Benjamin (I): Sir Richard Arcos
Reading one of Dr. Langdon's pestiferous books, I note with wry amusement that it is stated that Mary Magdalen belonged to the 'powerful' tribe of Benjamin. This is linked to the Kingship of Saul, which is fair enough, I suppose.
However, I believe I'm correct in stating that the tribe of Benjamin was very far from being powerful, indeed, Saul's first reaction on being told he'd be king was: 'Am I not a Benjaminite, of the smallest of the tribes of Israel? And my family the least of all the families of the tribe of Benjamin?' They were important in one respect, being descended from the younger son of Rachel, but whn some of their men committed an atrocious act of sexual immorality in the days of the Judges, Rachel's blood didn't seem to count for anything.
Equally, descent from Saul hardly counted for anything either, given the hash he made of being king. Saul was one man, his son Ish-Baal (called Ish-Boshesh in Samuel, but Ish-Baal is undoubtedly the original name. Boshesh is Hebrew for 'shame', and as a pagan deity, Baal was considered shameful) who seized the throne of Israel (not Judah) was bumped off by a couple of his own officers during the war between the House of Saul and the House of David. No Benjamite ever held the throne again, although a rebel from that tribe called Sheba tried to take over the Kingdom of Israel. He was also bumped off. All this happened rather a long time before the 1st Century (during the reign of David, in fact). After the division of the monarchies on the death of King Solomon, Benjamin adhered to the tribe of Judah and there is no record that any person from the tribe ever made a claim on the throne of the Southern kingdom. The Northern Kingdom was never ruled by a single dynasty for long, and Northern Kings tended to live short lives ended by violent deaths.
However, I believe I'm correct in stating that the tribe of Benjamin was very far from being powerful, indeed, Saul's first reaction on being told he'd be king was: 'Am I not a Benjaminite, of the smallest of the tribes of Israel? And my family the least of all the families of the tribe of Benjamin?' They were important in one respect, being descended from the younger son of Rachel, but whn some of their men committed an atrocious act of sexual immorality in the days of the Judges, Rachel's blood didn't seem to count for anything.
Equally, descent from Saul hardly counted for anything either, given the hash he made of being king. Saul was one man, his son Ish-Baal (called Ish-Boshesh in Samuel, but Ish-Baal is undoubtedly the original name. Boshesh is Hebrew for 'shame', and as a pagan deity, Baal was considered shameful) who seized the throne of Israel (not Judah) was bumped off by a couple of his own officers during the war between the House of Saul and the House of David. No Benjamite ever held the throne again, although a rebel from that tribe called Sheba tried to take over the Kingdom of Israel. He was also bumped off. All this happened rather a long time before the 1st Century (during the reign of David, in fact). After the division of the monarchies on the death of King Solomon, Benjamin adhered to the tribe of Judah and there is no record that any person from the tribe ever made a claim on the throne of the Southern kingdom. The Northern Kingdom was never ruled by a single dynasty for long, and Northern Kings tended to live short lives ended by violent deaths.
posted by Highland Host at
6:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home