It was sarisim who attended Izevel (Jezebel), being present to throw her out of the window when she was overthrown. (2 Kings 9:31) Being in the queen's chamber, considering that she maintained many foreign ways, it is possible that in this case they were indeed castrated. In another case they are listed last after the women and children, indicating that they ranked lower even than children, so this time they may have actually been truly castrated—possibly when carried away captive. (Yirmeyahu 41:16) But the term is of foreign origin, appearing in many ancient cuneiform documents, especially Assyrian ones, where the form is she-reshi, which means "he who is the head". In Egyptian documents, Persians officials at every level are called by this title. In general it would be considered repulsive in Israel to castrate men, and in most cases the term probably only related to someone loyal enough to be trusted by the king to the degree that he would trust his wives and daughters to someone who had no way to carry out sexual desire with them. I.e., it was one who would "give anything" to serve his king. Potifar was called a saris, and he had a wife—something he would not need if he was a eunuch.

Food Service Staff

The butler and baker who met Yoseyf in prison were also called sarisim. Let us look at other staff related to the king's dining room. The one who made the king's wine was called a cupbearer. Nehemyah was one. He would taste the wine before serving it to the king, which could also prevent the king from being poisoned.

The king also had butchers and chefs on his staff. Like the cupbearer, their lives were on the line every day dependent on how well they pleased the king. What the Queen of Sheva was most impressed with about King Shlomo's palace was his table and his dining hall. (1 Kings 10:4) She was struck with the way his servants were seated at table—possibly in the order of rank. He must have had a huge food preparation staff, since for just one day he would prepare 30 bulls, 100 sheep, as well as deer, gazelle, roebuck, and fattened fowls—more than 140 animals in all. (1 Kings 4:21) Considering that one bull can weigh 800 pounds and feed 75 to 100 people, and one sheep can feed 20 to 30, he could be feeding three to four thousand people per day in his royal dining hall! David was not as lavish as Shlomo, since he often went out to battle.

Those permitted to partake were held in especially high esteem. To be one who "sat at the king's table" was a very special honor. As a very shrewd political move, David allowed the only surviving descendant of Sha'ul to sit at his table—which this grandson of Sha'ul (Mefibosheth) considered such an honor that he felt he it was not right to ever ask any other favor from the king. (2 Shmu'el 9:7-13; 19:28) Only those with whom the king shares an intimate bond are allowed to eat with him. Knowing this forms the backdrop for several of Yahshua's parables.

Barzillai tied together the fact that he could no longer taste food with no longer being able to hear musicians (2 Shmu'el 19:33ff), suggesting that "dinner music" was one of the impressive features of Shlomo's dining room. The Queen did admire his male and female singers. They were one of his special treasures that brought him great delight. (Qoheleth/ Eccles. 2:7) In addition to the Temple musicians, David chose some people to be his own private musicians. He must have been very picky about their skills, being an accomplished musician himself. They would be among those who "saw the king's face". David was Sha'ul's most famous court musician. He was summoned first to play his harp as a way to drive away bad moods that YHWH sent one him. (1 Shmu'el 16:14; 18:10) He later was named Sha'ul's armor-bearer.

The psalms admonish us to sing and play music of all sorts to YHWH. He delights in us singing to Him. He wants us to dance before Him as a wife would before her husband. The courts of His Temple are analogous to the king's banquet hall. Singing and music would be required at the banquet of a king just as there were Levitical singers and musicians leading worship as people brought their sacrifices to the Temple. Worship is like enjoying His table. Yet, as in Yahshua's parable, how many refuse to come?

People Who Accompanied the King

We see an allusion in 2 Shmu'el 11 to the fact that no honorable king would sit at home while his people were out fighting wars. This is a more modern idea. Kings were often chosen because of their prowess in battle, so it only made sense to be the one who led his troops to war.

The Armor-bearer (noseh-kelim) is a task for which David was hired by King Sha'ul after he pleased him with his harp-playing. (1 Shmu'el 16:21) After David fell out of favor with Sha'ul, the king chose another armor-bearer. (1 Shmu'el 31:4)

He would carry spare swords and other weapons, since one would never know until he was up against his enemy exactly what weapon would be needed. It was important to have an arsenal of various weapons available and ready, though the king could not carry them all himself. (Likewise, some of our enemies will be best defeated by using YHWH's word; others are defeated by not answering them a word, as Nekhemyah knew well. The community holds more skills than any individual, so we must stick together.) David refused to even use armor on one occasion, not because it did not fit, but because it was not the most suitable thing for the occasion. (1 Shmu'el 17) He knew that to defeat a giant with a spear, one had to defeat him before he gets close enough to touch you, just as with a ferocious beast. So a sling would be better. Armor would also prevent him from dodging the giant's spear.

