{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_32883/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_32883","id":"gutenberg_32883","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/32883","summary":null,"tags":["Bible -- Antiquities","Bible -- Evidences, authority, etc.","Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: History - Ancient","Category: History - Religious","Cuneiform inscriptions"],"text":"Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments\n\n  A Sketch of the Most Striking Confirmations of the Bible, From Recent\n                             Discoveries in:\n\n            Egypt. Palestine. Assyria. Babylonia. Asia Minor.\n\n                                    by\n\n                       Archibald Henry Sayce, M.A.\n\n            Deputy Professor of Comparative Philology, Oxford.\n\n                           Hon. LL.D., Dublin.\n\n                             Second Edition.\n\n                                 London:\n\n                       The Religious Tract Society.\n\n             36, Paternoster Row; 65, St. Paul\u2019s Churchyard.\n\n                                   1884\n\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\n\nPreface.\nChapter I. Introduction.\nChapter II. The Book of Genesis.\nChapter III. The Exodus out of Egypt.\nChapter IV. The Moabite Stone and the Inscription of Siloam.\nChapter V. The Empire of the Hittites.\nChapter VI. The Assyrian Invasions.\nChapter VII. Nebuchadrezzar and Cyrus.\nAppendix I.\nAppendix II.\nIndex.\nFootnotes\n\n\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\n                             [Illustration.]\n\n   Monument of a Hittite king, accompanied by an inscription in Hittite\nhieroglyphics, discovered on the site of Carchemish and now in the British\n                                 Museum.\n\n\nThe object of this little book is explained by its title. Discovery after\ndiscovery has been pouring in upon us from Oriental lands, and the\naccounts given only ten years ago of the results of Oriental research are\nalready beginning to be antiquated. It is useful, therefore, to take stock\nof our present knowledge, and to see how far it bears out that \u201cold story\u201d\nwhich has been familiar to us from our childhood. The same spirit of\nscepticism which had rejected the early legends of Greece and Rome had\nlaid its hands also on the Old Testament, and had determined that the\nsacred histories themselves were but a collection of myths and fables. But\nsuddenly, as with the wand of a magician, the ancient eastern world has\nbeen reawakened to life by the spade of the explorer and the patient skill\nof the decipherer, and we now find ourselves in the presence of monuments\nwhich bear the names or recount the deeds of the heroes of Scripture. One\nby one these \u201cstones crying out\u201d have been examined or more perfectly\nexplained, while others of equal importance are being continually added to\nthem.\n\nWhat striking confirmations of the Bible narrative have been afforded by\nthe latest discoveries will be seen from the following pages. In many\ncases confirmation has been accompanied by illustration. Unexpected light\nhas been thrown upon facts and statements hitherto obscure, or a wholly\nnew explanation has been given of some event recorded by the inspired\nwriter. What can be more startling than the discovery of the great Hittite\nEmpire, the very existence of which had been forgotten, and which yet once\ncontended on equal terms with Egypt on the one side and Assyria on the\nother? The allusions to the Hittites in the Old Testament, which had been\ndoubted by a sceptical criticism, have been shown to be fully in\naccordance with the facts, and their true place in history has been\npointed out.\n\nBut the account of the Hittite Empire is not the only discovery of the\nlast four or five years about which this book has to speak. Inscriptions\nof Sargon have cleared up the difficulties attending the tenth and\neleventh chapters of Isaiah\u2019s prophecies, and have proved that no \u201cideal\u201d\ncampaign of an \u201cideal\u201d Assyrian king is described in them. The campaign,\non the contrary, was a very real one, and when Isaiah delivered his\nprophecy the Assyrian monarch was marching down upon Jerusalem from the\nnorth, and was about to be \u201cthe rod\u201d of God\u2019s anger upon its sins. Ten\nyears before the overthrow of Sennacherib\u2019s army his father, Sargon, had\ncaptured Jerusalem, but a \u201cremnant\u201d escaped the horrors of the siege, and\nreturned in penitence \u201cunto the mighty God.\u201d\n\nPerhaps the most remarkable of recent discoveries is that which relates to\nCyrus and his conquest of Babylonia. The history of the conquest as told\nby Cyrus himself is now in our hands, and it has obliged us to modify many\nof the views, really derived from Greek authors, which we had read into\nthe words of Scripture. Cyrus, we know now upon his own authority, was a\npolytheist, and not a Zoroastrian; he was king of Elam, not of Persia. It\nwas Elam, and not Persia, as Isaiah\u2019s prophecies declared, which invaded\nBabylon. Babylon itself was taken without a siege, and Mr. Bosanquet may\ntherefore have been right in holding that the Darius of Daniel was Darius\nthe son of Hystaspes.\n\nHardly less interesting has been the discovery of the inscription of\nSiloam, which reveals to us the very characters used by the Jews in the\ntime of Isaiah, perhaps even in the time of Solomon himself. The discovery\nhas cast a flood of light on the early topography of Jerusalem, and has\nmade it clear as the daylight that the Jews of the royal period were not\nthe rude and barbarous people it has been the fashion of an unbelieving\ncriticism to assume, but a cultured and literary population. Books must\nhave been as plentiful among them as they were in Ph\u0153nicia or Assyria; nor\nmust we forget the results of the excavations undertaken last year in the\nland of Goshen. Pithom, the treasure-city built by the Israelites, has\nbeen disinterred, and the date of the Exodus has been fixed. M. Naville\nhas even found there bricks made without straw.\n\nBut the old records of Egypt and Assyria have a further interest than a\nmerely historical one. They tell us what were the religious doctrines and\naspirations of those who composed them, and what was their conception of\ntheir duty towards God and man. We have only to compare the hymns and\npsalms and prayers of these ancient peoples\u2014seeking \u201cthe Lord, if haply\nthey might feel after Him and find Him\u201d\u2014with the fuller lights revealed in\nthe pages of the Old Testament, to discover how wide was the chasm that\nlay between the two. The one was seeking what the other had already found.\nThe Hebrew prophet was the forerunner and herald of the Gospel, and the\nlight shed by the Gospel had been reflected back upon him. He saw already\n\u201cthe Sun of Righteousness\u201d rising in the east; the psalmist of Shinar or\nthe devout worshipper of Asshur were like unto those \u201cupon whom no day has\ndawned.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.\n\n\n    _How the Cuneiform Inscriptions were deciphered.\u2014Grotefend\u2019s\n    guess.\u2014Lassen and Rawlinson\u2019s studies.\u2014Discoveries of Botta,\n    Layard, George Smith, and Rassam.\u2014Certainty of our present\n    knowledge._\n\n\nThe decipherment of the cuneiform or wedge-shaped inscriptions of Assyria\nhas been one of the most marvellous achievements of the present century.\nIt has often been asked how Assyrian scholars have been enabled to read an\nAssyrian text with almost as much certainty as a page of the Old\nTestament, although both the language and the characters in which it is\nwritten were utterly unknown but a few years ago. A brief history of the\norigin and progress of the decipherment will best answer the question.\n\nTravellers had discovered inscriptions engraved in cuneiform, or, as they\nwere also termed, arrow-headed, characters on the ruined monuments of\nPersepolis and other ancient sites in Persia. Some of these monuments were\nknown to have been erected by the Ach\u00e6menian princes\u2014Darius, the son of\nHystaspes, and his successors\u2014and it was therefore inferred that the\ninscriptions also had been carved by order of the same kings. The\ninscriptions were in three different systems of cuneiform writing; and,\nsince the three kinds of inscription were always placed side by side, it\nwas evident that they represented different versions of the same text. The\nsubjects of the Persian kings belonged to more than one race, and just as\nin the present day a Turkish pasha in the East has to publish an edict in\nTurkish, Arabic, and Persian, if it is to be understood by all the\npopulations under his charge, so the Persian kings were obliged to use the\nlanguage and system of writing peculiar to each of the nations they\ngoverned, whenever they wished their proclamations to be read and\nunderstood by them.\n\nIt was clear that the three versions of the Ach\u00e6menian inscriptions were\naddressed to the three chief populations of the Persian Empire, and that\nthe one which invariably came first was composed in ancient Persian, the\nlanguage of the sovereign himself. Now this Persian version happened to\noffer the decipherer less difficulties than the two others which\naccompanied it. The number of distinct characters employed in writing it\ndid not exceed forty, while the words were divided from one another by a\nslanting wedge. Some of the words contained so many characters that it was\nplain that these latter must denote letters, and not syllables, and that\nconsequently the Persian cuneiform system must have consisted of an\nalphabet, and not of a syllabary. It was further plain that the\ninscriptions had to be read from left to right, since the ends of all the\nlines were exactly underneath one another on the left side, whereas they\nterminated irregularly on the right; indeed, the last line sometimes ended\nat a considerable distance from the right-hand extremity of the\ninscription.\n\nThe clue to the decipherment of the inscriptions was first discovered by\nthe successful guess of a German scholar, Grotefend. Grotefend noticed\nthat the inscriptions generally began with three or four words, one of\nwhich varied, while the others remained unchanged. The variable word had\nthree forms, though the same form always appeared on the same monument.\nGrotefend, therefore, conjectured that this word represented the name of a\nking, the words which followed it being the royal titles. One of the\nsupposed names appeared much oftener than the others, and as it was too\nshort for Artaxerxes and too long for Cyrus, it was evident that it must\nstand either for Darius or for Xerxes. A study of the classical authors\nshowed Grotefend that certain of the monuments on which it was found had\nbeen constructed by Darius, and he accordingly gave to the characters\ncomposing it the values required for spelling \"Darius\" in its old Persian\nform. In this way he succeeded in obtaining conjectural values for six\ncuneiform letters. He now turned to the second royal name, which also\nappeared on several monuments, and was of much the same length as that of\nDarius. This could only be Xerxes; but if so, the fifth letter composing\nit (_r_) would necessarily be the same as the third letter in the name of\nDarius. This proved to be the case, and thus afforded the best possible\nevidence that the German scholar was on the right track.\n\nThe third name, which was much longer than the other two, differed from\nthe second chiefly at the beginning, the latter part of it resembling the\nname of Xerxes. Clearly, therefore, it could be nothing else than\nArtaxerxes, and that it actually was so, was rendered certain by the fact\nthat the second character composing it was that which had the value of\n_r_.\n\nGrotefend now possessed a small alphabet, and with this he proceeded to\nread the word which always followed the royal name, and therefore probably\nmeant \u201cking.\u201d He found that it closely resembled the word which signified\n\u201cking\u201d in Zend, the old language of the Eastern Persians, which was spoken\nin one part of Persia at the same time that Old Persian, the language of\nthe Ach\u00e6menian princes, was spoken in another. There could, consequently,\nbe no further room for doubt that he had really solved the great problem,\nand discovered the key to the decipherment of the cuneiform texts.\n\nBut he did little further himself towards the completion of the work, and\nit was many years before any real progress was made with it. Meanwhile,\nthe study of Zend had made great advances, more especially in the hands of\nBurnouf, who eventually turned his attention to the cuneiform\ninscriptions. But it is to Burnouf\u2019s pupil, Lassen, as well as to Sir\nHenry Rawlinson, that the decipherment of these inscriptions owes its\nfinal completion. The discovery of the list of Persian satrapies in the\ninscription of Darius at Naksh-i-Rustem, and above all the copy of the\nlong inscription of Darius on the rock of Behistun, made by Sir H.\nRawlinson, enabled these scholars independently of one another to\nconstruct an alphabet which differed only in the value assigned to a\nsingle character, and, with the help of the cognate Zend and Sanskrit, to\ntranslate the language so curiously brought to light. The decipherment of\nthe Persian cuneiform texts thus became an accomplished fact; what was\nnext needed was to decipher the two versions which were inscribed at their\nside.\n\nBut this was no easy task. The words in them were not divided from one\nanother, and the characters of which they were composed were exceedingly\nnumerous. With the assistance, however, of frequently recurring proper\nnames even these two versions gradually yielded to the patient skill of\nthe decipherer; and it was then discovered that while one of them\nrepresented an agglutinative language, such as that of the Turks or Fins,\nthe other was in a dialect which closely resembled the Hebrew of the Old\nTestament. The monuments found almost immediately afterwards in Assyria\nand Babylonia by Botta and Layard soon made it clear to what people this\ndialect must have belonged. The inscriptions of Nineveh turned out to be\nwritten in the same language and form of cuneiform script; and it must\ntherefore have been for the Semitic population of Assyria and Babylonia\nthat the kings of Persia had caused one of the versions of their\ninscriptions to be drawn up. This version served as a starting-point for\nthe decipherment of the texts which the excavations in Assyria had brought\nto light.\n\nIt might have been thought that the further course of the decipherment\nwould have presented little difficulty, now that the values of many of the\nAssyrian characters were known, and the close resemblance of the language\nthey concealed to Hebrew had been discovered. But the complicated nature\nof the Assyrian system of cuneiform\u2014the great number of characters used in\nit, the different phonetic values the same character might have, and the\nfrequent employment of ideographs, which denoted ideas and not\nsounds\u2014caused the progress of decipherment to be for some time but slow.\nIndeed, had the Assyrian inscriptions been confined to those engraved on\nthe alabaster bulls and other monuments of Nineveh, our knowledge of the\nlanguage would always have remained comparatively limited. But,\nfortunately, the Assyrians, like the Babylonians before them, employed\nclay as a writing material, and established libraries, which were filled\nwith a literature on baked bricks.\n\nOne of the most important results of Sir A. H. Layard\u2019s explorations at\nNineveh was the discovery of the ruined library of the ancient city, now\nburied under the mounds of Kouyunjik. The broken clay tablets belonging to\nthis library not only furnished the student with an immense mass of\nliterary matter, but also with direct aids towards a knowledge of the\nAssyrian syllabary and language. Among the literature represented in the\nlibrary of Kouyunjik were lists of characters, with their various phonetic\nand ideographic meanings, tables of synonymes, and catalogues of the names\nof plants and animals. This, however, was not all. The inventors of the\ncuneiform system of writing had been a people who preceded the Semites in\nthe occupation of Babylonia, and who spoke an agglutinative language\nutterly different from that of their Semitic successors. These Accadians,\nas they are usually termed, left behind them a considerable amount of\nliterature, which was highly prized by the Semitic Babylonians and\nAssyrians. A large portion of the Ninevite tablets, accordingly, consists\nof interlinear or parallel translations from Accadian into Assyrian, as\nwell as of reading books, dictionaries, and grammars, in which the\nAccadian original is placed by the side of its Assyrian equivalent. It\nfrequently happens that the signification of a previously unknown Assyrian\nword can be ascertained by our finding it given as the rendering of an\nAccadian word, with the meaning of which we are already acquainted. The\nbilingual texts have not only enabled scholars to recover the\nlong-forgotten Accadian language; they have also been of the greatest\npossible assistance to them in their reconstruction of the Assyrian\ndictionary itself.\n\nThe three expeditions conducted by Mr. George Smith, as well as the later\nones of Mr. Hormuzd Rassam, have added largely to the stock of tablets\nfrom Kouyunjik originally acquired for the British Museum by Sir A. H.\nLayard, and have also brought to light a few other tablets from the\nlibraries of Babylonia. Although, therefore, only one of the many\nlibraries which now lie buried beneath the ground in Babylonia and Assyria\nhas, as yet, been at all adequately explored, the amount of Assyrian\nliterature at the disposal of the student is already greater than that\ncontained in the whole of the Old Testament. Apart from the help afforded\nby the old dictionaries and lists of words and characters, he has more\nfacilities for determining the meaning of a word by a comparison of\nparallel passages than the student of Biblical Hebrew; and in many\ninstances, accordingly, Assyrian has made it possible to fix the\nsignification of a Hebrew word, the sense of which has hitherto been\ndoubtful.\n\nThe Assyrian student, moreover, possesses an advantage which is not shared\nby the Hebraist. Owing to its hieroglyphic origin, the cuneiform system of\nwriting makes large use of what are called determinatives, that is to say,\nof characters which have no phonetic value, but which determine the class\nto which the word they accompany belongs. It is, therefore, always\npossible to tell at a glance whether the word with which we are dealing is\nthe name of a man, of a woman, of a deity, of a river, of a country, or of\na city; or, again, whether it denotes an animal, a bird, a vegetable, a\nstone, a star, a medicine, or the like. With all these aids, accordingly,\nit is not wonderful that the study of Assyrian has made immense progress\nduring the last few years, and that an ordinary historical text can be\nread with as much certainty as a page from one of the historical books of\nthe Old Testament. Indeed, we may say that it can be read with even\ngreater certainty, since it presents us with the actual words of the\noriginal writer; whereas the text of the Old Testament has come to us\nthrough the hands of successive generations of copyists, who have\ncorrupted many passages so as to make them grammatically unintelligible.\n\nAt the same time, the hieroglyphic origin of the cuneiform mode of writing\nhas been productive of disadvantages as well as of advantages. The\ncharacters which compose it may express ideas as well as sounds; and\nthough we may know what ideas are represented, we may not always know the\nexact pronunciation to be assigned to them. Thus, in English, the\nideograph + may be pronounced \u201cplus,\u201d \u201cadded to,\u201d or \u201cmore,\u201d according to\nthe pleasure of the reader. The Assyrian scribes usually attached one or\nmore phonetic characters to the ideographs they employed, in order to\nindicate their pronunciation in a given passage; but these \u201cphonetic\ncomplements,\u201d as they are termed, were frequently omitted in the case of\nwell-known proper names, such as those of the native kings and deities.\nHence the exact pronunciation of these names can only be settled when we\nfind them written phonetically; and there are one or two proper names,\nsuch as that of the hero of the great Chaldean epic, which have never yet\nbeen met with phonetically spelt.