We have then at least of Uzziah's reign 26 years.
Jotham „ „ 71 f, Alaaz „ 16 „ 1) Hezekiah „ 2 '„ If 99 6Q* - This calculation is as close an approximation as it is now possible to obtain. At some point Within the last years of Jeroboam II. Hosea began to prophecy. From the death of Jeroboam to the beginmng of Hezekiah, at an ordinary calculation, are fifty-seven or fifty-eight years. Bishop Horsley extends the period considerably longer (Com/no: tag CM H0Sea ; Works, vol. p. 234). We dc not understand the principle of Rosenmiiller's computation, which reduces the time between Jeroboam's death and Hezekiah's accession to a period of about forty years. We agree with Maurer's remark (Comment. Granz. Hist. Crz?. in Prophetas Minores, 1840), Alii annos quadraginta numerant nescio quem computandi modum secuti.' This long duration of office is not improbable, and the book itself furnishes strong presumptive evidence in support of this chronology. The first prophecy. of Hosea fore tells the overthrow of Jehu's house ; and the menace was fulfilled on the death of Jeroboam, his great-grandson (2 Kings xv. 12). A predic tion of the ruin which was to overthrow Jehu's house at Jeroboam's death must have been uttered during Jeroboam's life. This fact defines the period of Hosea's commencement of his labours, and verifies the inscription, which states that the word of the Lord came to him in the reign of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, king of Israel. Again in ch. x. 14, allusion is made to an expedition of Shalman ezer against Israel ; and if it was the first inroad against king Hoshea, who began to reign in the twelfth ycar of Ahaz, the event referred to by the prophet as past must have happened close upon the beginning of Hezekiah's reign (2 Kings xvii. 5). Thc extended duration indicated in the super scription thus seems borne out by the contents of the prophecy.
The years of Hosca's public life were dark and melancholy. The vials of the wrath of heaven were poured out on his apostate people. The nation suffered under the evils of that schism which was effected under him who has been branded with the indelible stignia—` who made Israel to sin.' The obligations of law had been relaxed, and the claims of religion disregarded ; Baal became the rival of Jehovah, and in the dark recesses of the groves were practised the impure and murderous rites of heathen deities. Peace and prosperity fled the land which was harassed by foreign invasion and domestic broils. Alight and murder became the twin sentinels of the throne ; alliances were formed with other nations, which brought with them seductions to paganism ; the land was defiled by bloodshed and adultery, falsehood and debauchery—all classes being guilty ; and the nation was so thoroughly debased that but a fraction of its population maintained their spiritual allegiance (2 Kings xix. IS). The death of Jeroboam II. was followed by an interregnum of ten years, an interregnum which Ewald and The nius deny without any just chronological founda tion (Bleek, Ein/eitung, p. 520, 1Mo). At the expiry of this period, his son Zechariah assumed the sovereignty, and was slain by Shallum, after the short space of six months (2 Kings xv. to). In four weeks ShalIum was assassinatcd by Menahem. The assassin, during a disturbed reign of ten years, became tributary to the Assyrian Pul. His suc cessor, Pekahiah, wore the crown but two years, when he was murdered by Pekah. Pekah, after swaying his bloody sceptre for twenty years, met a similar fate in the conspiracy of Hoshea ; Ho.shea, the last of the usurpers, after another interregnum of eight years, ascended the throne, and his admi nistration of nine years ended in the overthrow of his kingdom and the expatriation of his people (2 Kings xvii. IS, 23).
The prophecies of Hosea were directed especi ally against the country whose sin was bringing upon it such disasters—periodical anarchy and final captivity. Israel, or Ephraim, is the people espe cially addressed. Their homicides and fornica tions, their perjury and theft, their idolatry and impiety, are censured with a faithful severity. Judah is sometimes, indeed, introduced, warned, and admonished. Bishop Horsley (Works, iii. 236) reckons it a mistake to suppose that Hosea's prophecies are almost wholly directed against the kingdom of Israel.' But any one reading Hosea will at once discover that the oracles having rela tion to Israel are primary, while the references to Judah are only incidental. In ch. i. 7, Judah is mentioned in contrast with Israel, to whose condi tion the symbolic name of the prophet's son is specially applicable. In ver. the future union of the two nations is predicted. The long oracle in ch. ii. has no relation to Judah, nor the sym bolic representation in ch. iii. Ch. iv. is severe upon Ephraim, and ends with a very brief exhor. tation to Judah not to follow his example. In the succeeding chapters allusions to Judah do in deed occasionally occur, when similar sins can be predicated of both branches of the nation. The prophet's mind was intensely occupied with the destinies of his ovvn people. The nations around him are unheeded : his prophetic eye beholds the crisis approaching his own country, and sees its cantons ravaged, its tribes murdered or enslaved. No wonder that his rebukes are so terrible, and his menaces so alarming ; yet invitations replete with tcnderness are interspersed with his startling expos tulations. Now we have a vision of the throne, at first shrouded in darkness, and sending forth light nings, thunders, and voices ; but while we gaze, it becomes encircled with a rainbow, which gradually expands till it loses itself in the brilliancy which it self had originated (ch. xi. and xiv.) The peculiar mode of instruction which the pro phet details in the first and third chapters has given rise to many theories. We refer to the command expressed in ch. 1. 2- And the Lord said unto Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and children of whorcdoms,' etc. ; ch. iii. 1, "Then said the Lord unto me, Go yet, love a woman be loved of her friend, yet an adulteress,' etc. What was the precise nature of the transactions here re corded ? Were they real events, the result of divine injunctions literally understood, and as literally ful filled? or were these intimations to the prophet only intended to be pictorial illustrations of the apostacy and spiritual folly and unfaithfulness of Israel ? The former view, viz., that the prophet actually and literally entered into this revolting connubial alliance, was advocated in ancient times by Cyril, Theodoret, Basil, and Augustine ; and more re cently has been maintained by Mercer, Grotius, Houbigant, Manger, Horsley, Stuck, Drake, lien derson, Pusey, Hofmann (lVezIrsag. u. Erfiil. p. 20o), and by Kurtz in a separate tractate, Die Ehe der propheten Hosea, flat-1z Hosea i.-iii., Dor pat, 1859. Fanciful theories are also rife on this subject. Luther supposed the prophet to perform a kind of drama in view of the people, giving his lawful wife and children these mystical appellations, and the opinion of Calvin is not very different. Newcome (Min. Prophets) thinks that a wife of fornication means merely an Israelite, a woman of apostate and adulterous Israel. So Jac. Capellus (In Hoseanz; Opera, p. 683). Hengstenberg sup.