The person with this title did more than just carry the king's armor. He helped strategize. Wars are won by weighing out what is in front of one and choosing the right weapon. He had to be very knowledgeable in battlefield techniques. He was chosen for his skill in planning.

The term kelim (vessels) is also the root for the Hebrew term for kidneys (kilyoth). In Hebraic thought, kidneys rather than the brain are often seen as the source of thought. So the noseh-kelim would also be one who upholds the king's thoughts. Several passages bear this out: Yehonathan's armor-bearer told him to "do whatever is in your heart". (1 Shmu'el 14:7) He fought alongside the king, putting the king's life before his own. Indeed, the king's life was often in his hands, so he would have to be one whom the king thoroughly trusted.

Generals had armor-bearers also. (2 Shmu'el 23:37)

The "captain" or "officer" (as commonly translated from the Hebrew shalish) actually means "third". But it does not mean "third in command". This term is only used in the context of chariots. (2 Kings 9:24; 10:25) Though YHWH had told Israel's kings not to amass many horses or chariots, King Shlomo did. (1 Kings 9:22ff) The shalish was the third man in the chariot after the driver and the man who was doing the fighting (in this case, the king). His function was very much like that of the armor-bearer. He chose the weaponry, watched the field, looking for targets, told the driver where to go, and guarded the one fighting. He was called one "on whose arm the king leaned". (2 Kings 7:2) Sometimes this may have been meant literally, such as in supporting him while he aimed his bow while the chariot was in motion. This same phrase is used of Naaman, the Syrian general. The king would have his back turned to him while in battle, so he had to be someone the king could trust to be dedicated and loyal to him. We know from archaeology that the Syrians had chariots too small for three people, but they used the same term, so shalish may have come to mean "the man in charge" in a more general sense.

The "king's companion" (as commonly translated from the Hebrew re'a, which usually means "friend"). One of the men called by this title was Hushai the Arkite, David's re'a. (2 Shmu'el 15:37) The re'a is listed along with officers, scribes, and priests, and one was even a priest. (1 Kings 4:32ff) Elsewhere he is listed along with those who oversaw the vineyards, camels, donkeys, flocks, herds, orchards, storehouses, etc. (1 Chron. 27:25-33), many of whom were, like Hushai, foreigners, since David had made many alliances over the years while a fugitive, and they had sworn allegiance to him. So the term has varied usage, and "friend" does not seem to adequately convey the meaning. One possibility is that it was a term borrowed from the Egyptian language, in which it means "known". In Egyptian it was always used of a foreigner known by Pharaoh, usually an emissary—one trusted to carry out his business. (cf. 2 Shmu'el 16:16ff) I.e., the king knew his heart.

According to Roland deVaux, this term was only used until King Shlomo's time, probably since the entity of kingship was a very recent thing in Israel, so apparently they borrowed the word from Egypt. After Shlomo's time, a Hebrew term with the same meaning is found. (2 Kings 10:11) Meyudaim means "known ones", that is, acquaintances of the king, but with this same specialized meaning.

Defenders of the King

In 2 Shmu'el 20:7 we see four categories of fighting men who went out to war for David:

1. The army of Israel (a standing army under the command of Yaov; see also 2 Shmu'el 8:16 and 20:23)
2. The Kherethites ("executioners")
3. The Pelethites ("couriers"), both of which groups were under the command of Benayah
4. The "mighty men" (the equivalent of the unpaid, pre-monarchy regular soldiers, war heroes who fought whenever necessary)

The Kherethites and Pelethites were both foreign groups who had attached themselves to David—mercenaries under a different command from the professional army. They were essentially bodyguards, though they were much more than that. They formed a sort of "private army" for the king especially during the many times of family intrigue because of jealousies among his sons and vying for his throne. When Avshalom revolted, they said they would rather stay and die with David than go home when given the choice. (2 Shmu'el 15:16ff) 6,000 Filistines from Gath also joined them at that time, since they had sworn allegiance to him at an earlier time. At Shlomo's inauguration, they are called "servants of your master" (1 Kings 1:33) If he had chosen these men from within Israel, people such as the Re'uvenites or Binyamites who thought they still had some claim to the throne might have a problem with his choice of successor, so he picked them from among foreigners who could never have a claim to the throne, nor could anyone related to them, and they knew this well. Part of this group was a detachment who went out to fight in the open field when they were needed by the army (2 Shmu'el 11:11); the other part remained at the king's house to protect him, if he did not go out to war. (11:9)