\n\nAnother disadvantage due to the hieroglyphic origin of the Assyrian\nsyllabary is the number of different phonetic values the same character\nmay bear. This caused a good deal of trouble in the early days of Assyrian\ndecipherment; but it was a difficulty that was felt quite as much by the\nAssyrians themselves as it is by us. Consequently they adopted various\ndevices for overcoming it; and as these devices have become known the\ndifficulty has ceased to be felt. In short, the study of Assyrian now\nreposes on as sure and certain a basis as the study of any ancient\nlanguage, a knowledge of which has been traditionally handed down to us;\nand the antiquity of its monuments, the copiousness of its vocabulary, the\nperfection of its grammar, and the syllabic character of the writing\u2014which\nexpresses vowels as well as consonants\u2014all combine to make it of the\nhighest importance for the study of the Semitic languages. Its recovery\nhas not only shed a flood of light on the history and antiquities of the\nOld Testament, it has served to illustrate and explain the language of the\nOld Testament as well.\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II. THE BOOK OF GENESIS.\n\n\n    Recent discoveries, especially in Babylonia and Assyria, have\n    thrown much light on Genesis.\u2014The Accadians.\u2014An Assyrian account\n    of the Creation.\u2014The Babylonian Sabbath.\u2014Traces of an account of\n    the Fall.\u2014Site of Paradise.\u2014\u201cAdam\u201d a Babylonian word.\u2014The Chaldean\n    story of the Deluge.\u2014This compared with the record in Genesis.\u2014The\n    Babylonian account of the building of Babel.\u2014The light thrown by\n    the Assyrian inscriptions on the names in Gen. x.\u2014Gomer; Madai;\n    Javan; Cush and Mizraim; Phut; Canaan; Elam; Asshur; Arphaxad;\n    Aram; Lud; Nimrod.\u2014The site of Ur.\u2014Approximate date of the rescue\n    of Lot by Abraham.\u2014Egypt in the time of Abraham.\u2014Records of\n    famines.\u2014The date of Joseph\u2019s appointment as second ruler in\n    Egypt.\u2014The Tale of the Two Brothers.\u2014Goshen.\n\n\nThere is no book in the world about which more has been written than the\nBible, and perhaps there is no portion of the Bible which has given rise\nto a larger literature than the Book of Genesis. Every word in it has been\ncarefully scrutinised, now by scholars who sought to discover its deepest\nmeaning or to defend it against the attacks of adversaries, now again by\nhostile critics anxious to expose every supposed flaw, and to convict it\nof error and inconsistency. Assailants and defenders had long to content\nthemselves with such evidence as could be derived from a study of the book\nitself, or from the doubtful traditions of ancient nations, as reported by\nthe writers of Greece and Rome. Such reports were alike imperfect and\nuntrustworthy; historical criticism was still in its infancy in the age of\nthe classical authors, and they cared but little to describe accurately\nthe traditions of races whom they despised. It was even a question whether\nany credit could be given to the fragments of Egyptian, Babylonian, and\nPh\u0153nician mythology or history extracted by Christian apologists from the\nlost works of native authors who wrote in Greek. The Egyptian dynasties of\nManetho, the Babylonian stories of the Creation and Flood narrated by\nBerossus, the self-contradicting Ph\u0153nician legends collected by Philo\nByblius, were all more or less suspected of being an invention of a later\nage. The earlier chapters of Genesis stood almost alone; friends and foes\nalike felt the danger of resting any argument on the apparent similarity\nof the accounts recorded in them to the myths and legends contained in the\nfragments of Manetho, of Berossus, and of Philo Byblius.\n\nAll is changed now. The marvellous discoveries of the last half-century\nhave thrown a flood of light on the ancient oriental world, and some of\nthis light has necessarily been reflected on the Book of Genesis. The\nmonuments of Egypt, of Babylonia, and of Assyria have been rescued from\ntheir hiding-places, and the writing upon them has been made to speak once\nmore in living words. A dead world has been called again to life by the\nspade of the excavator and the patient labour of the decipherer. We find\nourselves, as it were, face to face with Sennacherib, with Nebuchadnezzar,\nand with Cyrus, with those whose names have been familiar to us from\nchildhood, but who have hitherto been to us mere names, mere shadowy\noccupants of an unreal world. Thanks to the research of the last\nhalf-century, we can now penetrate into the details of their daily life,\ncan examine their religious ideas, can listen to them as they themselves\nrecount the events of their own time or the traditions of the past which\nhad been handed down to them.\n\nIt is more especially in Babylonia and Assyria that we find illustrations\nof the earlier chapters of Genesis, as, indeed, is only natural. The\nSemitic language spoken in these two countries was closely allied to that\nof the Old Testament, as closely, in fact, as two modern English dialects\nare allied to each other; and it was from Babylonia, from Ur of the\nChaldees, now represented by the mounds of Mugheir, that Abraham made his\nway to the future home of his descendants in the west. It is to Babylonia\nthat the Biblical accounts of the Fall, of the Deluge, and of the\nConfusion of Tongues particularly look: two of the rivers of Paradise were\nthe Tigris and Euphrates, the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat, and\nthe city built around the Tower which men designed should reach to heaven\nwas Babel or Babylon. Babylonia was an older kingdom than Assyria, which\ntook its name from the city of Assur, now Kalah Sherghat, on the Tigris,\nthe original capital of the country. It was divided into two halves, Accad\n(Gen. x. 10) being Northern Babylonia, and Sumir, the Shinar of the Old\nTestament, Southern Babylonia. The primitive populations of both Sumir and\nAccad were related, not to the Semitic race, but to the tribes which\ncontinued to maintain themselves in the mountains of Elam down to a late\nday. They spoke two cognate dialects, which were agglutinative in\ncharacter, like the languages of the modern Turks and Fins; that is to\nsay, the relations of grammar were expressed by coupling words together,\neach of which retained an independent meaning of its own. Thus\n_in-nin-sun_ is \u201che gave it,\u201d literally \u201che-it-gave,\u201d _e-mes-na_ is \u201cof\nhouses,\u201d literally \u201chouse-many-of.\u201d At an early date, which cannot yet,\nhowever, be exactly determined, the Sumirians and Accadians were overrun\nand conquered by the Semitic Babylonians of later history, Accad being\napparently the first half of the country to fall under the sway of the\nnew-comers. It is possible that Casdim, the Hebrew word translated\n\u201cChaldees\u201d or \u201cChald\u00e6ans\u201d in the Authorised Version, is the Babylonian\n_casidi_, or \u201cconquerors,\u201d a title which continued to cling to them in\nconsequence of their conquest.\n\nThe Accadians had been the inventors of the pictorial hieroglyphics which\nafterwards developed into the cuneiform or wedge-shaped system of writing;\nthey had founded the great cities of Chaldea, and had attained to a high\ndegree of culture and civilisation. Their cities possessed libraries,\nstocked with books, written partly on papyrus, partly on clay, which was,\nwhile still soft, impressed with characters by means of a metal stylus.\nThe books were numerous, and related to a variety of subjects. Among them\nthere were more particularly two to which a special degree of sanctity was\nattached. One of these contained magical formul\u00e6 for warding off the\nassaults of evil spirits; the other was a collection of hymns to the gods,\nwhich was used by the priests as a kind of prayer-book. When the Semitic\nBabylonians, the kinsmen of the Hebrews, the Aram\u00e6ans, the Ph\u0153nicians and\nthe Arabs, conquered the old population, they received from it, along with\nother elements of culture, the cuneiform system of writing and the\nliterature written in it. The sacred hymns still continued to serve as a\nprayer-book, but they were now provided with interlinear translations into\nthe Babylonian (or, as it is usually termed, the Assyrian) language. Part\nof the literature consisted of legal codes and decisions; and since the\ninheritance and holding of property frequently depended on a knowledge of\nthese, it became necessary for the conquerors to acquaint themselves with\nthe language of the people they had conquered. In course of time, however,\nthe two dialects of Sumir and Accad ceased to be spoken; but the necessity\nfor learning them still remained, and we find accordingly that down to the\nlatest days of both Assyria and Babylonia the educated classes were taught\nthe old extinct Accadian, just as in modern Europe they are taught Latin.\nFrom time to time, indeed, the scribes of Sennacherib or Nebuchadnezzar\nattempted to write in the ancient language, and in doing so sometimes made\nsimilar mistakes to those that are made now-a-days by a schoolboy in\nwriting Latin.\n\nThe Accadians were, like the Chinese, pre-eminently a literary people.\nTheir conception of chaos was that of a period when as yet no books were\nwritten. Accordingly, a legend of the Creation, preserved in the library\nof Cuthah, contains this curious statement: \u201cOn a memorial-tablet none\nwrote, none explained, for bodies and produce were not brought forth in\nthe earth.\u201d To the author of the legend the art of writing seemed to mount\nback to the very beginning of mankind.\n\nThis legend of the Creation, however, is not the only one that has been\nrecovered from the shipwreck of Assyrian and Babylonian literature.\nBesides the account given in the fragments of Berossus, there is another,\nwhich bears a striking resemblance to the account of the Creation in the\nfirst chapter of Genesis. It does not appear, however, that this last was\nof Accadian origin; at all events, there is no indication that it was\ntranslated into Assyrian from an older Accadian document, and there are\neven reasons for thinking that it may not be earlier\u2014in its present form\nat least\u2014than the seventh century B.C. We possess, unfortunately, only\nportions of it, since many of the series of clay tablets on which it was\ninscribed have been lost or injured. The account begins as follows:\u2014\n\n\n    1. At that time the heavens above named not a name,\n\n    2. Nor did the earth below record one:\n\n    3. Yea, the deep was their first creator,\n\n    4. The flood of the sea was she who bore them all.\n\n    5. Their waters were embosomed in one place, and\n\n    6. The flowering reed was ungathered, the marsh-plant was ungrown.\n\n    7. At that time the gods had not issued forth, any one of them,\n\n    8. By no name were they recorded, no destiny (had they fixed).\n\n    9. Then the (great) gods were made,\n\n    10. Lakhmu and Lakhamu issued forth (the first),\n\n    11. They grew up....\n\n    12. Next were made the host of heaven and earth,\n\n    13. The time was long (and then)\n\n    14. The gods Anu (Bel and Ea were born of)\n\n    15. The host of heaven and earth.\n\n\nIt is not until we come to the fifth tablet of the series, which describes\nthe appointment of the heavenly bodies\u2014the work of the fourth day of\ncreation, according to Genesis\u2014that the narrative is again preserved. Here\nwe read that the Creator \u201cmade beautiful the stations of the great gods,\u201d\nor stars, an expression which reminds us of the oft-recurring phrase of\nGenesis: \u201cAnd God saw that it was good.\u201d The stars, moon, and sun were\nordered to rule over the night and day, and to determine the year, with\nits months and days. The latter part of the tablet, however, like the\nlatter part of the first tablet, is destroyed, and of the next tablet\u2014that\nwhich described the creation of animals\u2014only the first few lines remain.\n\u201cAt that time,\u201d it begins, \u201cthe gods in their assembly created (the living\ncreatures). They made beautiful the mighty (animals). They made the living\nbeings come forth, the cattle of the field, the beast of the field, and\nthe creeping thing.\u201d What follows is too mutilated to yield a connected\nsense.\n\nThere is no need of pointing out how closely this Assyrian account of the\nCreation resembles that of Genesis. Even the very wording and phrases of\nGenesis occur in it, and though no fragment is preserved which expressly\ntells us that the work of the Creation was accomplished in seven days, we\nmay infer that such was the case, from the order of events as recorded on\nthe tablets. But, with all this similarity, there is even greater\ndissimilarity. The philosophical conceptions with which the Assyrian\naccount opens, the polytheistic colouring which we find in it further on,\nhave no parallel in the Book of Genesis. The spirit of the two narratives\nis essentially different.\n\nThe last tablet probably contained an account of the institution of the\nSabbath. At all events, we learn that the seventh day was observed as a\nday of rest among the Babylonians, as it was among the Jews. It was even\ncalled by the same name of Sabbath, a word which is defined in an Assyrian\ntext as \u201ca day of rest for the heart,\u201d while the Accadian equivalent is\nexplained to mean \u201ca day of completion of labour.\u201d A calendar of saints\u2019\ndays for the month of the intercalary Elul makes the seventh, fourteenth,\ntwenty-first, and twenty-eighth days of the lunar month Sabbaths, on which\ncertain works were forbidden to be done. On those days, it is stated,\n\u201cflesh cooked on the fire may not be eaten, the clothing of the body may\nnot be changed, white garments may not be put on, a sacrifice may not be\noffered, the king may not ride in his chariot, nor speak in public, the\naugur may not mutter in a secret place, medicine of the body may not be\napplied, nor may any curse be uttered.\u201d Nothing, in fact, that implied\nwork was allowed to be done. Where the Babylonian Sabbath differed from\nthe Jewish one was in its essentially lunar character. The first Sabbath\nwas the first day of a month, whatever might be the length of the month\nthat preceded it. While Sabbaths and new moons are distinguished from one\nanother in the Old Testament, they are found united in the Babylonian\nritual. It is no wonder, therefore, that the Babylonians were acquainted\nwith a week of seven days, each day of which was dedicated to one of the\nseven planets; it was the space of time naturally marked out by the four\nquarters of the moon.\n\nNo account of the Fall of Man, similar to that in Genesis, has as yet been\nfound among the fragments of the Assyrian libraries. Mr. George Smith,\nindeed, supposed that he had discovered one, but the text which he\nreferred to the Fall, is really an ancient hymn to the Creator. It is,\nnevertheless, pretty certain that such an account once existed. An archaic\nBabylonian gem represents a tree, on either side of which are seated a man\nand woman, with a serpent behind them, and their hands are stretched out\ntowards the fruit that hangs from the tree. A few stray references in the\nbilingual (Accadian and Assyrian) dictionaries throw some light upon this\nrepresentation, and inform us that the Accadians knew of \u201ca wicked\nserpent,\u201d \u201cthe serpent of night\u201d and \u201cdarkness,\u201d which had brought about\nthe fall of man. The tree of life, of which so many illustrations occur on\nAssyrian monuments, is declared to be \u201cthe pine-tree\u201d of Eridu, \u201cthe\nshrine of the god Irnin;\u201d and Irnin is a name of the Euphrates, when\nregarded as the \u201csnake-river,\u201d which encircled the world like a rope, and\nwas the stream of Hea, \u201cthe snake-god of the tree of life.\u201d The Euphrates,\nwe must remember, was one of the rivers of Paradise.\n\nThe site of Paradise is to be sought for in Babylonia. The garden which\nGod planted was in Eden, and Eden, as we learn from the cuneiform records,\nwas the ancient name of the \u201cfield\u201d or plain of Babylonia, where the first\nliving creatures had been created. The city of Eridu, which the people of\nSumir called \u201cthe good\u201d or \u201choly,\u201d was, as we have seen, the shrine of\nIrnin, and in the midst of a forest or garden that once lay near it grew\n\u201cthe holy pine-tree,\u201d \u201cthe tree of life.\u201d The rivers of Eden can be found\nin the rivers and canals of Babylonia. Two of them were the Euphrates and\nTigris, called by the Accadians _id Idikla_, \u201cthe river of Idikla,\u201d the\nBiblical Hiddekhel, while Pishon is a Babylonian word signifying \u201ccanal,\u201d\nand Gihon may be the Accadian Gukhan, the stream on which Babylon stood.\nEven the word _cherub_ is itself of Babylonian derivation. It is the name\ngiven to one of those winged monsters, with the body of a bull and the\nhead of a man, which are sometimes placed in the Assyrian sculptures on\neither side of the tree of life. They stood at the entrance of a\nBabylonian palace, and were supposed to prevent the evil spirits from\nentering within. The word comes from a root which means \u201cto approach\u201d or\n\u201cbe near,\u201d and perhaps originally signified one who was near to God.\n\nLike _cherub_, _Adam_ also was a Babylonian word. It has the general sense\nof \u201cman,\u201d and is used in this sense both in Hebrew and in Assyrian. But as\nin Hebrew it has come to be the proper name of the first man, so, too, in\nthe old Babylonian legends, the \u201cAdamites\u201d were \u201cthe white race\u201d of\nSemitic descent, who stood in marked contrast to \u201cthe black heads\u201d or\nAccadians of primitive Babylonia. Originally, however, it was this dark\nrace itself that claimed to have been \u201cthe men\u201d whom the god Merodach\ncreated; and it was not until after the Semitic conquest of Chaldea that\nthe children of Adamu or Adam were supposed to denote the white Semitic\npopulation. Hence it is that the dark race continued to the last to be\ncalled the Adamatu or \u201cred-skins,\u201d which a popular etymology connected\nwith _Adamu_ \u201cman.\u201d Sir H. Rawlinson has suggested a parallel between the\ndark and white races of Babylonia and the \u201csons of God\u201d and \u201cdaughters of\nmen\u201d of Genesis. Adam, we are told, was \u201cthe son of God\u201d (Luke iii. 38).\nBut nothing similar to what we read in the sixth chapter of Genesis has as\nyet been met with among the cuneiform records, and though these speak of\ngiant heroes, like Ner and Etanna, who lived before the Flood, we know\nnothing as yet as to their parentage.\n\nThe Babylonians, however, were well aware that the Deluge had been caused\nby the wickedness of the human race. It has often been remarked that\nthough traditions of a universal or a partial deluge are found all over\nthe world, it is only in the Old Testament that the cause assigned for it\nis a moral one. The Chaldean account of the Deluge, discovered by Mr.\nGeorge Smith, offers an exception to this rule. Here, as in Genesis,\nSisuthros, the Accadian Noah, is saved from destruction on account of his\npiety, the rest of mankind being drowned as a punishment for their sins.\n\nThe story of the Deluge formed the subject of more than one poem among the\nAccadians. Two of these were amalgamated together by the author of a great\nepic in twelve books, which described the adventures of a solar hero whose\nname cannot be read with certainty, but may provisionally be pronounced\nGisdhubar. The amalgamated account was introduced as an episode into the\neleventh book, the whole epic being arranged upon an astronomical\nprinciple, so that each book should correspond to one of the signs of the\nZodiac, the eleventh book consequently answering to Aquarius. Sisuthros,\nwho had been translated without dying, like the Biblical Enoch, is made to\ntell the story himself to Gisdhubar. Gisdhubar had travelled in search of\nhealth to the shores of the river of death at the mouth of the Euphrates,\nand here afar off in the other world he sees and talks with Sisuthros.\nFragments of several editions of the poem have been found, not only among\nthe ruins of Nineveh, but also in Babylonia; and by fitting these together\nit has been possible to recover almost the whole of the original text. The\ntranslations of it made by different scholars have necessarily improved\nwith the progress of Assyrian research, and though the first translation\ngiven to the world by Mr. George Smith was substantially correct, there\nwere many minor inaccuracies in it which have since had to be corrected.