165 



we are almost certain, that it zrcis realized ; he was not 

 perhaps born, when some of his brothers had already at- 

 tained the military and capitation age required by custom,, 

 or by the Mosaic code. It should seem, indeed, that we are 

 not pressing the subject too far in assuming this text to be 

 auxiliary to our interpretation, and that the mention of Eli- 

 as " the Lord's priest in Shiloh," is a particular record, that 

 he was the last who there exercised the office or the jurisdic- 

 tion annexed to it. I do not, however, press the conclusion, 

 that after the victory of Saul, the ark was removed to Shiloh 

 again, perhaps it might have been only placed at Nob, where 

 the priests were dwelling at the time of the inhuman massacre 

 of them by the command of Saul, and from which the son 

 of Ahiah (or Ahimelech, see margin,) escaped to David. 

 The consecration of the sword of Goliah, which was preserved 

 " behind the ephod," (c. 9- 21. 9-) in this city, seems indeed, 

 to afford, strong evidence of this, especially since Ahiah, or 

 Ahimelech, was high priest, and, as such, is summoned be- 

 fore Saul, (v. 22. 12.) and accused of " consulting the Lord 

 for David," (v. 10.) in the same city. But from this, it may 

 have been removed again to Kirjathjearim, after the death of 

 the priests, or on the invasion of the Philistines. However, 

 I repeat, that the chronology we support is completely inde- 

 pendent of this conjecture. 



The next period affords no obstacle or requires no parade 

 of argument : it is universally agreed, that Samuel and Saul 



reigned. 