After David there is no mention of them, but in 2 Kings 11:4, 19 we see a group called the kari, sometimes translated "captains". Their job is never defined, but they accompany the Pelethites on one occasion, and are thus assumed to be either connected to or successors to the Kherethites. In 11:19 we see another position mentioned: the "guard" or "escorts"; the Hebrew word is ratzim. It means "runners". But they were not couriers to send communications; they ran in front a king's chariot on most occasions in which they are mentioned, acting partly as bodyguards, but also as part of the ceremony announcing the king's arrival, much like Haman when he had to go ahead of Mordekhai to announce that the king was honoring him. It built expectancy of the one who was coming behind them. They are usually mentioned in terms of 50 men running before the king. Sha'ul had such runners when traveling. (1 Shmu'el 22:17). Avshalom and Adoniyah used this same type of ceremony when trying to usurp the throne. (2 Smu'el 15:1; 1 Kings 1:5) Rehav'am committed the armor that replaced Shlomo's to the leader of the ratzim who guarded the door to the king's house. This is the same job the Kherethites and Pelethites had, so since the kari replaced the Kherethites, it is possible that the Pelethites came to be called ratzim.

The "mighty men" would usually have trained men in their households which would form a company for battle, much like Avraham's 318 trained men who went out with him to rescue Lot. They would often come from localized battles to join the standing army when there was a larger enemy to fight.

The King's Estates

Shlomo acquired gardens, orchards, groves, and reservoirs, as well as people to work them. (Qoheleth/Eccles. 2:4ff) Uzziah also had large holdings of farmland. (2 Chron. 26:9) Hizqiyahu had much property. (2 Chron. 32:27) He had cattle from which to provide his portion of ascending-offerings. (31:3) Yoshiyahu provided 30,000 Passover lambs and 3,000 bulls from his own herds. (35:7) He had to have a lot of land to provide this many animals for just one day.

How was it possible for kings to own so much land if the Land of Israel had been allotted out to each of the tribes? Shmu'el had warned Israel that if they had a king like other nations, he would take the best of their fields and give them to his servants, as well as their sons and daughters to care for them. (1 Shmu'el 8:10ff) Sha'ul was not wealthy when he became king (1 Shm. 9:21), yet soon he was able to give fields and vineyards to his tribesmen, the Binyamites (1 Shm. 22:7), and by the time he died he was a very rich man. (2 Shm. 9:9ff) His possessions passed to David, showing that they were not Sha'ul's personal property, but belonged to the crown, the royal position, rather than being something he could leave to his children. Kings could give away land as a favor, but still had control over who worked the land (2 Shm. 9:7-9), and could take it back if they chose (2 Shm. 16:4; 19:28) Kings acquired lands by buying them, in some cases (2 Shmu'el 24:24), and one time stole some when the owner would not compromise the Torah. (1 Kings 21) In most cases, inherited lands were sold off, and thus far they have never yet been recovered.

Shlomo received a city and land as a wedding gift. (1 Kings 9:16) As we have seen before, each son of a king generally had land-holdings of his own. In some nations, the king owned all of the land and even the people (Gen. 47:19), but usually he just owned a large portion of land. This arrangement only died out in Western culture within the last few centuries, and we still have sheikhdoms in the Middle East that are set up this way.

In the Kingdom, the king will be allotted ample land, but whatever he gives to his sons will have to come from it; he cannot acquire any additional lands, because this is what caused Israel to be scattered. (Y'hezq'el/Ez. 45:7ff; 48:21ff) He can give it to his sons permanently, but to his servants only until the fiftieth year, so it will revert to its owner as the Torah specifies for all land that changed owners. (Y'hezq. 46:16) When a widow returned to her land after a several-year famine, she had to appeal to the king to have it back, so this shows us that the king was responsible for vacant land. (2 Kings 8)

David had storehouses in the field, and had overseers appointed over the workers, the vineyards, the produce, herds, camels, donkeys, flocks, olive trees, and still others over the stores of oil (since olive trees and oil were so plentiful). In other words, he had stewards. YHWH says that every beast of the field and all cattle actually belong to Him, (Psalm 50:5ff) Every human landowner is still only His steward.

Yahshua's parables show that wise stewards who proved worthy would be allowed to rule more (Luqa 12:41ff); YHWH said Moshe was faithful in His house, so He trusted him to take care of His most precious possession, Israel. (Num. 12:5) Yahshua, the prophet like Moshe, saw fit to do YHWH's will instead of His own. If a steward was wasteful, he had to account for it, and the stewardship could be taken away. (Luqa 16) Paul carries this idea over to congregational leadership: an overseer must be a blameless steward. (Titus 1:7) What we all have to be about is caring for YHWH's "estate".