\nThe latest and best version is that which has been published by Professor\nHaupt. The following translation of the account is based upon it:\u2014\n\n(Col. I) \u201cSisuthros speaks to him, even to Gisdhubar: Let me reveal unto\nthee, Gisdhubar, the story of my preservation, and the oracle of the gods\nlet me tell to thee. The city of Surippak, the city which, as thou\nknowest, is built on the Euphrates, this city was already ancient when the\ngods within it set their hearts to bring on a deluge, even the great gods\nas many as there are\u2014their father Anu, their king the warrior Bel, their\nthrone-bearer Adar, their prince En-nugi. Ea, the lord of wisdom, sat\nalong with them, and repeated their decree: \u2018For their boat! as a boat, as\na boat, a hull, a hull! hearken to their boat, and understand the hull, O\nman of Surippak, son of Ubara-Tutu; dig up the house, build the ship, save\nwhat thou canst of the germ of life. (The gods) will destroy the seed of\nlife, but do thou live, and bid the seed of life of every kind mount into\nthe midst of the ship. The ship which thou shalt build, ... cubits shall\nbe its length in measure, ... cubits the content of its breadth and its\nheight. (Above) the deep cover it in.\u2019 I understood and spake to Ea, my\nlord: \u2018The building of the ship which thou hast commanded thus, if it be\ndone by me, the children of the people and the old men (alike will laugh\nat me).\u2019 Ea opened his mouth and said, he speaks to me his servant: \u2018(If\nthey laugh at thee) thou shalt say unto them, (Every one) who has turned\nagainst me and (dis-believes the oracle that) has been given me, ... I\nwill judge above and below. (But as for thee) shut (not) the door (until)\nthe time comes of which I will send thee word. (Then) enter the door of\nthe ship, and bring into the midst of it thy corn, thy property, and thy\ngoods, thy (family), thy household, thy concubines, and the sons of the\npeople. The cattle of the field, the wild beasts of the field, as many as\nI would preserve, I will send unto thee, and they shall keep thy door.\u2019\nSisuthros opened his mouth and speaks; he says to Ea, his lord: \u2018(O my\nlord) no one yet has built a ship (in this fashion) on land to contain the\nbeasts (of the field). (The plan?) let me see and the ship (I will build).\nOn the land the ship (I will build) as thou hast commanded me.\u2019...\n\n(Col. II) \u201c... On the fifth day (after it was begun) in its circuit(?)\nfourteen measures its hull (measured); fourteen measures measured (the\nroof) above it. I made it a dwelling-house(?).... I enclosed it. I\ncompacted it six times, I divided (its passages) seven times, I divided\nits interior (seven) times. Leaks for the waters in the midst of it I cut\noff. I saw the rents, and what was wanting I added. Three _sari_ of\nbitumen I poured over the outside. Three _sari_ of bitumen I poured over\nthe inside. Three _sari_ of men, carrying baskets, who carried on their\nheads food, I provided, even a _saros_ of food for the people to eat,\nwhile two _sari_ of food the boatmen shared. To (the gods) I caused oxen\nto be sacrificed; I (established offerings) each day. In (the ship) beer,\nfood, and wine (I collected) like the waters of a river, and (I heaped\nthem up) like the dust(?) of the earth, and (in the ship) the food with my\nhand I placed. (With the help) of Samas [the Sun-God] the compacting of\nthe ship was finished; (all parts of the ship) were made strong, and I\ncaused the tackling to be carried above and below. (Then of my household)\nwent two-thirds: all that I had I heaped together; all that I had of\nsilver I heaped together; all that I had of gold I heaped together; all\nthat I had of the seed of life I heaped together. I brought the whole up\ninto the ship; all my slaves and concubines, the cattle of the field, the\nbeasts of the field, the sons of the people, all of them, did I bring up.\nThe season Samas fixed, and he spake, saying: \u2018In the night will I cause\nthe heaven to rain destruction. Enter into the midst of the ship and close\nthy door.\u2019 The season came round; he spake, saying: \u2018In the night will I\ncause the heaven to rain destruction.\u2019 Of that day I reached the evening,\nthe day which I watched for with fear. I entered into the midst of the\nship and shut the door, that I might close the ship. To Buzur-sadi-rabi,\nthe boatman, I gave the palace, with all its goods. Then arose\nMu-seri-ina-namari (The Water of Dawn at Daylight) from the horizon of\nheaven (like) a black cloud. Rimmon in the midst of it thundered, and Nebo\nand the Wind-God go in front: the throne-bearers go over mountain and\nplain: Nergal the mighty removes the wicked; Adar goes overthrowing all\nbefore him. The spirits of earth carried the flood; in their terribleness\nthey sweep through the land; the deluge of Rimmon reaches unto heaven; all\nthat was light to (darkness) was turned.\n\n(Col. III) \u201c(The surface) of the land like (fire?) they wasted; (they\ndestroyed all) life from the face of the land; to battle against men they\nbrought (the waters). Brother saw not his brother; men knew not one\nanother. In heaven the gods feared the flood, and sought a refuge; they\nascended to the heaven of Anu. The gods, like a dog in his kennel,\ncrouched down in a heap. Istar cries like a mother, the great goddess\nutters her speech: \u2018All to clay is turned, and the evil I prophesied in\nthe presence of the gods, according as I prophesied evil in the presence\nof the gods, for the destruction of my people I prophesied (it) against\nthem; and though I their mother have begotten my people, like the spawn of\nthe fishes they fill the sea.\u2019 Then the gods were weeping with her because\nof the spirits of earth; the gods on a throne were seated in weeping;\ncovered were their lips because of the coming evil. Six days and nights\nthe wind, the flood, and the storm go on overwhelming. The seventh day\nwhen it approached the storm subsided, the flood which had fought against\n(men) like an armed host was quieted. The sea began to dry, and the wind\nand the flood ended. I watched the sea making a noise, and the whole of\nmankind was turned to clay; like reeds the corpses floated. I opened the\nwindow, and the light smote upon my face; I stooped and sat down; I weep,\nover my face flow my tears. I watch the regions at the edge of the sea; a\ndistrict rose twelve measures high. To the land of Nizir steered the ship;\nthe mountain of Nizir stopped the ship, and it was not able to pass over\nit. The first day, the second day, the mountain of Nizir stopped the ship.\nThe third day, the fourth day, the mountain of Nizir stopped the ship. The\nfifth day, the sixth day, the mountain of Nizir stopped the ship. The\nseventh day when it approached I sent forth a dove, and it left. The dove\nwent and returned, and found no resting-place, and it came back. Then I\nsent forth a swallow, and it left. The swallow went and returned, and\nfound no resting-place, and it came back. I sent forth a raven, and it\nleft. The raven went and saw the carrion on the water, and it ate, it\nswam, it wandered away; it did not return. I sent (the animals) forth to\nthe four winds, I sacrificed a sacrifice. I built an altar on the peak of\nthe mountain. I set vessels [each containing the third of an ephah] by\nsevens; underneath them I spread reeds, pine-wood, and spices. The gods\nsmelt the savour; the gods smelt the good savour; the gods gathered like\nflies over the sacrifices. Thereupon the great goddess at her approach\nlighted up the rainbow which Anu had created according to his glory. The\ncrystal brilliance of those gods before me may I not forget;\n\n(Col. IV) \u201cthose days I have thought of, and never may I forget them. May\nthe gods come to my altar; but may Bel not come to my altar, since he did\nnot consider but caused the flood, and my people he assigned to the abyss.\nWhen thereupon Bel at his approach saw the ship, Bel stopped; he was\nfilled with anger against the gods and the spirits of heaven: \u2019Let none\ncome forth alive! let no man live in the abyss!\u2019 Adar opened his mouth and\nspake, he says to the warrior Bel: \u2018Who except Ea can form a design? Yea,\nEa knows, and all things he communicates.\u2019 Ea opened his mouth and spake,\nhe says to the warrior Bel: \u2018Thou, O warrior prince of the gods, why, why\ndidst thou not consider but causedst a flood? Let the doer of sin bear his\nsin, let the doer of wickedness bear his wickedness. May the just prince\nnot be cut off, may the faithful not be (destroyed). Instead of causing a\nflood, let lions increase, that men may be minished; instead of causing a\nflood, let hy\u00e6nas increase, that men may be minished; instead of causing a\nflood, let a famine happen, that men may be (wasted); instead of causing a\nflood, let plague increase, that men may be (reduced). I did not reveal\nthe determination of the great gods To Sisuthros alone a dream I sent, and\nhe heard the determination of the gods.\u2019 When Bel had again taken counsel\nwith himself, he went up into the midst of the ship. He took my hand and\nbid me ascend, even me he bid ascend; he united my wife to my side; he\nturned himself to us and joined himself to us in covenant; he blesses us\n(thus): \u2018Hitherto Sisuthros has been a mortal man, but now Sisuthros and\nhis wife are united together in being raised to be like the gods; yea,\nSisuthros shall dwell afar off at the mouth of the rivers.\u2019 They took me,\nand afar off at the mouth of the rivers they made me dwell.\u201d\n\nIt is hardly necessary to indicate the points of agreement and\ndisagreement between this Babylonian account of the Deluge and that of\nGenesis. The most striking difference between the two, that which first\nmeets the eye, is the polytheism of the Babylonian version, in contrast\nwith the monotheism of the Biblical narrative. Here, in place of the gods\nof Chaldea, we are confronted by the one supreme Deity; we have no longer\nto do with a Bel who requires the intercession of Ea before he will\nconsent not to destroy the guiltless with the guilty; it is the Lord\nHimself who \u201csaid in His heart, I will not again curse the ground any more\nfor man\u2019s sake.\u201d In the Babylonian legend, moreover, Noah and Enoch have\nbeen confounded together; Sisuthros is not only saved from the waters of\nthe flood, but translated to the abode of the gods. The vessel itself in\nwhich the seed of life was preserved is not the same in the two accounts.\nAccording to the Hebrew narrative, it was an ark; according to the\nBabylonian poem, a ship. It is true that in one place it is called \u201ca\npalace,\u201d the word used being the same as that which in many passages of\nthe Old Testament is applied to God\u2019s \u201cpalace\u201d of heaven; but it is\nprovided with a pilot, Buzur-sadi-rabi, \u201cthe Sun-god of the mighty\nmountain,\u201d and Sisuthros is made to expostulate on the strangeness of\nbuilding a ship which should sail over the land. It must, however, be\nnoticed that the shrines in which the images of the gods were carried in\nBabylonia were called \u201cships,\u201d and that these \u201cships\u201d corresponded with\nthe ark of the Hebrew tabernacle.\n\nThe land of Nizir, in which the vessel of Sisuthros rested, was among the\nmountains of Pir Mam, to the north-east of Babylonia. Rowandiz, the\nhighest peak in this part of Asia, rises a little to the north of the Pir\nMam, and it seems probable, therefore, that it represents \u201cthe mountain of\nNizir.\u201d The whole country had been included by the Accadians in the vast\nterritory of Guti, or Gutium, which roughly corresponds with the modern\nKurdistan. It is accordingly worth notice that a wide-spread eastern\ntradition makes Gebel Gudi, or Mount Gudi, the mountain on which the ark\nrested, and that in early Jewish legend this mountain is called Lubar or\nBaris, the boundary between Armenia and Kurdistan, in the land of the\nMinni. Ararat, or Urardhu, as it is written in the cuneiform inscriptions,\ndenoted Armenia, and more particularly the district about Lake Van; so\nthat \u201cthe mountains of Ararat,\u201d of which Genesis speaks, might easily have\nbeen the Kurdish ranges of Southern Armenia. It was not until a very late\nperiod that the name of Ararat was first applied and then confined to the\nlofty mountains in the north.\n\nRowandiz seems also to have been regarded in Accadian mythology as the\nOlympos on which the gods dwelt. In this case it was usually called \u201cthe\nmountain of the east;\u201d but the east was here the north-east, since other\nlegends identified it with Aralu, or Hades, the mountain of gold which was\nfabled to be in the far north. It is to this Accadian Olympos that\nreference is made in Isa. xiv. 13, where the King of Babylon is described\nas boasting that he would \u201cascend into heaven, and exalt his throne above\nthe stars of the gods,\u201d that he would \u201csit on the mountain of the assembly\nof the gods in the extremities of the north.\u201d The mountain was sometimes\nknown as the \u201cmountain of the world,\u201d since the firmament was supposed to\nrevolve on its peak as on a pivot. We must not imagine, however, that the\nAccadians, any more than the Greeks, actually believed the gods to live\nabove the clouds on the terrestrial Rowandiz, except at a very early\nperiod in their history. Just as we do not think of the sky when we use\nthe word heaven in a spiritual sense, so by \u201cthe mountain of the assembly\nof the gods\u201d they meant a spiritual mountain, of which Rowandiz was the\nearthly type. It is in this way that we must explain the position assigned\nto Sisuthros after his translation. He does not live along with the gods\nin the north, but has his station fixed \u201cat the mouth of the rivers\u201d\nEuphrates and Tigris, which in ancient times flowed into the Persian Gulf\nthrough separate channels. At an epoch when the geographical knowledge of\nthe Accadians did not extend very far, the unknown district beyond the\nmouth of the Euphrates became a representative of the other world; and the\nEuphrates itself was identified with Datilla, the river of \u201cthe God of\nlife and death,\u201d as well as with the stream or \u201cgreat deep\u201d which was\nsupposed to encircle the earth like a monstrous serpent.\n\nThe name of the Chaldean Noah, Sisuthros, or, as it is written in the\ncuneiform, Khasis-adra, or Adra-khasis, is really a title, given to him on\naccount of his righteousness, and signifying \u201cwise (and) pious.\u201d His\nproper name is one which means \u201cthe Sun of Life,\u201d though the exact\npronunciation of it is somewhat uncertain. Neither of these names agrees\nwith that of the Biblical Noah, but the latter has received a full\nexplanation from the Assyrian language, where it signifies \u201crest.\u201d\n\nAfter the Flood, we are told in Genesis that men journeyed from the east\nuntil they came to the plain of Shinar, where they built the tower of\nBabel, in the vain hope of ascending into heaven. God, however, confounded\ntheir language and scattered them over the face of the earth. The\nreferences in this narrative to Shinar and Babel, or Babylon, indicate\nthat here again we may expect to find a Babylonian account of the\nConfusion of Tongues, just as we have found a Babylonian account of the\nDeluge. As we have seen, the Accadians regarded themselves as having come\nfrom the \u201cmountain of the east\u201d where the ark had rested, while Shinar is\nthe Hebrew form of the native name Sumir\u2014or Sungir, as it was pronounced\nin the allied dialect of Accad\u2014the southern half of pre-Semitic Babylonia.\nNow Mr. George Smith discovered some broken fragments of a cuneiform text\nwhich evidently related to the building of the Tower of Babel. It tells us\nhow certain men had \u201cturned against the father of all the gods,\u201d and how\nthe thoughts of their leader\u2019s heart \u201cwere evil.\u201d At Babylon they essayed\nto build \u201ca mound\u201d or hill-like tower, but the winds blew down their work,\nand Anu \u201cconfounded great and small on the mound,\u201d as well as their\n\u201cspeech,\u201d and \u201cmade strange their counsel.\u201d The very word that is used in\nthe sense of \u201cconfounding\u201d in the narrative of Genesis is used also in the\nAssyrian text. The Biblical writer, by a play upon words, not uncommon in\nthe Old Testament, compares it with the name of Babel, though\netymologically the latter word has nothing to do with it. Babel is the\nAssyrian Babili, \u201cGate of God,\u201d and is merely a Semitic translation of the\nold Accadian (or rather Sumirian) name of the town, Ca-dim\u00edra, where Ca is\n\u201cgate\u201d and dim\u00edra \u201cGod.\u201d Chaldean tradition assigned the construction of\nthe tower and the consequent confusion of languages to the time of the\nautumnal equinox; and it is possible that the hero-king Etanna (Titan in\nGreek writers), who is stated to have built a city in defiance of the will\nof heaven, was the wicked chief under whom the tower was raised.\n\nThe confusion of tongues was followed by the dispersion of mankind. The\nearth was again peopled by the descendants of the three sons of Noah\u2014Shem,\nHam, and Japhet. Shem is the Assyrian Samu, \u201colive-coloured,\u201d Ham is\nKhammu, \u201cburned black,\u201d and Japhet Ippat, \u201cthe white race.\u201d The tribes and\nraces which drew their origin from them are enumerated in the tenth\nchapter of Genesis. The arrangement of this chapter, however, is\ngeographical, not ethnological; the peoples named in it being grouped\ntogether according to their geographical position, not according to their\nrelationship in blood or language. Here it is that the non-Semitic\nElamites are classed along with the Semitic Assyrians, and that the\nPh\u0153nicians of Canaan, who spoke the same language as the Hebrews, and\noriginally came from the same ancestors, are associated with the\nEgyptians. When this fact is recognised, there is no difficulty in showing\nthat the statements of the chapter are fully consistent with the\nconclusions of modern research.\n\nThe Assyrian inscriptions have thrown a good deal of light upon the names\ncontained in it. Gomer, the son of Japhet, represents the Gimirrai of the\ninscriptions, the Kimmerians of classical writers. Pressed by the Scyths\nof the Russian steppes, they threatened to overrun the Assyrian empire\nunder a leader named Teispes, but were defeated by Esar-haddon, in B.C.\n670, in a great battle on the north-eastern frontier of his kingdom, and\ndriven westwards into Asia Minor. There they sacked the Greek town of\nSin\u00f4p\u00e8, and spread like locusts over the fertile plains of Lydia. Among\nthe gifts sent to Nineveh by the Lydian king, Gugu or Gyges\u2014a name in\nwhich we may see the Gog of Ezekiel\u2014were two Kimmerian chieftains whom he\nhad captured with his own hand. Gyges was afterwards slain in battle with\nthe barbarians, and it required some years before they could be finally\nextirpated.\n\nMadai are the Medes, a title given by the Assyrians to the multifarious\ntribes to the east of Kurdistan. They are first mentioned in the\ninscriptions about 820 B.C., and were partially subdued by Tiglath-Pileser\nII and his successors. At this time they lived in independent communities,\neach governed by its \u201ccity-chief.\u201d The Median empire, which rose upon the\nruins of Nineveh, was really the creation of the kings of Ekbatana, the\nmodern Hamadan. The population of this district was known among the\nBabylonians as _manda_, or \u201cbarbarians;\u201d and through a confusion of the\nlatter word with the proper name Mad\u00e2, or \u201cMedes,\u201d historians have been\nled to suppose that the empire of Ekbatana was a Median one.\n\nJavan is the Greek word \u201cIonian,\u201d but in the Old Testament it is generally\napplied to the island of Cyprus, which is called the Island of Yavnan, or\nthe Ionians, on the Assyrian monuments. A more specific name for it in\nHebrew is Kittim, derived from the name of the Ph\u0153nician colony of Kition,\nnow represented by Larnaka. Cyprus was first visited by the Babylonians at\na very remote period, since Sargon I of Accad, who, according to Nabonidos\n(B.C. 550), lived 3,200 years before his time, carried his arms as far as\nits shores. As for Tubal and Meshech, they are as frequently associated\ntogether in the Assyrian inscriptions as they are in the Bible. The Tubal\nor Tibar\u00eani spread in Old Testament times over the south-eastern part of\nKappadokia, while the Meshech or Moschi adjoined them on the north and\nwest. Ashkenaz is the Assyrian Asguza, the name of a district which lay\nbetween the kingdoms of Ekbatana and the Minni.