- 31-
- only that, as they camped in two divisions on the opposite side of the valley,
perhaps beneath the two spurs of the ridge that juts into the plain from the south-east,
they seemed like two little flocks of kids – so small and weak, as compared with their
enemies. For seven days the two armies lay observing each other. From the
circumstance, specially mentioned in the text, that the Israelites had gone out
"provisioned" (ver. 27, margin), and even from their camping in two divisions, we
infer that the object of Ahab was to remain on the defensive, which, indeed, the
inferiority of numbers rendered imperative. Besides, the Jewish position was most
happily chosen. It barred the advance of the enemy, who could not move forward
without first giving battle to Israel. The Syrians must have perceived the advantage
of Ahab's position, with his back to the base of his operations, while the division of
Israel into two camps might enable them to envelop their enemies if they attempted
an advance, in which case the very size of the Syrian army would, from its
unwieldiness, prove a serious difficulty. But the danger of idle delay in a hostile
country, and in an Eastern warfare, was nearly as great. And so on the seventh day
the attack was made - as we judge, by the Syrians. Their defeat was crushing. The
great Syrian host of 100,000 was destroyed,^50 and the men who either made their
way from the battle-field to Aphek, or who had been left there as a garrison,
experienced another and even more terrible calamity. While crowding into the gates,
or else while occupying the ramparts, which had probably been hastily thrown up or
strengthened, a wall fell upon 27,000 of their number.^51
Further defense being thus rendered impossible, the previous confidence of Ben-
hadad gave place to abject fear. He fled from room to room - into the innermost
chamber. His servants, who had formerly given such warlike counsel, now advised
him to sue in most humble manner for his life, holding out the hope of the
mercifulness of the kings of Israel of which they had heard. There is an ominous
sound in this. The kings of Israel had never been distinguished for mercy. But they
had only too often shown their sympathy with the heathen kingdoms around, and
manifested a desire to make alliance with them, and to conform to their ways. Yet,
even so, it is not easy to explain the conduct of Ahab when the Syrian envoys of Ben-
hadad appeared before him, in true Eastern manner, with sackcloth on their loins and
ropes round their necks, suing only for the life of him who now ostentatiously styled
himself Ahab's "slave." It could scarcely have been due to weakness of character
when Ahab broke into the almost joyous exclamation, "Is he yet alive?" Nor could it
have been merely from kindness of disposition that he ostentatiously substituted: "he
is my brother" for the designation, "thy slave Ben-hadad," used by the Syrian envoys.
They were not slow to perceive the altered tone of the king. They favorably
interpreted and laid hold on that which had come from him; and they said: "Thy
brother Ben-hadad."^52
(^)