The King's Officials

Everyone in the king's court, no matter how highly placed, is still Eved-haMelekh. That is, to the king, he is a servant. But to the people, the king's officials are sarim (princes or, generically, rulers). This one simple important principle helps us understand so many things in Scripture that would otherwise be confusing, especially as related to Yahshua's position. When Yahshua's disciples were vying for who would be in the highest position in His kingdom, He told them there would be thrones for each of them, not just one or two. But He reminded them that the greatest were those who serve the most. Bearing that in mind, let us look at the three highest political offices below the king in ancient Israel (and presumably in the coming Messianic kingdom):

1. Asher Al-haBayit -- "[the one] who is over the house". A modern Latin-based title that is the equivalent is "majordomo". It appears in the same form in many languages during this time period. "Vizier" would be another synonym. The "house" in this case was the king's palace, not the Temple or a government building as such. There are four people in Scripture (spanning a long time-frame) called by this title, and an ancient tomb in Yehudah has been found with this inscription, as has a seal (made by a signet ring). The title "officer (or ruler) of the house" (Nagid haBayit, as in 2 Chron. 28:7) may be another name for the same position. This person ran the affairs of the household of the king himself (the royal dwelling place as well as the everyday life of the king). Yoseyf had this position under Pharaoh, and he was considered the real ruler of Egypt,so it was no mean position. He has the keys to every room in the house, including the administrative offices. When Uziiyahu became leprous and had to be quarantined though still officially the king, his son Yotham held this position and essentially ruled for him. (The son of the king usually did not hold nearly this much power while the king was still alive. Compare Gal. 4:1-3.)

   In a passage that shows that such a person could be removed from his position if he tried to station himself above the king, we see just how powerful someone with this title could be. He had his own fleet of chariots! (Yeshayahu/Isaiah 22:15ff) It sounds very much like the position haSatan originally had under YHWH—with the same temptation as one of the occupational hazards! He is a steward who works just beneath the king. He apparently had a uniform that declared his authority. He is to be considered a "father" to the inhabitants of Yerushalayim and the House of Yehudah. In this passage he sounds very much like a king in his own right, and this is considered a Messianic passage even by the rabbis. This makes perfect sense when we remember the opening principle of this section; to YHWH, Yahshua is "Asher Al ha-Bayit", but to those beneath Him, He is indeed King. This fits very well with Moshe's prophecy that the Messiah would be a prophet like himself, for Moshe is called "faithful in My entire house"—a very similar phraseology; the two hold the same position in YHWH's eyes. He carries heavy authority, but is still under the king. (This may explain the distinction made between the king and the prince in Yehezq'el's vision of the Kingdom Temple.) Again, to YHWH, He is one of many subordinates, though the highest, but to us He is King. Yahshua gave this position to Keyfa when He ascended to His throne to take up His role as King. (Mat. 16:19) He retained this office though Yaaqov, Yahshua's brother, assumed the role of king on earth among the believers after Yahshua's departure. (The fact that Sha'ul/Paul had no such official position in the administration of the Kingdom may have been a large part of the cause for the friction between himself and the two of them.)
   
   

2. Sofer -- often translated "scribe", but actually much more. He not only records the king's words, but also has a great deal of administrative authority. Some of the highest leaders in the Temple are called the "scribes" in the Renewed Covenant. This was nothing new; religious leaders in David's time were administrators. (2 Shmu'el 20:23ff) The same held true under Shlomo. Two sons of a priest from David's administration continue in a dynasty of sorts. (1 Kings 4:1-6) One of David's personal guards is placed over the army of Israel, the sons of David's prophet are now priest and friend of the king, and another kept the same position he had held under David. This goes to show that the sons of those loyal to a previous king were likely to end up in a royal office themselves. They had upheld the king's honor and proven trustworthy, so their sons were considered likely to do the same. And earlier than that, the priesthood had even more of a governmental function. Both the king's scribe (as representative of the king himself) and the high priest had jurisdiction over the financial outlays for the repair of the Temple. (2 Kings 12:10, and this was still the case 100 years later, 2 Kings 22:3ff.) A special point is made of the fact that he had to be called to read some documents that the high priest and possibly even the king could not read. (When Israel began worshipping foreign elohim, the common people stopped being educated so that they could not read Torah and recognize that their leaders were not teaching them properly, much as took place centuries later under the Roman Church.) At least one scribe had a chamber in YHWH's House (in the gate complex, from where he could read announcements in the hearing of all the people, as per Yirmeyahu/Jeremiah 36:10-12) This oassage mentions that there was a scribe's chamber in the king's house as well, where decision-makers met. So he had offices in both the Temple and the palace. One scribe's house was later turned into a dungeon, indicating that it was highly fortified. (Yirmeyahu 37:15) So the scribe was lower than the "Asher al-haBayit", but still very high—the equivalent of a prime minister or secretary of state as well as the king's personal secretary.

   Another title often translated "scribe" is shoter, which is based on the word for "writing", but really refers to the fact that he is one who is very skilled at writing or composing, and really could be equated with an office-holder or politician of any type.
   