\n\nCush and Mizraim denote Ethiopia and Egypt, Ethiopia roughly corresponding\nto the Nubia of today. As Ethiopia was largely peopled by tribes who had\ncome across the Red Sea from Southern Arabia, the name of Cush was given\nin the Old Testament (as in verse 7 of this chapter) to Southern Arabia\nalso. Properly speaking, however, it denoted the country which commenced\non the southern side of the First Cataract. Mizraim means \u201cthe two\nMatsors,\u201d that is Upper and Lower Egypt. Lower Egypt was the original\nMatsor, a word which signifies \u201cwall,\u201d and referred to the line of\nfortification which defended the kingdom on the eastern side from the\nattacks of Asiatic tribes. The word occurs more than once in the Biblical\nwriters, though its sense has been obscured in the Authorised Version.\nThus in Isaiah xxxvii. 25, Sennacherib boasts that he has \u201cdried up all\nthe rivers of Matsor,\u201d that is to say, the mouths of the Nile; and in\nIsaiah xix. 6, we ought to translate \u201cthe Nile-arms of Matsor,\u201d instead of\n\u201cbrooks of defence.\u201d While Matsor was the name of Lower Egypt, Upper Egypt\nwas termed Pathros (Isa. xi. 11), which is the Egyptian Pe-to-res or\n\u201csouthern land.\u201d The Pathrusim or inhabitants of Pathros are mentioned\namong the sons of Mizraim in the chapter of Genesis upon which we are\nengaged.\n\nPhut seems to be the Egyptian Punt, on the Somali coast. Spices and other\nprecious objects of merchandise were brought from it, and the Egyptians\nsometimes called it \u201cthe divine land.\u201d The Lehabim of verse 13 are the\nLibyans, while the Naphtuhim may be the people of Napata in Ethiopia. The\nCaphtorim or inhabitants of Caphtor are the Ph\u0153nician population settled\non the coast of the Delta. From an early period the whole of this district\nhad been colonised by the Ph\u0153nicians, and, as Ph\u0153nicia itself was called\nKeft by the Egyptians, the part of Egypt in which they had settled went by\nthe name of Keft-ur or \u201cgreater Ph\u0153nicia.\u201d From various passages of the\nOld Testament(1) we learn that the Philistines, whom the kings of Egypt\nhad once employed to garrison the five cities in the extreme south of\nPalestine, had originally been Ph\u0153nicians of Caphtor, so that the words of\nthe verse before us must have been moved from their proper place,\n\u201cCaphtorim, out of whom came Philistim,\u201d being the correct reading.\n\nCanaan signifies \u201cthe lowlands,\u201d and was primarily the name of the coast\non which the great cities of Ph\u0153nicia were built. As, however, the inland\nparts of the country were inhabited by a kindred population, the name came\nto be extended to designate the whole of Palestine, just as Palestine\nitself meant originally only the small territory of the Philistines. In\nIsaiah\u2019s prophecy upon Tyre (xxiii. 11) the word is used in its primitive\nsense, though here again the Authorised Version has misled the English\nreader by mistranslating \u201cthe merchant-city\u201d instead of \u201cCanaan.\u201d Sidon,\n\u201cthe fishers\u2019 town,\u201d was the oldest of the Canaanite or Ph\u0153nician cities;\nlike Tyre, it was divided into two quarters, known respectively as Greater\nand Lesser Sidon. Heth or the Hithites adjoined the Ph\u0153nicians on the\nnorth; we shall have a good deal to say about them in a future chapter,\nand therefore pass them by now. The Amorite was the inhabitant of the\nmountains of Palestine, in contrast to the Canaanite or lowlander, and the\nname is met with on the Egyptian monuments. The towns of Arka and Simirra\n(or Zemar) are both mentioned by Tiglath-Pileser II, while the city of\nArvad or Arados (now Ru\u00e2d) is repeatedly named in the Assyrian\ninscriptions. So also is Hamath (now Hamah), which was conquered by\nSargon, and made by him the seat of an Assyrian governor.\n\nThe name of Elam has first received its explanation from the decipherment\nof the Assyrian texts. It was the name of the mountainous region to the\neast of Babylonia, of which Shushan or Susa was at one time the capital,\nand is nothing more than the Assyrian word _elam_, \u201chigh.\u201d _Elam_ was\nitself a translation of the Accadian _Numma_, under which the Accadians\nincluded the whole of the highlands which bounded the plain of Babylonia\non its eastern side. It was the seat of an ancient monarchy which rivalled\nin antiquity that of Chaldea itself, and was long a dangerous neighbour to\nthe latter. It was finally overthrown, however, by Assur-bani-pal, the\nAssyrian king, about B.C. 645. The native title of the country was Anzan\nor Ansan, and the name of its capital, Susan or Shushan, seems to have\nsignified \u201cthe old town\u201d in the language of its inhabitants.\n\nAsshur or Assur was originally the name of a city on the banks of the\nTigris, the ruins of which are now known as Kalah Sherghat. The name was\nof Accadian derivation, and signified \u201cwater-bank.\u201d The city long\ncontinued to be the capital of the district which was called after it\nAssyria, but was eventually supplanted by Ninua or Nineveh. Nineveh lay\nopposite the present town of Mosul, and it is from the remains of its\nchief palace, now buried under the mounds of Kouyunjik, that most of the\nAssyrian inscriptions in the British Museum have been brought. A few miles\nto the south of Nineveh, on the site now known as Nimr\u00fbd, was Calah, a\ntown built by Shalmaneser I, who lived B.C. 1300. Calah subsequently fell\ninto ruins, but was rebuilt in the ninth century before our era. \u201cBetween\nNineveh and Calah\u201d stood Resen, according to Genesis. Resen is the\nAssyrian _Ris-eni_, \u201chead of the stream,\u201d which is once mentioned in an\ninscription of Sennacherib. Rehoboth \u00b4Ir, or \u201cthe open spaces of the\ncity,\u201d must have denoted the suburbs of Nineveh, and cannot be identified\nwith Dur-Sarrukin, founded by Sargon at Khorsabad, several miles to the\nnorth.\n\nIt is plain from the context that Arphaxad must signify Chaldea; and this\nconclusion is verified by the fact that the name might also be pronounced\nArpa-Chesed, or \u201cborder of Chald\u00e6a.\u201d Chesed is the singular of Casdim, the\nword used in the Old Testament to denote the inhabitants of Babylonia. The\norigin of it is doubtful, but, as has been suggested above, it most\nprobably represents the Assyrian _casidi_, \u201cconquerors,\u201d a term which\nmight very well be applied to the Semitic conquerors of Sumir and Accad.\nThe Greek word Chaldeans is derived from the Kald\u00e2, a tribe which lived on\nthe shores of the Persian Gulf, and is first heard of in the ninth century\nbefore our era. Under Merodach-Baladan, the Kald\u00e2 made themselves masters\nof Babylonia, and became so integral a part of the population as to give\ntheir name to the whole of it in classical times.\n\nAram, the brother of Arphaxad, represents, of course, the Aram\u00e6ans of\nAram, or \u201cthe highlands,\u201d which included the greater part of Mesopotamia\nand Syria. In the later days of the Assyrian Empire, Aramaic, the language\nof Aram, became the common language of trade and diplomacy, which every\nmerchant and politician was supposed to learn, and in still later times\nsucceeded in supplanting Assyrian in Assyria and Babylonia, as well as\nHebrew in Palestine, until in its turn it was supplanted by Arabic.\n\nLud seems to be a misreading; at all events, Lydia and the Lydians, on the\nextreme western coast of Asia Minor, had nothing to do with the peoples of\nElam, of Assyria, and of Aram. What the original reading was, however, it\nis now impossible to say.\n\nIn the midst of all these geographical names we find a notice inserted\nrelating to \u201cthe mighty hunter\u201d Nimrod, the beginning of whose kingdom, we\nare told, was Babylon, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh in the land of\nShinar. His name has not yet been discovered in the cuneiform records.\nSome Assyrian scholars have wished to identify him with Gisdhubar, the\nhero of the great Chaldean epic, which contains the account of the Deluge;\nbut Gisdhubar was a solar hero who had originally been the Accadian god of\nfire. It is true that Gisdhubar was the special deity of the town of\nMarad, and that Na-Marad would signify in the Accadian language \u201cthe\nprince of Marad\u201d; such a title, however, has not been found in the\ninscriptions. Erech, called Uruk on the monuments, is now represented by\nthe mounds of Warka, far away to the south of Babylon, and was one of the\noldest and most important of the Babylonian cities. Like Calneh, the\nKul-unu of the monuments, it was situated in the division of the country\nknown as Sumir or Shinar. Accad, from which the northern division of the\ncountry took its name, was a suburb of Sippara (now Abu-Habba), and, along\nwith the latter, made up the Sepharvaim or \u201cTwo Sipparas\u201d of Scripture.\nThe Accadian form of the name was Agad\u00ea, and here was the seat of a great\nlibrary formed in remote days by Sargon I, and containing, among other\ntreasures, a work on astronomy and astrology in seventy-two books.\n\nThe translation of the verse which follows the list of Nimrod\u2019s Babylonian\ncities is doubtful. It is a question whether we should render with the\nAuthorised Version: \u201cOut of that land went forth Asshur,\u201d or prefer the\nalternative translation: \u201cOut of that land he went forth to Assyria.\u201d The\nlatter is favoured by Micah v. 6, where \u201cthe land of Nimrod\u201d appears to\nmean Assyria. But the question cannot be finally decided until we discover\nsome positive information about Nimrod on the monuments.\n\nIf, however, little light has been thrown by modern research on the person\nof Nimrod, this is by no means the case as regards Abraham. Abu-ramu or\nAbram, \u201cthe exalted father,\u201d Abraham\u2019s original name, is a name which also\noccurs on early Babylonian contract-tablets. Sarah, again, is the Assyrian\n_sarrat_, \u201cqueen,\u201d while Milcah, the daughter of Haran, is the Assyrian\n_milcat_, \u201cprincess.\u201d The site of Ur of the Chaldees, the birthplace of\nAbram, has been discovered, and excavations have been made among the ruins\nof its temples. The site is now called Mugheir, and lies on the western\nside of the Euphrates, on the border of the desert, immediately to the\nwest of Erech. The chief temple of Ur was dedicated to the moon-god, and\nthe Accadian inscriptions on its bricks, which record its foundation, are\namong the earliest that we possess. It was, in fact, the capital of one of\nthe oldest of the pre-Semitic dynasties, and its very name, Uru or Ur, is\nonly the Semitic form of the Accadian _eri_, \u201ccity.\u201d It is probable that\nit had passed into the hands of the Semitic \u201cCasdim\u201d before the age of\nAbraham; at all events, it had long been the resort of Semitic traders,\nwho had ceased to lead the roving life of their ancestors in the Arabian\ndesert. From Ur, Abraham\u2019s father had migrated to Haran, in the northern\npart of Mesopotamia, on the high road which led from Babylonia and Assyria\ninto Syria and Palestine. Why he should have migrated to so distant a city\nhas been a great puzzle, and has tempted scholars to place both Ur and\nHaran in wrong localities; but here, again, the cuneiform inscriptions\nhave at last furnished us with the key. As far back as the Accadian epoch,\nthe district in which Haran was built belonged to the rulers of Babylonia;\nHaran was, in fact, the frontier town of the empire, commanding at once\nthe highway into the west and the fords of the Euphrates; the name itself\nwas an Accadian one signifying \u201cthe road\u201d; and the deity to whom it was\ndedicated was the moon-god of Ur. The symbol of this deity was a conical\nstone, with a star above it, and gems with this symbol engraved upon them\nmay be seen in the British Museum.\n\nThe road which passed through Haran was well known to the Chaldean kings\nand their subjects. Sargon I of Accad, and his son Naram-Sin, had already\nmade expeditions into the far west. Sargon had carved his image on the\nrocks of the Mediterranean coast, and had even crossed over into the\nisland of Cyprus. The campaign, therefore, of Chedor-laomer and his\nallies, recorded in the fourteenth chapter of Genesis, was no new thing.\nThe soil of Canaan had already felt the tramp of Babylonian feet. We can\neven fix the approximate date at which the campaign took place, and when\nAbraham and his confederates surprised the invaders and recovered from\nthem the spoils of Southern Palestine. For twelve years, we are told, the\ntribes in the neighbourhood of the Dead Sea had served Chedor-laomer, king\nof Elam, and then they rebelled; but the rebellion was quickly followed by\ninvasion. Chedor-laomer and \u201cthe kings that were with him,\u201d\u2014Amraphel, king\nof Shinar, Arioch, king of Ellasar, and Tidal, \u201cking of nations,\u201d\u2014marched\nagainst the revolters, overthrew them in battle, and carried them away\ncaptive. The name of Arioch is actually found on the cuneiform monuments.\nBricks have been discovered engraved with the legend of Eri-aku, king of\nLarsa, the son of Kudur-Mabug the Elamite. Eri-aku means in Accadian \u201cthe\nservant of the moon-god,\u201d and Larsa, his capital, is now represented by\nthe mounds of Senkereh, a little to the east of Erech. Kudur-Mabug is\nentitled \u201cthe father of Palestine,\u201d and it would, therefore, seem that he\nclaimed supremacy over Canaan. His name is an Elamite one, signifying \u201cthe\nservant of the god Mabug,\u201d and is closely parallel to the Biblical\nChedor-laomer, that is, Kudur-Lagamar, \u201cthe servant of the god Lagamar.\u201d\nLagamar and Mabug, however, were different deities, and we cannot,\ntherefore, identify Chedor-laomer and Kudur-Mabug together. But it is\nhighly probable that they were brothers, Chedor-laomer being the elder,\nwho held sway in Elam, while his nephew Eri-aku owned allegiance to him in\nSouthern Babylonia. At any rate, it is plain from the history of Genesis\nthat Babylon was at this time subject to Elam, and under the government of\nmore than one ruler. Amraphel would have been king of that portion of\nSumir, or Southern Chaldea, which was not comprised in the dominions of\nthe king of Larsa; and the fact that the narrative begins by stating that\nthe campaign in Palestine was made in his days, seems to imply that the\nwhole account has been extracted from the Babylonian archives. As for\n\u201cTidal, king of nations,\u201d it is very possible that we ought to read Turgal\n(Thorgal), with the Septuagint, while Goyyim or \u201cnations\u201d has been shown\nby Sir Henry Rawlinson to be a misreading for Gutium, the name given to\nthe tract of country northward of Babylonia, which stretched from\nMesopotamia to the mountains of Kurdistan, and within which the kingdom of\nAssyria afterwards arose.\n\nNow, the Assyrian king Assur-bani-pal tells us that an image of the\ngoddess Nana had been carried away from Babylonia by the Elamite king\nKudur-Nankhundi when he overran Chaldea 1635 years before his own time,\nthat is to say, in 2280 B.C. It is possible that this invasion of the\ncountry by Kudur-Nankhundi was the beginning of Elamite supremacy in\nBabylonia, and that Kudur-Mabug and Chedor-laomer were descendants of his.\nIf so, we shall have an approximate date for the rescue of Lot by Abraham,\nand consequently for the age of Abraham himself.\n\nThe fourteenth chapter of Genesis is the last in the Book that relates to\nBabylonia. The history now turns to Egypt; and it is, therefore, from the\nmonuments of Egypt, and not from those of Babylonia and Assyria, that we\nhenceforth have to look for light and information.\n\nNo traditions of a deluge had been preserved among the Egyptians. They\nbelieved, however, that there was a time when the greater part of mankind\nhad been destroyed by the angry gods. A myth told how men had once uttered\nhostile words against their creator Ra, the Sun-God, who accordingly sent\nthe goddess Hathor to slay them, so that the earth was covered with their\nblood as far as the town of Herakleopolis. Then Ra drank 7,000 cups of\nwine, made from the fruits of Egypt and mingled with the blood of the\nslain; his heart rejoiced, and he made an oath that he would not destroy\nmankind again. Rain filled the wells, and Ra went forth to fight against\nhis human foes. Their bows were broken and themselves slaughtered, and the\ngod returned victorious to heaven, where he created Paradise and the\npeople of the stars. This myth agrees with another, according to which\nmankind had emanated from the eyes of Ra, though there was a different\nlegend of the creation, which asserted that all men, with the exception of\nthe negroes, had sprung from the tears of the two deities Horus and\nSekhet.\n\nWhen Abraham went down into Egypt the empire was already very old. Its\nhistory begins with Menes, who united the independent states of the Nile\nvalley into a single kingdom, and established his capital at Memphis. The\nfirst six dynasties of kings, who reigned 1,478 years, represent what is\ncalled the Old Empire. It was under the monarchs of the fourth dynasty\nthat the pyramids of Gizeh were built; and at no time during its later\nhistory did the art and culture of Egypt reach again so high a level as it\ndid under the Old Empire. With the close of the sixth dynasty came a\nperiod of disaster and decline. When Egypt again emerged into the light of\nhistory it was under the warrior princes of the twelfth dynasty. The\ncapital had been shifted to the new city of Thebes, in the south, a new\ngod, Amun, presided over the Egyptian deities, and the ruling class itself\ndiffered in blood and features from the men of the Old Empire. Henceforth\nEgyptian art was characterised by a stiff conventionality wholly unlike\nthe freedom and vigour of the art of the early dynasties; the government\nbecame more autocratic; and the obelisk took the place of the pyramid in\narchitecture. But the Middle Empire, as it has been termed, did not last\nlong. Semitic invaders from Canaan and Arabia overran the country, and\nestablished their seat at Zoan or Tanis. For 511 years they held the\nEgyptians in bondage, though the native princes, who had taken refuge in\nthe south, gradually acquired more and more power, until at last, under\nthe leadership of Aahmes or Amosis, the founder of the eighteenth dynasty,\nthey succeeded in driving the hated foreigners out. These foreigners are\nknown to history as the Hyksos or Shepherds, Hyksos being the Egyptian\n_hik shasu_, \u201cprince of the Shasu,\u201d or \u201cBeduins.\u201d The name which they bear\nupon the monuments is Menti.\n\nIt must have been while the Hyksos monarchs were holding their court at\nZoan that Abraham entered the land. He found there men of Semitic blood,\nlike himself, and speaking a Semitic language. A welcome was assured him,\nand he had no need of an interpreter. But the Hyksos kings had already\nbegun to assume Egyptian state and to adopt Egyptian customs. In place of\nthe Semitic _shalat_, \u201cruler,\u201d the title by which their first leaders had\nbeen known, they had borrowed the Egyptian title of Pharaoh. Pharaoh\nappears on the monuments as _pir-aa_, \u201cgreat house,\u201d the palace in which\nthe king lived being used to denote the king himself, just as in our own\ntime the \u201cporte\u201d or gate of the palace has become synonymous with the\nTurkish Sultan.\n\nBy the time that Joseph was sold into Egypt there was little outward\ndifference between the court at Zoan and the court of the native princes\nat Thebes. The very names and titles borne by the Hyksos officials had\nbecome Egyptian; and though they still regarded the god Set as the chief\nobject of their worship, they had begun to rebuild the Egyptian temples,\nand pay honour to the Egyptian deities. Potiphar, to whom Joseph was sold,\nbore a purely Egyptian name, meaning \u201cthe gift of the risen one,\u201d while\nthe name of Potipherah, the high priest of On, whose daughter, Asenath,\nwas married by Joseph, is equally Egyptian, and signifies \u201cthe gift of the\nSun-God.\u201d The Sun-God was the special deity of On; to him the great temple\nof the city was dedicated, and the name by which the place was known to\nthe Greeks was Heliopolis, \u201cthe city of the sun.\u201d It was the city whose\nname is played upon in Isaiah xix. 18, where the prophet declares that in\nthe day when Egypt shall be converted to the Lord, \u201cthe City of the Sun\u201d\n(_\u2019ir ha-kheres_) shall become \u201cthe city of the destruction\u201d of idols\n(_\u2019ir ha-heres_). Jeremiah, too, plays similarly upon the name, when he\nsays that Nebuchadnezzar, \u201cshall break also the images of Beth-Shemesh\n(the house of the Sun-God) that is in the land of Egypt\u201d (Jer. xliii. 