confession, and petition. In his thanksgiving, acknowledgment of God mingled with humiliation; in his

confession, a sense of inability with the expression of felt want; while his petition, evidently based on the

Divine promise (Genesis 13:16; 32:12), was characterized by singleness of spiritual desire. For, in order to

know what he sought, when so earnestly craving for "understanding," we have only to turn to his own

"Book of Proverbs." And, as in the case of all whose spiritual aim is single, God not only granted his

request, but also added to what He gave "all t hings" otherwise needful, thus proving that the "promise of

the life that now is" is ever connected with that of the life "which is to come" (2 Timothy 4:8), just as in our

present condition the soul is with the body. Perhaps we may put it otherwise in this manner. As so often,

God extended the higher wisdom granted Solomon even to the lower concerns of this life, while He added to

it the promise of longevity and prosperity - but only on condition of continued observance of God's statutes

and commandments (1 Kings 3:14).83 Such gracious condescension on the part of the LORD called for the

expression of fresh public thanksgiving, which Solomon rendered on his return to Jerusalem (1 Kings 3:15).

Evidence of the reality of God's promise soon appeared, and that in a manner peculiarly calculated to

impress the Eastern mind. According to the simple manners of the times, a cause too difficult for ordinary

judges was carried direct to the king, who, as God's representative, was regarded as able to give help to his

people in all time of need. In such paternal dispensation of justice, there was no appeal to witnesses nor to

statute-books, which indeed would have been equally accessible to inferior judges; but the king was

expected to strike out some new light, in which the real bearings of a case would so appear as to appeal to all

men's convictions, and to command their approval of his sentence. There was here no need for anything

recondite - rather the opposite. To point out to practical common sense what was there, though unperceived

until suddenly brought to prominence, would more than anything else appeal to the people, as a thing

within the range of all, and yet showing the wise guidance of the king. Thus sympathy and universal trust,

as well as admiration, would be called forth, especially among Orientals, whose wisdom is that of common

life, and whose philosophy that of proverbs.

The story of the contention of the two women for the one living child, when from the absence of witnesses

it seemed impossible to determine whose it really was, is sufficiently known. The ready wisdom with which

Solomon devised means for ascertaining the truth would commend itself to the popular mind. It was just

what they would appreciate in their king. Such a monarch would indeed be a terror to evil-doers, and a

protection and praise to them that did well. It is probably in order to explain the rapid spread of Solomon's

fame that this instance of his wisdom is related in Holy Scripture (1 Kings 3:28).

The prosperity of such a reign was commensurate with the fact that it was based upon the Divine promises,

and typical of far greater blessings to come. The notices in 1 Kings 4 and 5 are strung together to indicate

that prosperity by presenting to our view the condition of the Israelitish monarchy in the high-day of its

glory. Wise and respected councilors surrounded the king.84

The administration of the country was orderly, and the taxation not arbitrary but regulated. The land was

divided, not according to the geographical boundaries of the "tribes," but according to population and

resources, into twelve provinces, over each of which a governor was appointed. Among their number we

find two sons-in-law of the king (4:11, 15), and other names well-known in the land (such as those of Baana,

ver. 12, probably the brother of "the recorder," ver. 3, and Baanah, the son of Hushai, probably David's

councilor, ver. 16). Had this policy of re -arranging the country into provinces been sufficiently consolidated,

many of the tribal jealousies would have ceased. On the other hand, the financial administration, entrusted

to these governors, was of the simplest kind. Apparently, no direct taxes were levied, but all that was

requisite for the royal court and government had to be provided, each province supplying in turn what was

required for one month. Such a system could not indeed press heavily, so long as the country continued

prosperous; but with a luxurious court, in hard times, or under harsh governors, it might easily become an

instrument of oppres sion and a source of discontent. From 1 Kings 12:4 we gather that such was ultimately

the case. It need scarcely be added, that in each province the supreme civil government was in the hands of

these royal officials; and such was the general quiet prevailing, that even in the extensive district east of the