   

3. Mazkir -- He is really the one we would equate with a "scribe" in the usual sense of the word. Often translated "recorder", the term means "one who causes to remember"—i.e., a historian. He remembers and records what needs to be recalled. He was a chronicler who gathered what was worth remembering about a particular administration and compiled it, though he covered it in much more detail than merely recording people's words. He filled in the information necessary to understand the significance, and often even put his own "spin" on it to enhance the current king's image. We can see one chronicler claim that Shlomo never enslaved [the northern kingdom of] Israel, but another said that he did. (This came after his decline into worship of idols when he wanted to repair his father's palace, as he did not live there himself, since he had something larger.)

The Administration

How were things run under the kings? We will begin with David's administration, though there is much less documentation for it than for Shlomo's.

David had rulers over each tribe. (1 Chron. 27:16ff) That is, he left in place the tribal leadership that had been established long before there was a monarchy when tribes for the most part governed themselves independently. But now each of the tribes' leaders was required to bring men from his tribe up for the regular army and as guards for one month out of the year. However, Gad and Asher are missing from the list of the tribes so called up.

David had twelve other "ministers" over the following areas of jurisdiction:

1. The treasury -- the financial matters of the nation
   
2. The storehouses in the fields, cities, and villages -- keeping the granaries in repair and making sure they remained full for smooth flow of supply; the Levites would administer the storehouses for widows and the fatherless.
   
3. The workers in the fields for tilling the soil -- ensuring that adequate seed was available as opposed to that stored for food, that the oxen used for plowing were properly care for, and that plows, yokes, and harnesses were maintained
   
4. The vineyards - ensuring that the ground was cleared, soil was fertile, pests were kept under control, and that particulars in regard to the growing conditions for the production of different types of wine were taken care of
   
5. The produce of the vineyards for the wine-cellars -- overseeing the harvest, pressing, collection into vessels, aging of some, rationing to ensure that there would always be some available to the palace. (The Temple supply came from tithes.)
   
6. Olive and sycomore trees -- This type of sycomore (as contrasted with sycamore) is a type of fig tree, but its fruit is inedible unless each piece of fruit is pricked and smeared with olive oil (which sweetens it as it ripens), hence the reason the same person was in charge of both of these types of trees that work in tandem. This process is also a picture of the Messiah, who was both pierced and anointed. The olive is also much too bitter to eat until it is pickled or pressed into oil
   
7. Storage of oil -- Again someone different from the one in charge of production is in charge of the produce
   
8. Herds that fed in Sharon -- a very wide-open, accessible area along the coast and thus possibly more readily exportable
   
9. Herds in the valleys -- between the mountains, so not as readily accessible
   
10. Camels -- This was essentially the "Department of Transportation", because camels are not eaten, but used to carry the produce in large quantities over great distances with little need for water.
    
11. Donkeys -- For shorter-distance or smaller-scale transportation
    
12. Flocks -- That is, the sheep and goats.

It is easy to see which areas were the highest priority in that there were two "ministers" in charge of the vineyards, two in charge of olive products, and two in charge of the cattle. Most of the jobs are agriculturally-related so that food could be available year-round. In 1 Chronicles 28:1, we then see a synopsis of what constituted "all the rulers of Israel":

1. The leaders of the tribes
   
2. The leaders of the divisions that waited on the king (different from the "courses" of Levitical priests who came to Yerushalayim for two weeks at a time in an order David had set up in 1 Chron. 24, though the term is the same)
   
3. The leaders over thousands (a continuation of the order as structured by Moshe)
   
4. The leaders over hundreds (again, established by Moshe)
   
5. The stewards over all the property and possessions of the king
   
6. The officials (sarisim)
   
7. The mighty men (g'vurim)
   
8. All the men of the army (khayil)

Various nations made peace with David and served him after he defeated them in battle. (e.g., 2 Shmu'el 10:19) The Moavites had to bring tribute to David—a certain percentage of all their produce as enforced by administrators. (2 Shmu'el 8:2) The Syrians (8:6) were also under tribute with the added need to have troops garrisoned there (to enforce the tribute because either the people were less willing than the Moavites to pay or because David could not trust the governor to enforce his own people's compliance.) The whole land of Edom had to have garrisons stationed throughout (8:14)—apparently the least trustworthy of all of David's tributaries!

The administration had to grow as the kingdom expanded more and more into an empire. (Despite all the revenues, an emperor had to take care of his vassals, even if there were several wars or famines going on at the same time, especially if one became dependent on resources from those lands, and this was expensive.) Therefore Shlomo's administration was a little bit different. Some of the same structure was left intact, but not all. He still had twelve officers over all of Israel, but only six of them were directly over a particular tribe. (1 Kings 4:7-21) They were in charge of collecting an internal tribute by which each region provided food for the king's household one month out of the year. But none of the tribute came from the House of Yehudah. David had not favored the Jews, but Shlomo did, and his scribe even saw Israel and Yehudah as two nations already. (4:20)

These overseers were called nitzavim—"stationed ones"; i.e., they had jurisdiction over their regions, but no authority elsewhere. One man was over them all. (4:5) Five of them had names beginning with "Ben" (son of), suggesting that their fathers might have been members of David's administration and/or that their posts might end up being hereditary.