13);\nwhile Ezekiel changes the Egyptian word On into the Hebrew _aven_,\n\u201cnothingness,\u201d and prophesies that \u201cthe young men of Aven shall fall by\nthe sword\u201d (Ezek. xxx. 17). The ruins of On are within an afternoon\u2019s\ndrive of Cairo: but nothing remains of the city except mounds of earth,\nand a solitary obelisk that once stood in front of the great temple of the\nsun, and had been reared by Usertasen I, of the twelfth dynasty, a\nthousand years before the daughter of its priest became the wife of\nJoseph. The name of this daughter, Asenath, is the Egyptian \u2019Snat.\n\nWe are told that when the Pharaoh had made Joseph \u201cruler over all the land\nof Egypt\u201d he gave him a new name, Zaphnath-paaneah (Gen. xli. 45).\nAccording to Dr. Brugsch, this name is the Egyptian _Za pa-u nt\npa-aa-ankh_, \u201cgovernor of the district of the place of life,\u201d that is, of\nthe district in which the Israelites afterwards built the towns of Raamses\nand Pithom, and in which the land of Goshen seems to have been situated.\nIn after times Egyptian legend confounded Joseph with Moses, and changing\nthe divine name which formed the first element in his into that of the\nEgyptian god Osiris, called him Osar-siph. The Jewish historian, Josephus,\nhas preserved for us the story which made Osar-siph the leader of the\nIsraelites in their flight from Egypt.\n\nThe seven years\u2019 famine, which Joseph predicted, is a rare occurrence in\nEgypt. In a country where rain is almost unknown, the fertility of the\nfields depends upon the annual inundation of the Nile when swollen by the\nmelting snows of Abyssinia. It is only where the waters can penetrate, or\ncan be led by canals and irrigating machines, that the soil is capable of\nsupporting vegetation; but wherever this takes place the mud they bring\nwith them is so fertilising that the peasantry frequently grow three\nluxuriant crops on the same piece of ground during the same year. For the\ninundation to fail in any single year is not common; for it to fail seven\nyears running is a most unusual event. The last recorded time when there\nwas a seven years\u2019 failure of the river, and a consequent famine, was in\nA.D. 1064-1071, under the reign of the Khalif El-Mustansir Billah. A\nsimilar failure must have taken place in the age of the twelfth dynasty,\nsince Ameni, an officer of King Usurtasen I, who has engraved the history\nof his life at the entrance of his tomb among the cliffs of Beni-Hassan,\nstates that \u201cno one was hungry in my days, not even in the years of\nfamine. For I had tilled all the fields of the district of Mah, up to the\nsouthern and northern frontiers. Thus I prolonged the life of its\ninhabitants, and preserved the food which it produced. No hungry man was\nin it. I distributed equally to the widow as to the married woman. I did\nnot prefer the great to the humble in all that I gave away.\u201d(2)\n\nAnother long famine of the same kind happened at a later date, and may\npossibly be that against which Joseph provided in Northern Egypt. The\nsepulchral tablet of a nobleman, called Baba, far away at El-Kab in\nSouthern Egypt, informs us of the fact. In this the dead man is made to\nsay: \u201cWhen a famine arose, lasting many years, I distributed corn to the\ncity each year of famine.\u201d\n\nBaba is supposed to have lived shortly before the establishment of the\neighteenth dynasty; and this would agree very well with the date which we\nmust assign to Joseph. As we shall see in the next chapter, we now know\nthe exact period of Egyptian history at which the Exodus must have taken\nplace; and if we count 430 years, \u201cthe sojourning of the children of\nIsrael who dwelt in Egypt\u201d (Exod. xii. 40), back from this, we shall be\nbrought to the reign of the Hyksos king Apophis or Apepi, the very king,\nin fact, under whom, according to ancient authors, Joseph was raised to be\nthe _adon_, or second ruler of the state. It was not until the Hyksos were\ndriven out of the country, and Aahmes, the founder of the eighteenth\ndynasty, was pursuing with bitter hatred both them and their friends that\n\u201cthere arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.\u201d\n\nThe earlier history of Joseph in the house of Potiphar finds a curious\nparallel in an old Egyptian romance, known as the Tale of the Two\nBrothers, which was composed by a scribe named Enna in the thirteenth\ncentury B.C. Anepu, it is there said, sent his younger brother, Bata, from\nthe field where they were working, to fetch corn from the village. \u201cAnd\nthe young brother found the wife of his elder brother occupied in braiding\nher hair. And he said to her, \u2018Rise up, give me seed-corn, that I may\nreturn to the field, for thus has my elder brother enjoined me, to return\nwithout delay.\u2019 The woman said to him, \u2018Go in, open the chest, that thou\nmayest take what thine heart desires, otherwise my locks will fall by the\nway.\u2019 And the youth entered into the stable, and took thereout a large\nvessel, for it was his wish to carry away much seed-corn. And he loaded\nhimself with wheat and grains of durra, and went out with it. Then she\nsaid unto him, \u2018How great is the burden on thine arm?\u2019 He said to her,\n\u2018Two measures of durra and three measures of wheat, making together five\nmeasures, which rest on my arms.\u2019 Thus he spake to her. But she spake to\nthe youth and said, \u2018How great is thy strength! Well have I remarked thy\nvigour every time.\u2019 And her heart knew him!... And she stood up and laid\nhold of him, and she said to him, \u2018Come, let us enjoy an hour\u2019s rest. The\nmost beautiful things shall be thy portion, for I will prepare for thee\nfestal garments.\u2019 Then the youth became like the panther of the south for\nrage, on account of the evil word which she had spoken to him; but she was\nafraid beyond all measure. And he spoke to her and said, \u2018Thou, O woman,\nhast been to me like a mother, and thy husband like a father, for he is\nolder than I, so that he might have been my parent. Why this so great sin,\nthat thou hast spoken to me? Say it not to me another time, then will I\nnot tell it this time, and no word of it shall come out of my mouth about\nit to any man whatsoever.\u2019 And he loaded himself with his burden, and went\nout into the field. And he went to his elder brother, and they completed\ntheir day\u2019s work. When it was now evening, the elder brother returned home\nto his dwelling. And his young brother followed behind his oxen, which he\nhad laden with all the good things of the field, driving them before him,\nto prepare for their resting-place in the stable in the village. And,\nbehold, the wife of his elder brother was afraid because of the word which\nshe had spoken, and she took a jar of fat, and she made herself like one\nto whom an evil-doer had offered violence. She wished thereby to say to\nher husband, \u2018Thy young brother has offered me violence.\u2019 And her husband\nreturned home at evening, according to his daily custom, and entered into\nhis house, and found his wife stretched out and suffering from injury. She\ngave him no water for his hands, according to her custom. And the lamp was\nnot lighted, so that the house was in darkness. But she lay there and\nvomited. And her husband spoke to her thus, \u2018Who has had to do with thee?\nLift thyself up!\u2019 She said to him, \u2018No one has had to do with me except\nthy young brother; for when he came to take seed-corn for thee, he found\nme sitting alone, and he said to me, \u201cCome, let us make merry an hour and\nrest! Let down thy hair!\u201d Thus he spake to me; but I did not listen to him\n(but said), \u201cSee, am I not thy mother, and is not thy elder brother like a\nfather to thee?\u201d Thus I spoke to him; but he did not hearken to my speech,\nand used force with me, that I might not make a report to thee. Now, if\nthou allowest him to live, I will kill myself.\u2019 \u201d(3) Anepu then took a\nknife, and went out to kill his brother. The cows, however, warned Bata of\nhis danger, and the Sun-God came to his aid, and set a river full of\ncrocodiles between himself and Anepu. When Anepu eventually learned the\nreal truth, he hurried back to his house, and put his wife to death.\n\nNo name like that of Goshen, where the Israelites were settled by order of\nthe Pharaoh, has as yet been discovered upon the monuments. Goshen,\nhowever, could not have been far from the north-eastern frontier of Egypt,\nand from Genesis xlvii. 11, we learn that it was in the land of Rameses.\nNow, Dr. Brugsch has shown that Ramses, or Rameses, was the title given to\nZoan by Ramses II, when he raised it anew from the ruins in which it had\nlain since the expulsion of the Hyksos, and filled it again with stately\nedifices. Goshen consequently must have been in the neighbourhood of Zoan,\nas, indeed, we might expect, since Joseph\u2019s family would naturally be\nsettled not far from the capital and the residence of the powerful\nminister. It was from hence that Jacob\u2019s body, after being embalmed, as\nwas customary in Egypt, was carried to the old family tomb at Hebron; and\nwe can therefore understand why Zoan and Hebron were brought into such\nclose relation in the well-known passage of Numbers (xiii. 22) where it is\nsaid that \u201cHebron was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt.\u201d Hebron and\nZoan were the two points around which centred the patriarchal history\nwhich is set before us in the Book of Genesis.\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III. THE EXODUS OUT OF EGYPT.\n\n\n    _Egypt during the sojourn of the Israelites.\u2014The travels of an\n    Egyptian officer through Palestine before the time of\n    Joshua.\u2014Recent excavations at Tel el-Maskh\u00fbta.\u2014Discovery of the\n    treasure-chambers built by the Israelites.\u2014Date of the Exodus\n    fixed.\u2014Origin of the word J\u0115hov\u00e2h.\u2014The rite of\n    circumcision.\u2014Origin of the name Moses.\u2014Illustrations of Hebrew\n    law and ritual from Ph\u0153nician and Assyrian monuments.\u2014Tablet\n    describing the duties of a priest of Bel.\u2014The sacrificial tariff\n    of Marseilles.\u2014Ph\u0153nician texts found in Cyprus._\n\n\nThe expulsion of the Hyksos conquerors of Egypt, while it brought\noppression and slavery to their Semitic kindred who were left behind,\ninaugurated an era of conquest and glory for the Egyptians themselves. The\nwar against the Asiatics which had begun in Egypt was carried into Asia,\nand under Thothmes III and other great monarchs of the eighteenth dynasty\nthe Egyptian armies traversed Palestine and Syria, and penetrated as far\nas the Euphrates. The tribes of Canaan paid tribute; the Amorites or\n\u201chill-men\u201d were led into captivity; and the combined armies of Hittites\nand Ph\u0153nicians were defeated in the plain of Megiddo. On the temple-walls\nof Karnak at Thebes, Thothmes III (B.C. 1600) gives a list of the\nCanaanitish towns which had submitted to his arms. Among them we read the\nnames of Zarthan and Beroth, of Beth-Anoth and Gibeah, of Migdol and\nOphrah, of Taanach and Jibleam, of Shunem and Chinneroth, of Hazor and\nLaish, of Merom and Kishon, of Abel and Sharon, of Joppa and Achzib, of\nBeyrut and Accho, of Heshbon and Megiddo, of Hamath and Damascus. One of\nthe conquered places bears the curious name of Jacob-el, \u201cJacob the God,\u201d\nwhile mention is made of the Negeb, or \u201csouthern district,\u201d which\nafterwards formed part of the territory of Judah.\n\nTwo centuries later, when the troublous times which saw the close of the\neighteenth dynasty had ushered in the nineteenth, the same districts had\nagain to be overrun by the Egyptian kings. Once more victories were gained\nover the powerful Hittites, in their fortress of Kadesh, on the Orontes,\nand over the tribes of Palestine. Seti I, the father of Ramses II, records\namong his conquests Beth-Anoth and Kirjath-Anab(4) in the south, as well\nas Zor or Tyre. Ramses II himself, the Sesostris of the Greeks, battled\nfor long years against the Hittites on the plains of Canaan, and\nestablished a line of Egyptian fortresses as far north as Damascus. The\ntablets which he engraved at the mouth of the Dog River, near Beyr\u00fbt,\nstill remain to testify to his victories and campaigns. Representations\nwere sculptured on the walls of Thebes of the forts of \u201cTabor, in the land\nof the Amorites,\u201d of Merom and of Salem; and the capture of the revolted\ncity of Ashkelon was celebrated both in sculpture and in song.\n\nBut the most interesting record which has come down to us from his reign\nis the account given by a _mohar_, or military officer, of his travels\nthrough Palestine, at a time when the country was nominally tributary to\nEgypt. The _mohar_ made his tour during the latter part of the reign of\nRamses II, the oppressor of the Israelites, so that the account he has\ngiven of Canaan shows us what it was like shortly before its conquest by\nJoshua. He journeyed as far north as Aleppo in a chariot, which is more\nthan a traveller in Palestine could do now, and describes how his clothes\nwere stolen one night, and how his own groom, or \u201cmuleteer,\u201d joined the\nrobbers. Among the places he visited were the Ph\u0153nician cities of Gebal,\nfamous for its shrine of Ashtoreth, Beyr\u00fbt, Sarepta, Sidon, and Tyre,\nwhich he says was built on an island in the sea, drinking-water being\nconveyed to it in boats. Old Tyre, on the continent opposite, seems to\nhave been recently burnt. Hamath, Timnah, Hazor, Tabor, Horonaim, and\nperhaps Adullam, were also visited, and mention is made not only of the\nford of the Jordan, near Beth-Shean, but also of \u201ca passage\u201d in front of\nthe city of Megiddo, which had to be crossed before the town could be\nentered. Joppa, the modern Jaffa, was surrounded with gardens of\ndate-palms, which have now been supplanted by oranges. The road, however,\nwas not always good. In one place the _mohar_ had to \u201cdrive along the edge\nof the precipice, on the slippery height, over a depth of 2,000 cubits,\nfull of rocks and boulders;\u201d while at another time his groom broke the\nchariot in pieces by driving over a slippery path, and necessitated the\nrepair of the injured carriage by \u201cthe iron-workers\u201d at the nearest\nsmithy. Already, therefore, it is clear, Palestine possessed plenty of\nsmithies at which iron was forged.\n\nThat Ramses II was the Pharaoh of the oppression, has long been suspected\nby Egyptian scholars. The accounts of the wars of himself and his\npredecessors in Canaan show that up to the date of his death that country\nwas not yet inhabited by the Israelites. Not only is no mention made of\nthem, but the history of the Book of Judges precludes our supposing that\nPalestine could have been an Egyptian province after the Israelitish\nconquest. It must have ceased to be tributary to the Pharaohs before it\nwas entered by Joshua. Moreover, the name of the city of Ramses (Raamses)\nbuilt by the Israelites in Egypt points unmistakeably to the reign of the\ngreat Ramses II himself. As has already been observed, the name was given\nto Zoan after its reconstruction by this monarch, whose grandfather,\nRamses I, was the first Egyptian king who bore the name. As Ramses I\nreigned but a very few years, while his successor, Seti I, associated his\nson, Ramses II, with him on the throne when the latter was but twelve\nyears old or thereabouts, it could only have been during his long reign of\nsixty-seven years that Ramses II brought the name by which he had been\nchristened into vogue. It is possible that those Egyptian scholars are\nright who see the Hebrews in a certain class of foreigners called Aperiu,\nand employed by Ramses II to work at his monuments; if so, we should have\nanother proof that the Exodus could not have taken place until after his\ndeath. The identification, however, is rendered very doubtful by the fact,\nthat long after the time of Ramses II, a document of the reign of Ramses\nIII speaks of 2,083 Aperiu as settlers in Heliopolis, and describes them\nas \u201cknights, sons of the kings, and noble lords of the Aperiu, settled\npeople, who dwell in this place.\u201d If, therefore, the Aperiu were really\nthe Hebrews, we should have to suppose that some of them who had obtained\noffices of honour and influence in Egypt remained behind in Heliopolis,\nthe city of Joseph\u2019s wife, when their poorer and oppressed kinsmen\nfollowed Moses and Aaron into the desert in search of the Promised Land.\n\nHowever this may be, the question as to the date of the Exodus, and\nconsequently as to the Pharaoh of the oppression, has now been finally set\nat rest by the excavations recently undertaken at Tel el-Maskh\u00fbta. Tel\nel-Maskh\u00fbta is the name of some large mounds near Tel el-Keb\u00eer and other\nplaces which were the scene of the late war; and M. Naville, who has\nexcavated them for the Egyptian Exploration Fund, has found inscriptions\nin them which show not only that they represent an ancient city whose\nreligious name was Pithom, while its civil name was Succoth, but also that\nthe founder of the city was Ramses II. In Greek times the city was called\nHero\u00f6polis, or Ero, from the Egyptian word _ara_, \u201ca store-house,\u201d\nreminding us that Pithom and Raamses, which the Israelites built for the\nPharaoh, were \u201ctreasure-cities\u201d (Exod. i. 11). M. Naville has even\ndiscovered the treasure-chambers themselves. They are very strongly\nconstructed, and divided by brick partitions from eight to ten feet thick,\nthe bricks being sun-baked, and made some with and some without straw. In\nthese strawless bricks we may see the work of the oppressed people when\nthe order came: \u201cThus saith the Pharaoh, I will not give you straw.\u201d\n\nThe treasure-chambers occupy almost the whole area of the old city, the\nwalls of which are about 650 feet square and 22 feet thick. Its name\nPithom\u2014in Egyptian Pa-Tum\u2014signifies the city of the Setting Sun; and since\nit had another name, Succoth, we can now understand how it was that the\nIsraelites started on their march not from Goshen, but from Succoth (Ex.\nxiii. 20), that is, from the very place where they had been working.\nEtham, their next stage, seems to be the Egyptian fortress of Khetam,\nwhile Pi-hahiroth (Ex. xiv. 2), is probably Pi-keheret, which is mentioned\nin an inscription found at Tel el-Maskh\u00fbta as somewhere in the\nneighbourhood of the canal that led from the Nile to the Red Sea.\n\nThe Pharaoh under whom the Exodus actually took place could not have been\nRamses II himself, but his son and successor, Meneptah II, who ascended\nthe throne about B.C. 1325. His reign lasted but a short time, and it was\ndisturbed not only by the flight of the Children of Israel, but also by a\ngreat invasion of Northern Egypt by the Libyans, which was with difficulty\nrepulsed. This took place in his fifth year. Three years later a report\nwas sent to him by one of his officials stating that \u201cthe passage of\ntribes of the Shasu (or Beduins) from the land of Edom had been effected\nthrough the fortress of Khetam, which is situated in Succoth (Thuku), to\nthe lakes of the city of Pithom, which are in the land of Succoth, in\norder that they might feed themselves and their herds on the possessions\nof the Pharaoh.\u201d The lakes of Pithom must be those of B\u00e2lah and Timsah, on\nwhich Ismailia now stands, not far from Tel el-Maskh\u00fbta, and Khetam is the\nEtham of Scripture. It is possible that Timsah, \u201cthe lake of crocodiles,\u201d\nis the _y\u00e2m s\u00fbph_, or \u201csea of papyrus reeds,\u201d of Scripture, which the\ntranslators of the Septuagint erroneously identified with the Red Sea.