I. NON-ISRAELITES.

1. Their nationalities. Descendants of five of the seven nations in the promised laud anterior to the conquest, remnants of which were left instead of being utterly consumed as enjoined by Moses (Deuteronomy 7:1).

(1) The Hittites, sons or descendants of Herb, the second son of Canaan (Genesis 10:15), who in Abraham's time dwelt in and around Hebron (Genesis 26:34), in Moses', along with the Amorites and Jebusites, occupied the mountains of Judah and Ephraim (Numbers 13:29), and in Solomon's, resided north of Palestine (1 Kings 9:20; 1 Kings 10:29; 1 Kings 11:1; 2 Kings 7:6). Identified with the Cheta of the Egyptian monuments (Ebers, 'Egypt and the Books of Moses,' pp. 285, 286), and the Chatti of the cuneiform inscriptions (Sehrader, 'Die Keilinschriften,' p. 107, etc.), they have finally been discovered by Sayce ('Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments,' p. 5) and Brugsch ('Egypt,' etc., 1:338) to be a large and powerful nation "whose two chief seats were at Kadesh on the Orontes, and Carchemish on the Euphrates." Ebers and Schrader doubt whether the northern belonged to the same family as the southern Hittites; but evidence tends to the conclusion that they did. "That the Hittites formed part of the Hykses forces, and that some of them, instead of entering Egypt, remained behind in Southern Canaan," is confirmed by the statement of Manetho, that Jerusalem was founded by the Hyksos after their expulsion from Egypt, and by that of Ezekiel (Ezekiel 16:3) that Jerusalem had a Hittite mother (Sayce). Traces of their existence have been left in two places in Palestine - in Hattin, the old Caphar Hittai of the Talmud, above the Sea of Galilee; and in Kerr Hatta, north of Jerusalem (Conder, 'Handbook to the Bible,' p. 235).

(2) The Amorites. Mountaineers, as the name imports, found on both sides of the Jordan, from north to south of Palestine, though their principal habitat was the Judaean mountains (Genesis 14:13, 17, 24; Numbers 13:30; Joshua 10:5), they were among the most powerful of the ancient Canaanitish tribes. Mamre, an Amorite chieftain, with two brothers, was confederate with Abraham (Genesis 14:13).

(3) The Perizzites. Either highlanders or dwellers in the hills and woods of Palestine (Josephus), or rustics living in the open country and in villages, as opposed to the Canaanites, who occupied walled towns (Kalisch) - if they were not, rather, a tribe of wandering nomads whose origin is lost in obscurity (Keil) - they were found by Abraham in the centre of Palestine (Genesis 13:7), and by Joshua in Lower Galilee (Joshua 17:15). A trace of them has been found in the present village of Ferasin, north-west of Sbechem (Conder, 'Handbook to the Bible,' p. 235).

(4) The Hivites. Translated "villager" (Gesenius), or "midlander" (Ewald), the one of which renderings is as good as the other, since both are conjectural, the Hivite is first heard of in the time of Jacob as a settler near Shechem (Genesis 34:2), and afterwards in Joshua's day further south at Gibeon (Joshua 9:1, 7), though Hermon, in the land of Mizpeh (Joshua 11:3), and Mount Lebanon (Judges 3:3) were probably their principal abodes.

(5) Jebusites. A primitive branch of the Canaanites, who held the country round Jerusalem as far down as the time of David (2 Samuel 5:6, 7). At the period of the conquest their king was Adonibezek, or "Lord of righteousness" (Joshua 10:1).

2. Their condition. Practically bond-servants, paying tribute to Solomon, they had no part in the civil commonwealth or religious theocracy of Israel. They illustrate the relation in which the world's inhabitants stand to the Church. Those have no share in this; yet to this, against their will, they pay tribute and render important service - compelled, not by Christians, but by the King of Christians, who maketh all things on earth subserve the Church according to the counsel of his will (Ephesians 1:11, 22; Daniel 7:14).

3. Their occupation. The working-class population of those days, the artisans and labourers, Solomon employed them in the construction of his temple, palaces, and cities, just as the Pharaohs of former times had employed the progenitors of his people in making bricks and erecting store cities in the land of Ham (Exodus 1:11). It was the custom then and long after to subject prisoners of war and the populations of conquered territories to servile work. Thothmes III. of Egypt carried labourers captive to build the temple of his father Amon (Wilkinson, 'Ancient Egyptians,' 1:344: 1878). The employment of foreign captives in such tasks was an ancient practice in Egypt (Brugsch, 'Egypt,' etc., 1:417). An inscription of Esarhaddon states that the custom prevailed in Assyria, he himself saying of his captives from foreign lands, "I caused crowds of them to work in fetters in making brick" ('Records of the Past,' 3:120). Not even Solomon, and far less the Pharaohs of Egypt or the kings of Assyria, were acquainted with the golden rule.

II. ISRAELITES.

1. Their ancestry. Descendants of the twelve tribes, whose heads were the sons of Israel, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, their ancestry was honoured as well as ancient.

2. Their industry. The warriors of the kingdom, they did the fighting needful for the empire's protection and extension. Judged by the Christian standard, war is always an evil and often a sin; but in certain stages of civilization it appears to be inevitable, if neither necessary nor excusable.

3. Their dignity. From them were chosen the officers of the king's army, the captains of his chariots and of his horsemen, the chiefs of his officers, and the superintendents of his workmen (1 Kings 9:22).

LESSONS.

1. The sin of slavery.

2. The dignity of labour.

3. The nobility of free men. - W.

To some Christians "the sense of duty" and kindred phrases sound unattractive and suspicious. Yet it is dangerous even to minimise the sense of duty. A man who makes no terms with conscience, but does what God commands, will find his love grow stronger. A Christian's sense of duty is not the same as the sense of duty of one who has no faith. Natural religion would teach a man to be honest, sober, and industrious, but Christ's teaching goes far beyond this. Religious duties; purity of heart; forgiveness of others, etc. But it is in the realm of supernatural help, prayer, and the sacraments that the greatest divergence is seen. "As the duty of every day required." Words such as these suggest that unless we are living a life of prayer, unless we are partaking of the life of Christ in the means He left for us to use, we are undutiful. What we claim for our religion is this —

1. The personal love of Christ will make us more severe with ourselves in performing "hard, unwelcome" duties of every day.

2. It will also claim from us earnest prayer, belief in the grace of the Holy Spirit, etc.

(W. R. Hutton, M. A.).