Administration of Cities

Even when we had kings, elders (Heb., z'qanim--literally, "bearded ones") still handled all local affairs. This should be the background we keep in mind as we study other aspects of a king's administration.

Even in the royal cities where the kings lived and where they controlled many of the decisions, the elders were still of high rank. (2 Kings 10:1-5) In Shomron, the capital of the Northern Kingdom, there was still a "governor" for local affairs (1 Kings 22:26), and Yerushalayim also had a governor who apparently lived just inside the city gate. (2 Kings 23:8) This sar ha-ir ("city ruler") was more of what we would think of as a mayor. He was responsible for justice being done within that city.

Captured foreign cities would sometimes have governors posted over them by the conqueror, and he was part of the king's administration, but Israelite cities that were not capitals usually did not have a single man ruling; rather, decisions were made by a group of z'qanim. Usually the government consisted of the leaders of prominent families, not professional politicians. This way, everyone was generally represented more fairly, because most people had a relative among the governors. A jury of peers was unheard of; the most learned, wisest, and best-respected were the ones chosen by consensus to rule a city.

Elders of cities other than the capital did not normally report directly to the king, but when Yoshiyahu found the scroll of the Torah that had been neglected for many years, he called together all the elders from the entire Kingdom of Yehudah to hear it read, because they were responsible to rule according to it and to teach it to their families. (2 Kings 23:1ff)

In most cases this group was both the city council and the court system. In addition to judging criminal cases or disputes, according to the Torah, they also made decisions for the city at large, such as what to do about a well that was running dry or the fact that the city was no longer adequate in the face of newer battle technologies. There may have been a few exceptions to this. In at least one place we see both "elders and judges" mentioned. (Deut. 21:2) All elders would usually be judges, but some judges might not act as elders if they were not heads of families themselves. In the larger cities there might have been some division of labor in having some who were only judges, if there were too many cases to judge.

Let us look at some Scriptural examples. When we are told to bring at least two witnesses (three if the first two are not extremely credible) if an accusation is being made against someone, who hears the testimony of the witnesses? The elders. If one witness is found to disagree, the person would be tried by the priests and judges at YHWH's sanctuary, and careful inquiry is made. If the witness is found to be lying, he is given the same sentence he tried to have foisted upon the one he was witnessing against. (Deut. 19:15ff)

If someone is found murdered outside any city, the elders and judges of each of the cities that surround the site, and they measure the distance to each city, and the elders of the nearest city need to bring a heifer to a brook, break its neck, wash their hands, and declare their innocence of the man's blood so that blood guilt can be forgiven, since the nearest city would be assumed to be responsible. (Deut. 21:1-9) The heifer probably had to come from the elders themselves. (Can you imagine august court justices in today's society bringing a cow to the proceedings?)

A rebellious, disobedient, and/or gluttonous son brought by his parents to the judges would be stoned to death by all the men of the city. (Deut. 2:18ff) The text does not mention it, but it implies presenting evidence and deciding whether the parents have a just case. They could not render judgment on their own against a son, though a man might do so against his daughter or even wife, as they are considered his property, as seen above. Even in the cities of refuge, all judgments are rendered by elders. (Num. 35:12)

If a death sentence is carried out, the elders are the one responsible for seeing to it that if he is hanged, his body is taken down before sunset and buried. (Deut. 21:22-23)

Elders are often described as "sitting in the city gates". (Psalm 69:12; Prov. 31:23) This does not mean right inside the large doors through which one entered the city, for the "gate" was an entire complex of defensive walls with rooms inside them. It would be in one of these rooms that trials would take place. It is likely that one of the elders was always at the gates to be able to summon all the rest when needed, because all of them would have ordinary work to do as well. Legal transactions were also carried out at the gates. (Gen. 23:18)

When David was a refugee from Sha'ul and attacked Israel's enemies, he sent some of the spoils to the elders of several cities to assure their loyalty. (1 Shmu'el 30:26ff) After all, when it was time to be acknowledged as king, it would not be on the basis of the votes of individual citizens. If he had the loyalty of the elders of the city, their families and the rest of the city would be behind him.

Even during the exile we see the elders of Yehudah coming to the prophet for guidance (Y'hezq'el 8), indicating that the most basic governmental structure of Israel remained intact even outside the Land. (We can even see this to some extent today among the Orthodox Jews.) Some of the elders of Israel—the Northern Kingdom, which had not been a nation for over 130 years—even showed up to enquire of him (Y'hezq'el 14:1; 20:1), but YHWH would not give them the information they sought, since they had not repented.