\n\nAmong the incidents connected with the deliverance of the Israelites are\ntwo which especially deserve notice. When God appointed Moses to his\nmission of leading his enslaved brethren out of Egypt, He at the same time\nrevealed Himself by the name of \u201cJehovah,\u201d the special name by which He\nwas henceforth to be known to the Children of Israel. It is unfortunate\nthat this sacred name has descended to the readers of the Authorised\nVersion of the Old Testament in a corrupt and barbarous form. The Hebrew\nalphabet was designed to express consonants only, not vowels; these were\nsupplied by the reader from his knowledge of the language and its\npronunciation. As long as Hebrew was still spoken, there was little\ndifficulty in doing this; but the case was changed when it ceased to be a\nliving language. A traditional pronunciation of the sacred records was\npreserved in the synagogues; but it necessarily differed in many respects\nfrom the pronunciation which had actually been once in use, and was itself\nin danger of being forgotten or altered. To avoid such a danger,\ntherefore, the so-called Masoretes, or Jewish scribes, in the sixth\ncentury after the Christian era, invented a system of symbols which should\nrepresent the pronunciation of the Hebrew of the Old Testament as read, or\nrather chanted, at the time in the great synagogue of Tiberias in\nPalestine.(5) It is in accordance with this Masoretic mode of\npronunciation that Hebrew is now taught. But there was one word which the\nMasoretes of Tiberias either could not or would not pronounce. This was\nthe national name of the God of Israel. Though used so freely in the Old\nTestament, it had come to be regarded with superstitious reverence before\nthe time when the Greek translation of the Septuagint was made, and in\nthis translation, accordingly, the word _Kyrios_, \u201cLord,\u201d is substituted\nfor it wherever it occurs. The New Testament writers naturally followed\nthe custom of the Septuagint and of their age, and so also did the\nMasoretes of Tiberias. Wherever the holy name was met with, they read in\nplace of it _Ad\u00f4nai_, \u201cLord,\u201d and hence, when supplying vowel-symbols to\nthe text of the Old Testament they wrote the vowels of _Ad\u00f4nai_ under the\nfour consonants, Y H V H, which composed it. This simply meant that\n_Ad\u00f4nai_ was to be read wherever the sacred name was found. In ignorance\nof this fact, however, the scholars who first revived the study of Hebrew\nin modern Europe imagined that the vowels of _Ad\u00f4nai_ (_\u0103_ or _\u0115_, _o_,\nand _\u00e2_) were intended to be read along with the consonants below which\nthey stood. The result was the hybrid monster _Y\u0115hov\u00e2h_. In passing into\nEngland the word became even more deformed. In German the sound of _y_ is\ndenoted by the symbol _j_, and the German symbol, but with the utterly\ndifferent English pronunciation attached to it, found its way into the\nEnglish translations of the Old Testament Scriptures.\n\nThere are two opinions as to what was the actual pronunciation of the\nsacred name while Hebrew was still a spoken language. On the one hand, we\nmay gather from the contemporary Assyrian monuments that it was pronounced\n_Yahu_. Wherever an Israelitish name is met with in the cuneiform\ninscriptions which, like Jehu or Hezekiah, is compounded with the divine\ntitle, the latter appears as _Yahu_, Jehu being _Yahua_, and Hezekiah\n_Khazaki-yahu_. Even according to the Masoretes it must be read _Yeho_\n(that is, _Y\u0103hu_) when it forms part of a proper name. The early Gnostics,\nmoreover, when they transcribed it in Greek characters, wrote _Ia\u00f4_, that\nis, _Yah\u00f4_. On the other hand, the four consonants, Y H V H, can hardly\nhave been pronounced otherwise than as _Yahveh_, and this pronunciation is\nsupported by the two Greek writers Theodoret and Epiphanios, who say that\nthe word was sounded _Yav\u00e9_. The form _Yahveh_, however, is incompatible\nwith the form _Yahu_ (_Yeho_), which appears in proper names; and it has\nbeen maintained that it is due to one of those plays on words, of which\nthere are so many examples in the Old Testament. The spelling with a final\n_h_ was adopted, it has been supposed, in order to remind the reader of\nthe Hebrew verb which signifies \u201cto be,\u201d and to which there seems to be a\ndistinct allusion in Exod. iii. 14.(6)\n\nWe must now turn to a second incident which is specially connected with\nthe deliverance out of Egypt. This is the rite of circumcision, which was\nobserved in so solemn a manner at the moment when the Israelites had at\nlast crossed the Jordan and were preparing to attack the Canaanites. It\nwas a rite which had been practised by the Egyptians from the most remote\ntimes, and had been communicated by them, according to Herodotus, to the\nEthiopians. Josephus tells us that the rite was also practised by the\nArabs, to whom Herodotus adds the Syrians of Ph\u0153nicia, as well as the\nKolkhians and the Hittites of Kappadokia. A similar rite is found at the\npresent day among many barbarous tribes in different parts of the world,\nand distinguishes not only the Jew but the Mohammedan as well.\n\nThe name of Moses seems to be of Egyptian derivation. It would correspond\nto the Egyptian _mes_ or _mesu_, \u201cson,\u201d which is borne by more than one\nEgyptian prince at the period of the Exodus, and forms part of the name of\nRamses, or Ra-mesu, \u201cthe son of the sun.\u201d The Hebrew spelling of the word\nwith a final _h_ is designed to recall the Hebrew _mash\u00e2h_, \u201cto draw out\u201d\nor \u201cdeliver,\u201d just as the spelling of the Septuagint, M\u00f4ys\u00eas, was\ninfluenced by the etymology given by Josephus, which made it a compound of\nthe Egyptian _m\u00f4_, \u201cwater,\u201d and _ys\u00eas_, \u201cto rescue from a flood.\u201d Such\nplays upon words are common in ancient literature, and are still in favour\nin the East, and we must be on our guard against ascribing to them a\nscientific value which they do not possess. The name _mesu_, \u201cson,\u201d would\nbe an appropriate one for a child who had been adopted by an Egyptian\nlady, and who was brought up at the court of the Pharaoh in \u201call the\nwisdom of the Egyptians.\u201d\n\nThis chapter would be incomplete unless something were said of the\nillustrations of the law and ritual of the Israelites afforded by the\nmonuments of the nations around them. These illustrations are to be found\namong the Ph\u0153nicians and the Assyrians. Among both we find traces of\nsacrifices and institutions which offer many parallels to the ordinances\nof the Mosaic Law. Besides the Sabbaths already spoken of, the Babylonians\nand Assyrians had various festivals and fasts, on which certain rites had\nto be performed and certain sacrifices offered; they knew of\n\u201cpeace-offerings\u201d and of \u201cheave-offerings,\u201d of the dedication of the\nfirst-born, and of sacrifices for sin. The gods were carried in procession\nin \u201cships,\u201d which, as we learn from the sculptures, resembled in form the\nHebrew ark, and were borne on men\u2019s shoulders by means of staves. In front\nof the image of the god stood a table, on which showbread was laid; and a\ndistinction was drawn between the meal-offering and the animal sacrifice.\nCertain unclean kinds of food were forbidden, including the flesh of swine\nand \u201ccreeping things;\u201d and in the outer courts of the temples were large\nlavers called \u201cseas,\u201d like the \u201csea\u201d of Solomon\u2019s temple, in which the\nworshippers were required to cleanse themselves. Many of these regulations\nand rites came down from the Accadian period.\n\nAs a specimen of the rites which had to be performed, we may quote a\nportion of a tablet which prescribes the duties of the priest in the great\ntemple of Bel at Babylon. The tablet begins: \u201cIn the month Nisan, on the\n2nd day, two hours after nightfall, the priest must come and take of the\nwaters of the river, must enter into the presence of Bel, and change his\ndress, must put on a ... robe in the presence of Bel, and say this prayer:\n\u2018O my lord, who in his strength has no equal, O my lord, blessed\nsovereign, lord of the world, speeding the peace of the great gods, the\nlord who in his might destroys the strong, lord of kings, light of\nmankind, establisher of trust, O Bel, thy sceptre is Babylon, thy crown is\nBorsippa, the wide heaven is the dwelling-place of thy liver.... O lord of\nthe world, light of the spirits of heaven, utterer of blessings, who is\nthere whose mouth murmurs not of thy righteousness, or speaks not of thy\nglory, and celebrates not thy dominion? O lord of the world, who dwellest\nin the temple of the sun, reject not the hands that are raised to thee, be\nmerciful to thy city Babylon, to Beth-Saggil thy temple, incline thy face,\ngrant the prayers of thy people the sons of Babylon.\u2019 \u201d\n\nOur knowledge of the Ph\u0153nician ritual is largely derived from a\nsacrificial tariff discovered at Marseilles in 1845. The stone on which it\nis engraved is unfortunately not perfect, but what is left of it runs\nthus: \u201cIn the temple of Baal (the following tariff of offerings shall be\nobserved), which was prescribed (in the time of) the judge ... Baal, the\nson of Bod-Tanit, the son of Bod-(Ashmun, and in the time of Halzi-Baal),\nthe judge, the son of Bod-Ashmun, the son of Halzi-Baal and (their\ncomrades). For an ox as a full-offering, whether it be a prayer-offering\nor a full thank-offering, the priests (shall receive) ten shekels of\nsilver for each beast, and if it be a full-offering the priests shall\nreceive besides this (300 shekels\u2019 weight of flesh). And for a\nprayer-offering they shall receive (besides) the small joints(?) and the\nroast(?), but the skin and the haunches and the feet and the rest of the\nflesh shall belong to the offerer. For a bullock which has horns, but is\nnot yet broken in and made to serve, or for a stag, as a full-offering,\nwhether it be a prayer-offering or a full thank-offering, the priests\n(shall receive) five shekels of silver (for each beast, and if it be a\nfull-offering) they shall receive besides this 150 shekels\u2019 weight of\nflesh; and for a prayer-offering the small joints(?) and the roast(?); but\nthe skin and the haunches and the feet (and the rest of the flesh shall\nbelong to the offerer). For a sheep or a goat as a full-offering, whether\nit be a prayer-offering or a full thank-offering, the priests (shall\nreceive) one shekel of silver and two _sar_ for each beast; and in the\ncase of a prayer-offering they shall have (besides this the small joints\n(?)) and the roast(?); but the skin and the haunches and the feet and the\nrest of the flesh shall belong to the offerer. For a lamb or a kid or a\nfawn as a full-offering, whether it be a prayer-offering or a full\nthank-offering, the priests (shall receive) three-fourths of a shekel of\nsilver and (two) _zar_ (for each beast; and in the case of a\nprayer-offering they shall have) besides this the small joints(?) and the\nroast(?); but the skin and the haunches and the feet and the rest of the\nflesh shall belong to (the offerer). For a bird, whether wild or tame, as\na full-offering, whether it be _shetseph_ or _khazuth_, the priests (shall\nreceive) three-fourths of a shekel of silver and two _zar_ for each bird;\nand (so much flesh besides). For a bird, or for the offering of the\nfirst-born of an animal, or for a meal-offering or for an offering with\noil, the priests (shall receive) ten pieces of gold for each.... In the\ncase of every prayer-offering which is offered to the gods, the priests\nshall receive the small joints(?), and the roast(?) and the\nprayer-offering ... for a cake and for milk and for fat, and for every\noffering which is offered without blood.... For every offering which is\nbrought by a poor man in cattle or birds, the priests shall receive\nnothing ... anything leprous or scabby or lean is forbidden, and no one as\nregards that which he offers (shall taste of) the blood of the dead. The\ntariff for each offering shall be according to that which is prescribed in\nthis publication.... As for every offering which is not prescribed in this\ntable, and is not made according to the regulations which (have been\npublished in the time of ... Baal, the son of Bod-Tanit), and of\nBod-Ashmun, the son of Halzi-Baal, and of their comrades, every priest who\naccepts the offering which is not included in that which is prescribed in\nthis table, shall be punished.... As for the property of the offerer who\ndoes not discharge (his debt) for his offering (he also shall be\npunished).\u201d\n\nThe words that are wanting in the document have been partially supplied\nfrom the fragments of another copy of the tariff found among the ruins of\nCarthage. It will be observed that there is no mention in it of the\nsacrifice of children, which, as we know, once played a large part in the\nritual of the Ph\u0153nicians. This is explained by the fact that the tariff\nbelongs to that later age, when Greek and Roman influence had prevailed\nupon the Ph\u0153nician colonists in the west to give up the horrible practice.\nThe place of the child is taken by the _\u2019ayy\u00e2l_ or stag.\n\nThe tariff of Marseilles and Carthage has lately been supplemented by some\nPh\u0153nician texts found in the island of Cyprus, and written in black and\nred ink upon small pieces of marble. One of these has both faces\ninscribed, and a translation of its contents is worth giving. On the first\nface we read: \u201cExpenses of the month Ethanim: On the new-moon of the month\nEthanim, for the gods of the new-moon two.... For the architects who have\nbuilt the temples of Ashtoreth, for each house.... For the guardians of\nthe sanctuary and the overseers of the temple of Resheph 20.... For the\nmen (who tend) the cattle in the presence of the Holy Queen on this\nday.... For two boys two ... For two sacrifices ... For two bakers who\nhave baked the cakes for the (Holy) Queen.... For the barbers, for their\nwork, two.... For the ten masons who have built the foundations and the\ntemples of the Sun-god ... To Ebed-Ashmun, the principal scribe, who has\nbeen sent on this day, three.... For the dogs and their young....\u201d On the\nother face we have: \u201cOn the new-moon of the month Pe\u00fblat: For the gods of\nthe new-moon two.... For the masters of the days, incense and\npeace-offering.... For the images of the temple of the Sun-god and the\nother gods.... For Ebed-Bast of Carthage.... For the man who has bought\nthe withered plants(?).... For the shepherds of the country two.... For\nthe _\u2019alm\u00e2th_ and the 22 _\u2019al\u00e2m\u00f4th_, with a sacrifice.... For the dogs and\ntheir young three....\u201d\n\nHere we evidently have an account of the payments disbursed by the priests\nof a temple on particular days. Resheph was a title of the Sun-god, and M.\nClermont-Ganneau has pointed out that his name still survives in that of\nArs\u00fbf, a ruined town to the north of Jaffa. The cakes baked for Ashtoreth,\n\u201cthe Holy Queen,\u201d are the same as those which the Jewish men and women who\nhad fled to Egypt after the destruction of Jerusalem and the murder of\nGedaliah declared to Jeremiah that they would still continue to offer to\n\u201cthe queen of heaven\u201d (Jer. xliv. 19). What is meant by the \u201cdogs\u201d is best\nexplained by Deuteronomy xxiii. 18, while the barbers mentioned in the\ntext were required to shave the priests. Mention is also made of them in\nthe Assyrian inscriptions (see Lev. xix. 27, xxi. 5). The _\u2019alm\u00e2th_, or\n\u201cmaiden\u201d\u2014a word which has acquired a special significance in the Christian\nChurch in consequence of its having been used in Isaiah\u2019s prophecy of \u201cthe\nVirgin\u201d (Isa. vii. 14)\u2014here seems to mean the chief singer attached to the\ntemple of Ashtoreth. The _\u2019al\u00e2m\u00f4th_ are described in the sixty-eighth\nPsalm (ver. 25) as similarly employed in the worship of Israel. As for the\n\u201cMasters of the Days,\u201d they are the gods who, as among the Assyrians, were\nbelieved to preside over the months of the year. The month Ethanim, to\nwhich the first account refers, is mentioned, it will be remembered, in 1\nKings viii. 2, as being the month in which the feast of the dedication of\nSolomon\u2019s temple was held. That temple had been built with the help of\nPh\u0153nician workmen, and it was therefore natural that the names of the\nPh\u0153nician months should have become known to the Israelites in connection\nwith it. The Israelites themselves were still contented to speak of the\nmonths of the year according to the order in which they came. It was not\nuntil after the return from the Babylonish exile that special names for\nthe months were definitely adopted, and that the Jews henceforth called\nthem by the Assyrian names they had heard in Babylonia.\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV. THE MOABITE STONE AND THE INSCRIPTION OF SILOAM.\n\n\n    _The alphabet of Egyptian origin.\u2014Discovery of the Moabite\n    Stone.\u2014Translation of the inscription.\u2014Points of interest raised\n    by the inscription.\u2014Discovery of the Siloam inscription.\u2014The\n    translation.\u2014The date.\u2014Its bearing upon the topography of\n    Jerusalem._\n\n\nModern discovery has as yet thrown little contemporary light on the period\nof Israelitish history which extends from the conquest of Canaan to the\ntime when the kingdom of David was rent into the two monarchies of Israel\nand Judah. The buried ruins of Ph\u0153nicia have not yet been explored, and we\nhave still to depend on the statements of classical writers for what we\nknow, outside the Bible records, of Hiram the Tyrian king, the friend of\nDavid and Solomon. It is certain, however, that state archives already\nexisted in the chief cities of Ph\u0153nicia, and a library was probably\nattached to the ancient temple of Baal, the Sun-god, at Tyre, which was\nrestored by Hiram. It was from the Ph\u0153nicians that the Israelites, and the\nnations round about them, received their alphabet. This alphabet was of\nEgyptian origin. As far back as the monuments of Egypt carry us, we find\nthe Egyptians using their hieroglyphics to express not only ideas and\nsyllables, but also the letters of an alphabet. Even in the remote epoch\nof the second dynasty they already possessed an alphabet in which the\ntwenty-one simple sounds of the language were represented by special\nhieroglyphic pictures. Such hieroglyphic pictures, however, were employed\nonly on the public monuments; for books and letters and business\ntransactions the Egyptians made use of a running hand, in which the\noriginal pictures had undergone great transformations. This running hand\nis termed \u201chieratic,\u201d and it was from the hieratic forms of the Egyptian\nletters that the Ph\u0153nician letters were derived.\n\nWe have already seen that the coast of the Delta was so thickly peopled\nwith Ph\u0153nician settlers as to have acquired the name of Keft-ur, or\nCaphtor, \u201cgreater Ph\u0153nicia;\u201d and these settlers it must have been who\nfirst borrowed the alphabet of their Egyptian neighbours. For purposes of\ntrade they must have needed some kind of writing, by means of which they\ncould communicate with the natives of the country, and their business-like\ninstincts led them to adopt only the alphabet used by the latter, and to\ndiscard all the cumbrous machinery of ideographs and syllabic characters\nby which it was accompanied. It was doubtless in the time of the Hyksos\nthat the Egyptian alphabet became Ph\u0153nician. From the Delta it was handed\non to the mother country of Ph\u0153nicia, and there the letters received new\nnames, derived from objects to which they bore a resemblance and which\nbegan with the sounds they represented. These names, as well as the\ncharacters to which they belonged, have descended to ourselves, for the\nPh\u0153nician alphabet passed first from the Ph\u0153nicians to the Greeks, then\nfrom the Greeks to the Romans, and finally from the Romans to the nations\nof modern Europe. The very word _alphabet_ is a living memorial of the\nfact, since it is composed of _alpha_ and _beta_, the Greek names of the\ntwo first letters, and these names are simply the Ph\u0153nician _aleph_, \u201can\nox,\u201d and _beth_, \u201ca house.\u201d Just as in our own nursery days it was\nimagined that we should remember our lessons better if we were taught that\n\u201cA was an Archer who shot at a frog,\u201d so the forms of the letters were\nimpressed on the memory of the Ph\u0153nician boys by being likened to the head\nof an ox or the outline of a house.\n\nBut before the alphabet was communicated to Greece by the Ph\u0153nician\ntraders, it had already been adopted by their Semitic kinsmen in Western\nAsia. Excavations in Palestine and the country east of the Jordan would\ndoubtless bring to light inscriptions compiled in it much older than the\noldest which we at present know. Only a few years ago the gap between the\ntime when the Ph\u0153nicians first borrowed their new alphabet and the time to\nwhich the earliest texts written in it belonged was very great indeed. But\nduring the last fifteen years two discoveries have been made which help to\nfill it up, and prove to us at the same time what may be found if we will\nonly seek.