I. ITS HISTORIC CERTAINTY. That Shishak gradually drew his lines closer round the capital, and in the end stormed its citadel, has received confirmation from the monuments.

1. In the temple of Karnak, at Thebes, on the walls of which Soti I. and Rameses II. had by means of pictorial representations and hieroglyphic inscriptions preserved a record of their victories, Sheshonq, on returning from Palestine, caused a bas-relief to be executed in commemoration of his expedition.

2. On the south wall, behind the picture of the victories of Rameses II., to the east of the hall of the Bubastids, appears a colossal image of the Egyptian sovereign, arrayed in warlike costume and dealing heavy blows with a club or iron mace upon his captives, who are Jews or, at least, Asiatics, whom he grasps.by the hair of their heads.

3. In another representation he is depicted as leading captive a hundred and thirty-three cities or tribes, each one of which is personated by the figure of a chief whose name is written on an embattled shield, and whose physiognomy has been supposed (Lenormant) to declare them Jews, though this is probably imagination.

4. In the lists of names occur those of

(1) cities of Judah proper, as e.g. Adoraim (Adurma), Aijalon (Ajulon), Shoco (Shauke), Gibeon (Qebeana), etc;

(2) Levitical cities of Israel, as e.g. Taanach (Ta'ankau), Rehob (Rehabau), Mahanaim (Mahanema), etc.; and

(3) Canaanitish cities, as e.g. Bethshan (Beithshanlan), Megiddo (Makethu).

5. Among the names is one styled Judah-Malek; not "the King of Judah" (Stanley), but "the kingly Judah" (Ebers), or "Judah a kingdom' (Rawlinson), which is supposed to point to Jerusalem.

6. The conquered nations are designated as the "'Am of a distant land," and the Fenekh or the Phoenicians. The former expression, "'Am," answers exactly to the Hebrew word for "people," and may have been intended to denote the Jews (Brugsch, 'Egypt under the Pharaohs,' 2:215-219; Rawliuson, 'Egypt and Babylon,' 334-339; Ebers, in Riehm, art. "Sisak ").

II. ITS ACTUAL EXTENT. Whether Shishak ravaged the city is doubtful. The plundering reported suggests that he did (Bertheau, Keil), but, "like Hezekiah on the occasion of Sennacherib's invasion (2 Kings 18:13-16), Rehoboam may have surrendered his treasures (1 Kings 14:26) "to save his city from the horrors of capture" (Rawlinson). In any case, Shishak carried off valuable spoil.

1. The treasures of the temple, or house of the Lord, the sacred utensils employed in worship, which were then material, and the loss of which greatly hindered the observance of religion - a calamity which cannot now befall the Church of God in gospel times, since in Christian worship the outward ritual is nothing, but the inward spirit everything.

2. The treasures of the palace, or king's house in the city of David, i.e. the regalia or crown jewels, which are always more or less an object of desire to victorious generals and armies - a smaller calamity than the former, as the destruction of a nation's wealth is a lesser evil than the extinction or suppression of its religion.

3. The golden shields in the house of the forest of Lebanon (2 Chronicles 9:16), which Solomon had made, the LXX. (1 Kings 14:26) adding that he likewise carried off the golden armour David had taken as spoil from the King of Zobah (1 Chronicles 18:7) - the least calamity of the three, the shields being luxuries of which king or nation might be deprived without hurt, and the armour spoil of which either might be deprived without wrong.

III. ITS SPEEDY REPARATION.

1. The nation's loss concealed. Rehoboam covered up as far as he could the damage wrought, especially in his palace, by constructing shields of brass to take the place of those of gold which had been abstracted (see next homily).

2. The king's vanity soothed. He also endeavoured to heal his own wounded vanity, by causing these brazen shields to be borne before him in state procession every time he entered the temple. Just as they had done before with the golden shields, the guards fetched out their spurious substitutes with solemn pomp on every ceremonial day, and when the show was concluded replaced them in the guard-chamber, the spectators probably not being aware of the imposition.

LESSONS.

1. The instability of earthly things. A greater king than Shishak will one day plunder kings and common men alike of their material possessions.

2. The facility with which men impose upon themselves, the efforts they make, and the stratagems they resort to, to prop up their fallen greatness or restore their faded glory. Solomon's weak and vain son not the only man who has made brass shields do duty for golden ones.

3. The historic credibility of Scripture. The Shishak invasion is not the only instance in which the monuments have surprisingly corroborated Bible history. - W.

See how deterioration follows all character that goes down in its religious aspects. This deterioration marks the whole progress of human development. Is it not so with regard to all personal service? How ardent we once were! How devoted to the house of God, how punctual in attendance, how zealous in worship! How we longed for the hour of praise to double itself, that we might have long intercourse with the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost! Now how soon we become uneasy, how we long to be released, how patience becomes sensitive, and yields in angry surrender because too much tried! You never bring gold for brass when you leave God. The prodigal never brings any treasure back with him. When men go away intellectually from the Bible they bring back brass for gold. When they leave the Bible morally they bring back brass for gold. When they leave sympathetically they bring back artifice for inspiration, mechanics for vital communion.

(J.Parker, D.D.)