After Yehudah's exile was over, the elders still had authority to remove anyone who did not come up when summoned to an assembly from their place as part of Israel. (Ezra 10:7ff) This shows that the elder system remained in place through the 70-year captivity and beyond.

Public Works and How They Were Financed

Scripture says King Shlomo surpassed all other kings in riches and wisdom. (1 Kings 10:23) We are also told that all of Yehudah brought presents to Y'hoshafat, and he had riches and honor in abundance. (2 Chron. 17:5) Why in that order? It betrays an attitude prevalent in the region at that time: the wealthier one was, the more honor he received, and thus the more powerful he was perceived to be. Other nations judged a king this way.

The Kingdom's riches are the riches of the king himself. He bore the expenses of the administration. He paid all of his administrators, his personal army, what was needed to keep the "lay army" (those who were not professional soldiers) in the field, as well as any public works (such as fortifying a city wall or gate, building stables for war-horses, etc.). Shlomo paid for the Temple as well as his own palace. He had complete control over all revenues and could use them as he saw fit without having to consult anyone else for approval. There were no voting or committees. He was kept appraised of what was coming in and what each project would cost.

This model was the same throughout most of the Ancient Near East. Israel used other kings as a model more often than they should have. But we will again live under a king. How and where to spend will be up to Him (though in Y'hezq'el we see that he will be granted certain lands and not have a right to take anymore, to correct the errors of His ancestors).

But where did the king get all the revenue to pay for all these things? First of all, Shmu'el had warned the people who wanted a king that if they got their wish, the king would start taking not only their money, but their children as well for servants and soldiers.

But a king had a lot to pay for, but if he had a strong army, he had a lot to pay with. A powerful king who had conquered some peoples would also be paid off by others so he would not conquer them. The Ammonites paid tribute to Uzziyahu because he was powerful and had conquered other nations. Kings would bribe more powerful kings to change alliances. (1 Kings 15:18ff) Kings would also be paid to send soldiers to help another king win a battle. (2 Kings 16:7ff; 18:15ff) Vassal states would pay an annual tribute. Anyone coming through the country on caravan routes (and Israel was on several important trade routes) had to pay toll; traders who came through had to pay tariffs. These amounted to huge sums of money. Shlomo's annual revenue (not counting tolls, tariffs, or tribute from Arabia in particular, though other tributes would be included) amounted to 666 talents of gold per year. A talent is about 75 pounds. At the present price of $580 per ounce of gold, on talent would be worth $600,000, and 666 talents would be worth around $400 billion! Other tribute came in the form of animals: Moav, a sheep-breeding nation, regularly brought 100,000 lambs and the wool of the same number of rams. (2 Kings 3:4) The Filistines gave silver, and the Arabians brought flocks. (2 Chron. 17:10ff) With these revenues Y'hoshafat built fortifications and storage cities.

The purpose for this was alluded to when Y'shua asked what king would not count the cost before going to war. He had to be concerned with such things. Would this war be beneficial over all right now? He had to weigh the cost versus its strategic value for national security. When he conquered new territory he would have to build garrisons when he would keep representatives and a small army, and storage cities in the new area to be able to keep the army fed during a drought, a year of bad harvest, or a time when revenue was low. It was in his interest to keep them well-fed. If he did not, he could have mutiny or rebellion on his hands. Keeping all the money at the top would be asking for an overthrow. Because of Yoseyf's storehouses, he was able to feed all of Egypt and the surrounding areas, and because people paid him for provisions, Pharaoh ended up owning all of Egypt except its priests' possessions once they ran out of money and ended up selling their land and even themselves to him as slaves. (Gen. 47)

Numerous fragments of jars have been found that were marked "L'Melekh" (for or belonging to the king) indicating a very large storage facility where they were made and stored. If another king was coming to attack, massive provisions of food, drink, and oil would be sent to his target areas to allow his fortresses to outlast a siege, since the supply lines would be cut off at such times.

In theory the Temple treasury and the national treasury were two separate entities, because when Shishak of Egypt attacked, he plundered both. (1 Kings 14:25ff) But sometimes when kings would win a war they would give the booty to the Temple treasury. In fact, when David would win a war, he would not take the spoils for himself, but built up a collection of silver and gold so that there would be enough when Shlomo was ready to build the Temple. (2 Shmu'el 8:9ff) Shlomo then put what David had collected into the Temple treasury. (1 Kings 7:51; compare 15:14) The king's own officials were also in charge of overseeing the Temple revenue. (2 Kings 12:10; 22:3ff) On rare occasions, he took from the Temple treasury for his own use (2 Kings 12:18), though it was dedicated to YHWH, in order to pay off a king who was threatening to attack.