\n\n                             [Illustration.]\n\n           The Moabite Stone, erected by King Mesha, at Dibon.\n\n\nOne of these discoveries is that of the famous Moabite Stone. In the\nsummer of 1869, Dr. Klein, a German missionary, while travelling in what\nwas once the land of Moab, discovered a most curious relic of antiquity\namong the ruins of Dhib\u00e2n, the ancient Dibon. This relic was a stone of\nblack basalt, rounded at the top, two feet broad and nearly four feet\nhigh. Across it ran an inscription of thirty-four lines in the letters of\nthe Ph\u0153nician alphabet. Dr. Klein unfortunately did not realise the\nimportance of the discovery he had made; he contented himself with copying\na few words, and endeavouring to secure the monument for the Berlin\nMuseum. Things always move slowly in the East, and it was not until a year\nlater that the negociations for the purchase of the stone were completed\nbetween the Prussian Government on the one side and the Arabs and Turkish\npashas on the other. At length, however, all was arranged, and it was\nagreed that the stone should be handed over to the Germans for the sum of\n\u00a380. At this moment M. Clermont-Ganneau, a member of the French Consulate\nat Jerusalem, with lamentable indiscretion, sent men to take squeezes of\nthe inscription, and offered no less than \u00a3375 for the stone itself. At\nonce the cupidity of both Arabs and pashas was aroused; the Governor of\nNabl\u00fbs demanded the treasure for himself, while the Arabs, fearing it\nmight be taken from them, put a fire under it, poured cold water over it,\nbroke it in pieces, and distributed the fragments as charms among the\ndifferent families of the tribe. Thanks to M. Clermont-Ganneau, most of\nthese fragments have now been recovered, and the stone, once more put\ntogether, may be seen in the Museum of the Louvre at Paris. The fragments\nhave been fitted into their proper places by the help of the imperfect\nsqueezes taken before the monument was broken.\n\nWhen the inscription came to be read, it turned out to be a record of\nMesha, king of Moab, of whom we are told in 2 Kings iii. that after Ahab\u2019s\ndeath he \u201crebelled against the king of Israel,\u201d and was vainly besieged in\nhis capital Kirharaseth by the combined armies of Israel, Judah and Edom.\nMesha describes the successful issue of his revolt, and the revenge he\ntook upon the Israelites for their former oppression of his country. The\ntranslation of the inscription is as follows:\u2014\n\n\u201cI, Mesha, am the son of Chemosh-Gad, king of Moab, the Dibonite. My\nfather reigned over Moab thirty years, and I reigned after my father. And\nI erected this stone to Chemosh at Kirkha, a (stone of) salvation, for he\nsaved me from all despoilers, and made me see my desire upon all my\nenemies, even upon Omri, king of Israel. Now they afflicted Moab many\ndays, for Chemosh was angry with his land. His son succeeded him; and he\nalso said, I will afflict Moab. In my days (Chemosh) said, (Let us go) and\nI will see my desire on him and his house, and I will destroy Israel with\nan everlasting destruction. Now Omri took the land of Medeba, and (the\nenemy) occupied it in (his days and in) the days of his son, forty years.\nAnd Chemosh (had mercy) on it in my days; and I fortified Baal-Meon, and\nmade therein the tank, and I fortified Kiriathaim. For the men of Gad\ndwelt in the land of (Atar)oth from of old, and the king (of) Israel\nfortified for himself Ataroth, and I assaulted the wall and captured it,\nand killed all the warriors of the wall for the well-pleasing of Chemosh\nand Moab; and I removed from it all the spoil, and (offered) it before\nChemosh in Kirjath; and I placed therein the men of Siran and the men of\nMochrath. And Chemosh said to me, Go take Nebo against Israel. (And I)\nwent in the night, and I fought against it from the break of dawn till\nnoon, and I took it and slew in all seven thousand (men, but I did not\nkill) the women (and) maidens, for (I) devoted them to Ashtar-Chemosh; and\nI took from it the vessels of Yahveh, and offered them before Chemosh. And\nthe king of Israel fortified Jahaz and occupied it, when he made war\nagainst me; and Chemosh drove him out before (me, and) I took from Moab\ntwo hundred men, all its poor, and placed them in Jahaz, and took it to\nannex it to Dibon. I built Kirkha, the wall of the forest, and the wall of\nthe city, and I built the gates thereof, and I built the towers thereof,\nand I built the palace, and I made the prisons for the criminals within\nthe walls. And there was no cistern in the wall at Kirkha, and I said to\nall the people, Make for yourselves, every man, a cistern in his house.\nAnd I dug the ditch for Kirkha by means of the (captive) men of Israel. I\nbuilt Aroer, and I made the road across the Arnon. I built Beth-Bamoth,\nfor it was destroyed; I built Bezer, for it was cut (down) by the armed\nmen of Dibon, for all Dibon was now loyal; and I reigned from Bikran,\nwhich I added to my land, and I built (Beth-Gamul) and Beth-Diblathaim and\nBeth-Baal-Meon, and I placed there the poor (people) of the land. And as\nto Horonaim, (the men of Edom) dwelt therein (from of old). And Chemosh\nsaid to me, Go down, make war against Horonaim and take (it. And I\nassaulted it, and I took it, and) Chemosh (restored it) in my days.\nWherefore I made ... year ... and I....\u201d\n\nThe last line or two, describing the war against the Edomites, is\nunfortunately lost beyond recovery. The rest of the text, however, it will\nbe seen, is pretty perfect, and is full of interest to Biblical students.\nThe whole inscription reads like a chapter from one of the historical\nbooks of the Old Testament. Not only are the phrases the same, but the\nwords and grammatical forms are, with one or two exceptions, all found in\nScriptural Hebrew. We learn that the language of Moab differed less from\nthat of the Israelites than does one English dialect from another. Perhaps\nthe most interesting fact disclosed by the inscription is that Chemosh,\nthe national god of the Moabites, had come to be regarded not only as the\nsupreme deity, but even as almost the only object of their worship. Except\nin the passage which alludes to the dedication of women and maidens to\nAshtar-Chemosh, Mesha speaks as a monotheist, and even here the female\nAshtar or Ashtoreth is identified with the supreme male deity Chemosh.\nLike the Assyrian kings, moreover, who ascribed their victories and\ncampaigns to the inspiration of the god Assur, Mesha ascribes his\nsuccesses to the orders of Chemosh. He uses, in fact, the language of\nScripture; as the Lord said to David, \u201cGo and smite the Philistines\u201d (1\nSam. xxiii. 2), so Chemosh is made to say to Mesha, \u201cGo, take Nebo;\u201d and\nas God promised to \u201cdrive out\u201d the Canaanites before Israel, so Mesha\ndeclares that Chemosh drove out Israel before him from Jahaz. Mesha even\nsets up a stone of salvation to Chemosh, like Eben-ezer, \u201cthe stone of\nhelp,\u201d set up by Samuel (1 Sam. vii. 12); and the statement that Chemosh\nhad been \u201cangry with his land,\u201d but had made Mesha \u201csee his desire upon\nall his enemies,\u201d reminds us of the well-known passages in which the\nPsalmist declares that \u201cGod shall let me see my desire upon mine\noppressors,\u201d and the author of the Book of Judges recounts how that \u201cthe\nanger of the Lord was hot against Israel.\u201d\n\nThe covenant name of the God of Israel itself occurs in the inscription,\nspelt in exactly the same way as in the Old Testament. Its occurrence is a\nproof, if any were needed, that the superstition which afterwards\nprevented the Jews from pronouncing it did not as yet exist. The name\nunder which God was worshipped in Israel was familiar to the nations round\nabout. Nay, more; we gather that even after the attempt of Jezebel to\nintroduce the Baalim of Sidon into the northern kingdom, Yahveh was still\nregarded as the national god, and that the worship carried on at the high\nplaces, idolatrous and contrary as it was to the law, was nevertheless\nperformed in His name. The high-place of Nebo, like so many of the other\nlocalities mentioned in the inscription, is also mentioned in the prophecy\nagainst Moab contained in Isa. xv. xvi. It is even possible that the words\nof the verse in the Book of Isaiah in which it is named have undergone\ntransposition, and that the true reading is, \u201cHe is gone up to Dibon and\nto Beth-Bamoth to weep; Moab shall howl over Nebo and over Medeba.\u201d The\ninscription informs us that Beth-Bamoth, \u201cthe house of the high-places,\u201d\nwas the name of a place near Dibon, the name of which appears in the last\nverse of Isaiah xv. under the form of Dimon, the letter _b_ being changed\nby the prophet into _m_, in order to connect it with the word _d\u00e2m_,\n\u201cblood.\u201d Kirkha, \u201cthe wall of the forest,\u201d the modern Kerak, is called Kir\nof Moab and Kir-haresh or Kir-hareseth by Isaiah, and Kir-heres by\nJeremiah, which by a slight change of vocalisation would signify \u201cthe wall\nof the forest.\u201d The form Kir-haraseth is also used in the Book of Kings.\n\nThe story told by the Stone, and the account of the war against Moab given\nin the Bible, supplement one another. Dr. Ginsburg has suggested that the\ndeliverance of Moab from Israel was brought about during the reign of\nAhaziah, the successor of Ahab, and that Joram, the successor of Ahaziah,\nwas subsequently driven out of Jahaz, which lay on the southern side of\nthe Arnon; but that after this the tide of fortune turned, Joram summoned\nhis allies from Judah and Edom, ravaged Moab, and blockaded Mesha in his\ncapital of Kirkha. Then came the sacrifice by Mesha of his eldest son on\nthe wall of Kirkha\u2014so that \u201cthere was great indignation against Israel,\u201d\nand the allied forces retreated back \u201cto their own land.\u201d\n\nThe Moabite Stone shows us what were the forms of the Ph\u0153nician letters\nused on the eastern side of the Jordan in the time of Ahab. The forms\nemployed in Israel and Judah on the western side could not have differed\nmuch; and we may therefore see in these venerable characters the precise\nmode of writing employed by the earlier prophets of the Old Testament.\nThis knowledge is of great importance for the correction and restoration\nof corrupt passages, and more especially of proper names, the spelling of\nwhich has been deformed by copyists.\n\nJust, however, as the writing of two persons at the present day must\ndiffer, so also the writing of two nations like the Moabites and Jews must\nhave differed to some extent. Moreover, there must have been some\ndistinction between the more cursive writing of a papyrus-roll and the\ncarefully cut letters of a public monument like that of Mesha. Indeed,\nthat such a distinction did exist we have proof in a passage (Isa. viii.\n1) which has been mistranslated in the Authorised Version, but which ought\nto be rendered: \u201cTake thee a great slab, and write upon it with the\ngraving-tool of the people: Hasten spoil, hurry booty.\u201d Here words which\nwere afterwards to be made more emphatic by becoming the name of one of\nIsaiah\u2019s children, were written in a way that all could read, not in the\nrunning hand of a scroll, but in the large clear characters of a public\ndocument. What these characters exactly were, a recent discovery has\nenabled us to learn.\n\nHebrew inscriptions of an early date have long been sought for in vain. We\nknew of one or two inscribed fragments from the neighbourhood of the Pool\nof Siloam at Jerusalem, and of a few seals which might be referred to the\nperiod before the Babylonish Captivity; but, unfortunately, none of these\ncould be assigned to a definite date, and even the conclusion that some of\nthem were pre-exilic was after all little more than a guess. The seals are\nusually distinguished by the absence of any symbols or other devices, as\nwell as by a horizontal line drawn across the middle, which divides the\ninscription into two halves. The proper names also which occur on them\nare, in the majority of cases, compounded with the sacred name Yahveh.\nSeveral of these seals have been found in Babylonia and Mesopotamia, and\nmay therefore be regarded as memorials of the Jewish exile. But the\nlegends they bear are always short, and consist of little else than proper\nnames; and as their date was uncertain, it was impossible to draw any\nsolid inferences from them as to the character of the writing employed in\nJudah or Israel before the age of Nebuchadnezzar.\n\nIt is quite otherwise now. An inscription of some length has been\ndiscovered in Jerusalem itself, which is certainly as old as the time of\nIsaiah, and may be older still. In the summer of 1880, one of the native\npupils of Mr. Schick, a German architect long settled in Jerusalem, was\nplaying with some other lads in the so-called Pool of Siloam, and while\nwading up a channel cut in the rock which leads into the Pool, slipped and\nfell into the water. On rising to the surface, he noticed what looked like\nletters on the rock which formed the southern wall of the channel. He told\nMr. Schick of what he had seen; and the latter, on visiting the spot,\nfound that an ancient inscription, concealed for the most part by the\nwater, actually existed there.\n\nThe Pool is of comparatively modern construction, but it encloses the\nremains of a much older reservoir, which, like the modern one, was\nsupplied with water through a tunnel excavated in the rock. This tunnel\ncommunicates with the so-called Spring of the Virgin, the only natural\nspring of water in or near Jerusalem. It rises below the walls of the\ncity, on the western bank of the valley of the Kidron; and the tunnel\nthrough which its waters are conveyed is consequently cut through the\nridge, that forms the southern part of the Temple Hill. The Pool of Siloam\nlies on the opposite side of this ridge, at the mouth of the valley called\nthat of the Cheesemakers (Tyrop\u0153\u00f4n) in the time of Josephus, but which is\nnow filled up with rubbish, and in large part built over. According to\nLieutenant Conder\u2019s measurements, the length of the tunnel is 1,708 yards;\nit does not, however, run in a straight line, and towards the centre there\nare two _culs de sac_, of which the inscription now offers an explanation.\nAt the entrance on the western or Siloam side its height is about sixteen\nfeet; but the roof grows gradually lower, until in one place it is not\nquite two feet above the floor of the passage.\n\n                             [Illustration.]\n\nThe Siloam Inscription (tracing from a squeeze, taken 15th July, 1881, by\n                   Lieuts. Conder and Mantell, R. E.).\n\n\nThe inscription occupies the under part of an artificial tablet in the\nwall of rock, about nineteen feet from where the conduit opens out upon\nthe Pool of Siloam, and on the right-hand side of one who enters it. After\nlowering the level of the water, Mr. Schick endeavoured to take a copy of\nit; but as not only the letters of the text, but every flaw in the rock\nwere filled with a deposit of lime left by the water, all he could send to\nEurope was a collection of unmeaning scrawls. Besides the difficulty of\ndistinguishing the letters, it was also necessary to sit in the mud and\nwater, and to work by the dim light of a candle, as the place where the\ninscription is engraved is perfectly dark. All this rendered it impossible\nfor anyone not acquainted with Ph\u0153nician pal\u00e6ography to make an accurate\ntranscript. The first intelligible copy accordingly was made by Professor\nSayce after several hours of careful study; but this too contained several\ndoubtful characters, the real forms of which could only be determined by\nthe removal of the calcareous matter with which they were coated. In\nMarch, 1881, six weeks after Sayce\u2019s visit, Dr. Guthe arrived in\nJerusalem, and after making a more complete facsimile of the inscription\nthan had previously been possible, removed the deposit of lime by means of\nan acid, and so revealed the original appearance of the tablet. Letters\nwhich had previously been concealed now became visible, and the exact\nshapes of them all could be observed. First a cast, and then squeezes of\nthe text were taken; and the scholars of Europe had at last in their hands\nan exact copy of the old text.\n\nThe inscription consists of six lines, but several of the letters\ncomposing it have unfortunately been destroyed by the wearing away of the\nrock. The translation of it is as follows:\u2014\n\n1. \u201c(Behold) the excavation! Now this is the history of the excavation.\nWhile the excavators were still lifting up the pick, each towards his\nneighbour, and while there were yet three cubits to (excavate, there was\nheard) the voice of one man calling to his neighbour, for there was an\nexcess in the rock on the right hand (and on the left). And after that on\nthe day of excavating the excavators had struck pick against pick, one\nagainst the other, the waters flowed from the spring to the Pool for a\ndistance of 1,200 cubits. And (part) of a cubit was the height of the rock\nover the head of the excavators.\u201d\n\nThe language of the inscription is the purest Biblical Hebrew. There is\nonly one word in it\u2014that rendered \u201cexcess\u201d\u2014which is new, and consequently\nof doubtful signification. We learn from it that the engineering skill of\nthe day was by no means despicable. The conduit was excavated in the same\nfashion as the Mont C\u00e9nis tunnel of our own time, by beginning the work\nsimultaneously at the two ends; and, in spite of its windings, the workmen\nalmost succeeded in meeting in the middle. They approached, indeed, so\nnearly to one another, that the noise made by the one party in hewing the\nrock was heard by the other, and the small piece of rock which intervened\nbetween them was accordingly pierced. This accounts for the two _culs de\nsac_ now found in the centre of the channel; they represent the extreme\npoints reached by the two bands of excavators before they had discovered\nthat, instead of meeting, they were passing by one another.\n\nIt is most unfortunate that the inscription contains no indication of\ndate; but the forms of the letters used in it show that it cannot be very\nmuch later in age than the Moabite Stone. Indeed, some of the letters\nexhibit older forms than those of the Moabite Stone; but this may be\nexplained by the supposition that the scribes of Jerusalem were more\nconservative, more disposed to retain old forms, than the scribes of king\nMesha. The prevalent opinion of scholars is that the tunnel and\nconsequently the inscription in it were executed in the reign of Hezekiah.\nAccording to the Chronicler (2 Chr. xxxii. 30), Hezekiah \u201cstopped the\nupper watercourse of Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side\nof the city of David,\u201d and we read in 2 Kings xx. 20, that \u201che made a pool\nand a conduit, and brought water into the city.\u201d The object of the\nlaborious undertaking is very plain. The Virgin\u2019s Spring, the only natural\nsource near Jerusalem, lay outside the walls, and in time of war might\neasily pass into the hands of the enemy. The Jewish kings, therefore, did\ntheir best to seal up this spring, which must be the Chronicler\u2019s \u201cupper\nwater-course of Gihon,\u201d and to bring its waters by subterranean passages\ninside the city walls. Besides the tunnel which contains the inscription\nanother tunnel has been discovered, which also communicates with the\nVirgin\u2019s Spring. But it is tempting to suppose that the most important of\nthese\u2014the tunnel which contains the inscription\u2014must be the one which\nHezekiah made.\n\nThe supposition, however, is rendered uncertain by a statement of Isaiah\n(viii. 6). While Ahaz, the father of Hezekiah, was still reigning, Isaiah\nuttered a prophecy in which he made allusion to \u201cthe waters of Shiloah\nthat go softly.\u201d Now this can hardly refer to anything else than the\ngently flowing stream which still runs through the tunnel of Siloam. In\nthis case the conduit would have been in existence before the time of\nHezekiah; and, since we know of no earlier period when a great engineering\nwork of the kind could have been executed until we go back to the reign of\nSolomon, it is possible that the inscription may actually be of this\nancient date. The inference is supported by the name Shiloah, which\nprobably means \u201cthe tunnel,\u201d and would have been given to the locality in\nconsequence of the conduit which here pierced the rock. It was not likely\nthat when David and Solomon were fortifying Jerusalem, and employing\nPh\u0153nician architects upon great public buildings there, they would have\nallowed the city to depend wholly upon rain cisterns for its water supply.