(4) Assassination of Amasa. The unscru pulous Joab, however, was not so to be set aside. Before long, catching an opportunity, he assassi nated his unsuspecting cousin with his own hand; and David, who had used the instrumentality of Joab to murder Uriah, did not dare to resent the deed.
(5) New Insurrection. A quarrel, which took place between the men of Judah and those of the other tribes in bringing the king back, had encouraged a Benjamite named Sheba to rare a new insurrection, which spread with wondertut rapidity. Amasa was collecting troops as David's general at the time when he was treacherously assassinated by his cousin, who then, with his usual energy, pursued Sheba, and blockaded lot!. in Beth-maachah before he could collect his parti sans. Sheba's head was cut off and thrown over the wall; and so ended the new rising. Vet this was not the end of trouble; for the intestine war seems to have inspired the Philistines with the hope of throwing off the yoke. Four successive battles are recorded (2 Sam. xxi:15-22), in the first of which the aged David was nigh to being slain. His faithful officers kept him away from all future risks, and Philistia was once more, and finally, subdued.
(6) Conspiracy of Adonijah. The last com motion recorded took place when David's end seemed nigh, and Adonijah, one of his elder sons, feared that the influence of Bathsheba might gain the kingdom for her own son Solomon, Adonijah's conspiracy was joined by Abiathar, one of the two chief priests, and by the redoubtable Joab, upon which David took the decisive measure of raising Solomon at once to the throne. Of two young monarchs, the younger and the less known was easily preferred, when the sanction of the existing government was thrown into his scale; and the cause of Adonijah immediately fell to the ground. Amnesty was promised to the conspirators, yet it was not very faithfully observed. (See SoLo MON.) 6. Foreign Relations.
(1) Toleration of Foreigners. Numerous in dications remain to us that, however eminently David was imbued with faith in Jehovah as the national God of Israel, and however he strove to unite all Israel in common worship, he still had no sympathy with the later spirit which repelled all foreigners from co-operation with Jews. In
his early years necessity made him intimate with Philistines. Moabites and Ammonites; policy led him into league with the Tyrians. lie himself took in marriage a daughter of the king of Geshur • it is the less wonderful that we find Uriah the Hittite (2 Sam. xi.), Get her the Ish maelite (t Chron. ii:t7), and others, married to Israclitish wives. The fidelity of Ittai the Gittitc, and his six huadred men, has been already alluded to. It would appear, on the whole, that in tolerat ing foreigners Solomon did not go beyond the principles established by his father, though cir cumstances gave them a fuller development.
(2) Standing Army. It has been seen that the reign of David began as that of a constitu tional monarch, with a league between him and his people; it ends as a pure despotism, in which the monarch gives his kingdom away to whomso ever he pleases, and his nominee steps at once into power without entering into any public en gagements. The intensity of the despotism is strikingly shown in the indirect and cautious de vice by which alone Joah dared to hint to the king the suitableness of recalling Absalom from banish ment, though lie believed the king himself to de sire it (2 Sam. xiv). All rose necessarily out of the standing army which David kept up as an instrument of conquest and of power, by the side of which constitutional liberty could not stand.
The standing army which Saul had begun to maintain was greatly enlarged by David. An account of this is given in I Chron. xxvii; from which it would seem that 24,00o men were con stantly maintained on service, though there was a relieving of guard every month. Hence, twelve times this number, or 288,00o, were under a per rnanent military organization, with a general for each division in his month.
On one occasion (2 Sam. viii:3) David fought against Hadadezer about a district on the river Euphrates. Yet it is not to be imagined that he had any fixed possession of territory so distant, which indeed could have had no value to him.