The king had his own estates from which he ate the produce, so when other foreign dignitaries such as the Queen of Sheba would visit, they would bring gifts, but the host king would often give them back something of equal value so that there was no actual profit for the host.

Revenue also came in the form of gifts to the king. Anyone who wished to present himself in the royal court was required to come with a gift in hand. Otherwise it was considered presumptuous to ask for an audience. The gift was to acknowledge the privilege one was being given to simply stand before the king.

Even when King Sha'ul requested David's presence, his father Yishai still assumed he needed to bring something to the king (or may have simply been that grateful). He sent a donkey laden with bread, a skin of wine, and a young goat. In other words, he was giving him a whole meal—and a large on at that. (1 Shmu'el 16:18ff)

In Elisha's day, when the Syrian king heard that he could be healed in Israel, he sent the king of Israel ten talents of silver, 6,000 sheqels of gold, and ten changes of clothing (2 Kings 5:5)—not as the price for healing, but simply for allowing someone from his kingdom to enter the king's presence. (Syria was wealthier than Israel at this time.) People paid dearly to hear King Shlomo's wisdom firsthand.

Much income of this type came at the time of the coronation. Y'hoshafat was given presents by all of Yehudah. (2 Chron. 17:5) If a king was not already wealthy before his coronation, he was made rich at that time. Sha'ul was not tremendously rich, but the king is a figurehead for the whole nation, so who wants a poor king? Therefore, the king was empowered, and thereby the nation was as well. We are told that those who despised him did not bring presents. (1 Shmu'el 10:21ff) This implies that the rest—"those whose hearts YHWH touched"—did.

Sha'ul did not know how to act like a king, nor did he have a royal attitude; he was a warrior. Shmu'el had explained the behavior of royalty to the people, for they were not used to being around kings, and the priesthood did not act like royalty. He wrote it up in a book and laid it before YHWH. Where did he get this information? Probably not from YHWH (in Torah there is only instruction to kings about how they are to act and not to act), but from observing how the nations around him treated their kings. There were still Kanaanites living among Israel until David's reign.

Israel has only ever had one true King—YHWH—even if He used others at times to represent Him. We see in Exodus 34:19 and Deut. 16:16 that the understanding that none were to come before a king empty-handed was a reflection of the attitude YHWH wants us to have toward Himself when we come into His presence for the appointments of His festivals. We should not come before Him empty-handed even on the Sabbath—not just in the form of tithes, but also with the "offering of praise", and the gifts that He has given us with which to serve His community.

In the Kingdom, just as under Shlomo, all the nations will bring abundant wealth—gold, incense, flocks--on camels, ships, and apparently airplanes! The nation that will not serve Yahshua/Israel will perish. (Yeshayahu/Isa. 60:5)

Taxes:
These were actually not very common. They were utilized on special occasions such as when bribing a foreign king not to attack (paying him a tribute instead of going to war). The wealthy were taxed to pay off a stronger king under both Menakhem (2 Kings 15:19-20) and Yehoakhaz (2 Kings 23:33ff).

Shmu'el had warned the people that a king would take an additional tithe of their crops and flocks, beyond the tithes that were due to the Levites. (1 Shmu'el 8:15) Amos 7:1ff speaks of "the king's mowings". This implies that the king received the first cutting of the harvest. Men of rank also had power to extort taxes from the poor, though this practice is condemned in Amos 5:11.

After the exile, when the king did not return to the Land, YHWH was again King. Those who returned and rebuilt the Temple imposed an annual tax of one third of a sheqel on themselves by which to fund the service in the Temple. (Nekhemyah 10:32ff) They were so joyful to have worship leaders again that all of Israel contributed to the support of the gatekeepers, singers, priests, and Levites. (Nekh. 12:44-47) When there was not enough and the Levites and musicians were having to go home to work in their fields for sustenance, all of Yehudah was called to task, and faithful men were given the task of enforcing the rules about contributing, and distributing what came in to their fellows. (Nekh. 13:10ff)

Here is some news that may come as a shock to some. There will be taxes in the Kingdom! The "people of the Land" (an idiom for the common people) will be required to give an "offering for the prince" (the Hebrew term means what is skimmed off the top) of ½ of 1% of their wheat, barley, oil, and lambs. From this, the prince will be the one responsible to provide ascending offerings, grain and drink offerings, sin and peace offerings to atone for the House of Israel at the feasts, Sabbaths, and new moons. (Y'hezq'el 45:13ff) When asked if He paid the Temple tax (not one that was required by Torah) Yahshua said the sons of the Kingdom are exempt, since the kings of the earth get their taxes not their own sons but foreigners. But to avoid causing anyone to stumble, He had Keyfa catch a fish in whose mouth a coin was found to cover His and Keyfa's Temple tax. (Mat. 17:24-27)