\nSince the inscription calls the Pool of Siloam simply \u201cthe Pool,\u201d we may\nperhaps infer that no other reservoir of the kind was in existence at the\ntime; and yet in the age of Isaiah, as we learn from Isa. xxii. 9, 11,\nthere was not only \u201ca lower pool,\u201d in contradistinction to \u201can upper one,\u201d\nbut also \u201can old pool,\u201d in contradistinction to a new one. As Dr. Guthe\u2019s\nexcavations have laid bare the remains of four such pools in the\nneighbourhood of that of Siloam, there is no difficulty in finding places\nfor all these reservoirs. But they could hardly have existed when the Pool\nof Siloam was still known as simply \u201cthe Pool,\u201d nor could the name of\nShiloah have well been given to the locality if another tunnel, observed\nby Sir Charles Warren on the eastern side of the Temple Hill, had been\nalready excavated. This second tunnel starts, like the Siloam one, from\nthe Virgin\u2019s Spring, and was designed to bring the water of the spring\nwithin the walls of the city. A shaft is cut for seventy feet into the\nhill, where it meets another perpendicular shaft, which rises for a height\nof fifty feet, and then meets a flight of steps, which lead into a broad\npassage, ending in another flight of steps and a vaulted chamber. Niches\nfor lamps were found here at intervals, intended to light the persons who\nwent to draw the water by means of a bucket. As lamps of the Roman period\nwere discovered in the chamber, the tunnel must have been known and used\nup to the time of the capture of Jerusalem by Titus, and it is probably\nnot older than the reign of Herod. In any case, the comparative excellence\nof its workmanship goes to show that it was made at a later date than the\ntunnel of Siloam.\n\nWhatever doubts, however, may still hang over the date of the inscription,\nthere can be no question that it has thrown most important light on the\ntopography of Jerusalem in the period of the kings. It is now clear that\nthe modern city occupies very little of the same ground as the ancient\none; the latter stood entirely on the rising ground to the east of the\nTyrop\u0153\u00f4n valley, the northern portion of which is at present occupied by\nthe mosque of Omar, while the southern portion is uninhabited. The\nTyrop\u0153\u00f4n valley itself must be the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, where the\nidolaters of Jerusalem burnt their children in the fire to Moloch. It must\nbe in the southern cliff of this valley that the tombs of the kings are\nsituated; the reason why they have never yet been found being that they\nare buried under the rubbish with which the valley is filled. Among the\nrubbish must be the remains of the city which was destroyed by\nNebuchadnezzar, and whose ruins were flung into the gorge below. Between\nthe higher part of the hill, now occupied by the mosque of Omar, and its\nlower uninhabited portion, Dr. Guthe has discovered traces of a valley\nwhich once ran into the valley of the Kidron at right angles to it, not\nfar from the Virgin\u2019s Spring, and divided in old days the City of David\nfrom the rest of the town. Here, as well as in the now obliterated Valley\nof the Cheesemakers, there probably still lie the relics of the dynasty of\nDavid; but we shall only know the story they have to tell us when the\nspade of the excavator has come to continue the discoveries which the\ninscription of Siloam has begun.\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V. THE EMPIRE OF THE HITTITES.\n\n\n    _Discovery of traces of an ancient Hittite Empire.\u2014Scripture\n    references to the Hittites.\u2014Professor Sayce\u2019s discovery.\u2014The\n    inscriptions at Hamath.\u2014The Hittite race.\u2014Hittite art._\n\n\nFive years ago there was no one who suspected that a great empire had once\nexisted in Western Asia and contended on equal terms with both Egypt and\nAssyria, the founders of which were the little-noticed Hittites of the Old\nTestament. Still less did any one dream that these same Hittites had once\ncarried their arms, their art, and their religion to the shores of the\n\u00c6egean, and that the early civilisation of Greece and Europe was as much\nindebted to them as it was to the Ph\u0153nicians.\n\nThe discovery was made in 1879. Recent exploration and excavation had\nshown that the primitive art and culture of Greece, as revealed, for\nexample, by Dr. Schliemann\u2019s excavations at Myken\u00e6, were influenced by a\npeculiar art and culture emanating from Asia Minor. Here, too, certain\nstrange monuments had been discovered, which form a continuous chain from\nLydia in the west to Kappadokia and Lykaonia in the east. The best known\nof these are certain rock sculptures found at Boghaz Keui and Eyuk, on the\neastern side of the Halys, and two figures in relief in the Pass of\nKarabel, near Sardes, which the old Greek historian, Herodotus, had long\nago supposed to be memorials of the Egyptian conqueror Sesostris, or\nRamses II.\n\nMeanwhile other discoveries were being made in lands more immediately\nconnected with the Bible. Scholars had learned from the Egyptian\ninscriptions that before the days of the Exodus the Egyptian monarchs had\nbeen engaged in fierce struggles with the powerful nation of the Hittites,\nwhose two chief seats were at Kadesh on the Orontes and Carchemish on the\nEuphrates, and who were able to summon to their aid subject-allies not\nonly from Palestine, but also far away from Lydia and the Troad, on the\nwestern coast of Asia Minor. Ramses II himself, the Pharaoh of the\noppression, had been glad to make peace with his antagonists; and the\ntreaty, which provided, among other things, for the amnesty of political\noffenders who had found a shelter during the war among one or other of the\ntwo combatants, was cemented by the marriage of the Egyptian king with the\ndaughter of his rival. A century or two afterwards Tiglath-Pileser I of\nAssyria found his passage across the Euphrates barred by the Hittites of\nCarchemish and their Kolkhian mercenaries. From this time forward the\nHittites proved dangerous enemies to the Assyrian kings in their attempts\nto extend the empire towards the west, until at last in B.C. 717 Sargon\nsucceeded in capturing their rich capital, Carchemish, and in making it\nthe seat of an Assyrian satrap. Henceforth the Hittites disappear from\nhistory.\n\nBut they had already left their mark on the pages of the Old Testament.\nThe Canaanite who had betrayed his fellow-citizens at Beth-el to the\nIsraelites dared not entrust himself to his countrymen, but went away\n\u201cinto the land of the Hittites\u201d (Judges i. 26). Solomon imported horses\nfrom Egypt, which he sold to the Syrians and the Hittites (1 Kings x. 28,\n29), and when God had sent a panic upon the camp of the Syrians before\nJerusalem, they had imagined that \u201cthe king of Israel had hired against\nthem the kings of the Hittites and the kings of the Egyptians\u201d (2 Kings\nvii. 6). Kadesh itself, the southern Hittite capital, is mentioned in a\npassage where the Hebrew text is unfortunately corrupt (2 Sam. xxiv. 6).\nHere the Septuagint shows us that the officers sent by David to number the\npeople, in skirting the northern frontier of his kingdom, came as far as\n\u201cGilead and the land of the Hittites of Kadesh.\u201d In the extreme south of\nPalestine an offshoot of the race had been settled from an early period.\nThese are the Hittites of whom we hear in Genesis in connection with the\npatriarchs. Hebron was one of their cities, and Hebron, we are told (Numb.\nxiii. 22), \u201cwas built seven years before Zoan,\u201d or Tanis, the capital of\nthe Hyksos conquerors of Egypt. This suggests that the Hittites formed\npart of the Hyksos forces, and that some of them, instead of entering\nEgypt, remained behind in Southern Canaan. The suggestion is confirmed by\na statement of the Egyptian historian Manetho, who asserts that Jerusalem\nwas founded by the Hyksos after their expulsion from Egypt; and Jerusalem,\nit will be remembered, had, according to Ezekiel (xvi. 3), a Hittite\nmother.\n\nAnother Hittite city in the south of Judah was Kirjath-sepher, or\n\u201cBooktown,\u201d also known as Debir, \u201cthe sanctuary,\u201d a title which reminds us\nof that of Kadesh, \u201cthe holy city.\u201d We may infer from its name that\nKirjath-sepher contained a library stocked with Hittite books. That the\nHittites were a literary people, and possessed a system of writing of\ntheir own, we learn from the Egyptian monuments. What this writing was has\nbeen revealed by recent discoveries. Inscriptions in a peculiar kind of\nhieroglyphics or picture-writing have been found at Hamath, Aleppo, and\nCarchemish, in Kappadokia, Lykaonia, and Lydia. They are always found\nassociated with sculptures in a curious style of art, some of which from\nCarchemish, the modern Jerabl\u00fbs, are now in the British Museum. The style\nof art is the same as that of the monuments of Asia Minor mentioned above.\n\nIt was the discovery of this fact by Professor Sayce, in 1879, which first\nrevealed the existence of the Hittite empire and its importance in the\nhistory of civilisation. Certain hieroglyphic inscriptions, originally\nnoticed by the traveller Burckhardt at Hamah, the ancient Hamath, had been\nmade accessible to the scientific world by the Palestine Exploration Fund,\nand the conjecture had been put forward that they represented the\nlong-lost writing of the Hittites. The conjecture was shortly afterwards\nconfirmed by the discovery of similar inscriptions at Jerabl\u00fbs, which Mr.\nSkene and Mr. George Smith had already identified with the site of\nCarchemish. If, therefore, the early monuments of Asia Minor were really\nof Hittite origin, as Professor Sayce supposed, it was clear that they\nought to be accompanied by Hittite hieroglyphics. And such turned out to\nbe the case. On visiting the sculptured figure in the Pass of Karabel, in\nwhich Herodotus had seen an image of the great opponent of the Hittites,\nhe found that the characters engraved by the side of it were all of them\nHittite forms.\n\nHittite inscriptions have since been discovered attached to another\narchaic monument of Lydia, the sitting figure of the great goddess of\nCarchemish, carved out of the rocks of Mount Sipylos, which the Greeks\nfancied was the Niob\u00ea of their mythology as far back as the age of Homer;\nand similar inscriptions also exist at Boghaz Keui and Eyuk, in\nKappadokia, as well as near Ivris, in Lykaonia. Others have been\ndiscovered in various parts of Kappadokia and in the Taurus range of\nmountains, while a silver boss, which bears a precious inscription both in\nHittite hieroglyphics and in cuneiform characters, seems to belong to\nCilicia. In fact, there is now abundant evidence that the Hittites once\nheld dominion throughout the greater portion of Asia Minor, so that we\nneed no longer feel surprised at their being able to call Trojans and\nLydians to their aid in their wars against Egypt.\n\nThe existence of Hittite inscriptions at Hamath goes to show that Hamath\nalso was once under Hittite rule. This throws light on several facts\nrecorded in sacred history. David, after his conquest of the Syrians,\nbecame the ally of the Hamathite king, and the alliance seems to have\nlasted down to the time when Hamath was finally destroyed by the\nAssyrians, since it is implied in the words of 2 Kings xiv. 28, as well as\nin the alliance between Uzziah and Hamath, of which we are informed by the\nAssyrian monuments. Hamath and Judah, in fact, each had a common enemy in\nSyria, and were thus drawn together by a common interest. It was only when\nAssyria threatened all the populations of the west alike, that Hamath and\nDamascus were found fighting side by side at the battle of Karkar.\nOtherwise they were natural foes.\n\nThe reason of this lay in the fact that the Hittites were intruders in the\nSemitic territory of Syria. Their origin must be sought in the highlands\nof Kappadokia, and from hence they descended into the regions of the\nsouth, at that time occupied by Semitic Arameans. Hamath and Kadesh had\nonce been Aramean cities, and when they were again wrested from the\npossession of the Hittites they did but return to their former owners. The\nfall of Carchemish meant the final triumph of the Semites in their long\nstruggle with the Hittite stranger.\n\nEven in their southern home the Hittites preserved the dress of the cold\nmountainous country from which they had come. They are characterised by\nboots with turned-up toes, such as are still worn by the mountaineers of\nAsia Minor and Greece. They were thick-set and somewhat short of limb, and\nthe Egyptian artists painted them without beards, of a yellowish-white\ncolour, with dark black hair. In short, as M. Lenormant has pointed out,\nthey had all the physical characteristics of a Caucasian tribe. Their\ndescendants are still to be met with in the defiles of the Taurus and on\nthe plateau of Kappadokia, though they have utterly forgotten the language\nor languages their forefathers spoke. What this language was is still\nuncertain, though the Hittite proper names which occur on the monuments of\nEgypt and Assyria show that it was neither Semitic nor Indo-European. With\nthe help of the bilingual inscription in cuneiform and Hittite, already\nmentioned, Professor Sayce believes that he has determined the values of a\nfew characters and partially read three or four names, but until more\ninscriptions are brought to light it is impossible to proceed further.\nOnly it is becoming every day more probable that the hieroglyphics in\nwhich the inscriptions are written were the origin of a curious syllabary\nonce used throughout Asia Minor, which survived in Cyprus into historical\ntimes.\n\nHittite art was originally borrowed from Babylonia, but modified by the\nborrowers in a peculiar way. The borrowing took place before the rise of\nAssyria. The astronomical and astrological tablets belonging to the great\nwork on the heavenly bodies which was compiled for the library of Sargon I\nof Accad speak from time to time of the Khatt\u00e2 or Hittites, a clear proof\nthat already at that remote epoch they had moved down from their northern\nhome into their new quarters in Syria. Besides the art of Babylonia they\nalso borrowed several of the Babylonian deities and religious legends. The\nsupreme goddess of Carchemish was the Babylonian Istar or Ashtoreth, and\nthe representation of her found on early Babylonian cylinders was carried\nby the Hittites to the western coasts of Asia Minor, and from thence made\nits way across the \u00c6gean Sea to Greece. Even the Amazons of Greek\nmythology were really nothing more than the priestesses of this Hittite\ndivinity, who wore arms in honour of the goddess. The cities which\naccording to the Greeks were founded by the Amazons were all of Hittite\norigin.\n\nWe may expect to discover hereafter that the influence exercised by the\nHittites upon their Syrian neighbours was almost as profound as that\nexercised by them upon their neighbours in Asia Minor, and through these\nupon the fathers of the Greeks. For the present, however, we must be\ncontent with the startling results that have already been obtained in this\nnew field of research. A people that once played an important part in the\nhistory of the civilised world has been again revealed to us after\ncenturies of oblivion, and a forgotten empire has been again brought to\nlight. The first chapter has been opened of a new history, which can only\nbe completed when more Hittite inscriptions have been discovered, and the\nstory they contain has been deciphered. All that is now needed are\nexplorers and excavators, who shall do for the buried cities of the\nHittites what Botta and Layard have done for Nineveh or Schliemann for\nMyken\u00e6 and Troy.\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI. THE ASSYRIAN INVASIONS.\n\n\n    _Capture of Jerusalem.\u2014Shishak.\u2014Shalmaneser II.\u2014Inscription\n    describing the campaign of his sixth year.\u2014Correction of the\n    Biblical chronology.\u2014The worship of Rimmon.\u2014War against\n    Hazael.\u2014The black obelisk.\u2014Rimmon-nirari.\u2014Tiglath-Pileser II.\u2014The\n    fall of Arpad.\u2014Menahem pays tribute.\u2014Alliance of Ahaz with\n    Assyria.\u2014Capture of Samaria and of Damascus.\u2014Destruction of\n    Samaria.\u2014Sargon, Cuthah, and\n    Sepharvaim.\u2014Merodach-baladan.\u2014Invasion of Judah by Sargon.\u2014True\n    interpretation of Isaiah x. and xi.\u2014Sennacherib\u2019s invasion.\u2014His\n    account of it.\u2014The Biblical account.\u2014The date.\u2014The Lachish\n    bas-relief.\u2014Jewish policy in Hezekiah\u2019s reign.\u2014Hezekiah\u2019s public\n    works.\u2014The will of Sennacherib.\u2014Esar-haddon\u2019s reign.\u2014Explanation\n    of 2 Chron. xxxiii. 2.\u2014Isaiah xix.\u2014Reign of Assur-bani-pal.\u2014Date\n    of the fall of Assyria.\u2014Chronological table of events described in\n    the chapter._\n\n\nWhen David founded his empire his two powerful neighbours, Egypt and\nAssyria, were both in a state of decline. Assyria had fallen into the\nhands of unwarlike kings, who were unable to retain the conquests of their\npredecessors, even upon their immediate frontiers; while Egypt was divided\namong rival dynasties and rent with civil wars. Egypt, however, was the\nfirst to recover her strength. The monarchs of the twenty-second dynasty\nonce more united the country under one rule, and Shishak or Sheshank I\nturned his arms against the cities of Palestine. The brief account given\nin 1 Kings xiv. 25, 26, and the fuller history in 2 Chron. xii. of his\ninvasion of Judah and his capture of Jerusalem, are supplemented by his\nown record of it on the walls of the ruined temple of Karnak. Here the\nEgyptian king is represented as striking down the conquered Hebrews with a\ncolossal club, while beside him run long rows of embattled shields, within\neach of which is the name of a vanquished city. Among them we find the\nnames not only of Jewish towns but of Israelitish fortresses also\u2014such as\nMegiddo, Taanach, and Abel\u2014a proof that the Egyptian campaign was directed\nagainst the northern kingdom as well as against Judah, and could not,\ntherefore, have been undertaken at the instigation of Jeroboam, as has\nsometimes been supposed. One of the cities is called Judah-melek, or\n\u201cJudah-king,\u201d a title by which it is possible that Jerusalem may have been\nintended. At any rate, there is otherwise no mention of the royal city of\nRehoboam among the shields that have been preserved.\n\nThe vigorous rule of Shishak had not ceased long before Egypt once more\nsank into a state of anarchy and weakness, which ended in its conquest by\nthe Ethiopian Sabako, the So of the Old Testament (2 Kings xvii. 4).\nMeanwhile Assyria had recovered its strength, and had entered upon a new\ncareer of conquest. In B.C. 858 Shalmaneser II came to the throne, and his\nlong reign of thirty-five years was one continuous history of campaigns\nagainst his neighbours, in the course of which the authority of Assyria\nwas extended as far as the Mediterranean. The growing power of Damascus,\nwhich Rezon had torn from the empire of David in the time of Solomon (1\nKings xi. 23-25), formed the chief object of his attack. Already, in the\nsixth year of his reign, he had overthrown the combined forces of\nDamascus, of Hamath, and of the Hittites, and had slain 20,500 of his\nenemies in battle. Damascus was at this time governed by Hadad-idri or\nHadadezer, the Ben-hadad II of Scripture, the Scriptural name being a\nstanding title of the Syrian kings, and signifying \u201cthe son of Hadad,\u201d the\nsupreme deity of Damascus. Three years later Shalmaneser again attacked\nthe Syrian king; but it was not until his fourteenth year, when he crossed\nthe Euphrates with an army of 120,000 men, that he achieved any\nsubstantial success.\n\nThe campaign of the sixth year is narrated in detail in an inscription\nengraved by the Assyrian monarch on the rocks of Armenia. Here we learn\nthat, after crossing the Euphrates, he received the tribute of the Hittite\nstates in Pethor, the city of Balaam, which he describes as being situated\nat the junction of the Euphrates and Sajur. He then marched to Aleppo,\nwhere more gifts were brought to him, and after capturing three of the\nfortresses of Hamath, reached the royal city of Karkar or Aroer. This, he\nsays, \u201cI threw down, I dug up, I burned with fire; 1,200 chariots, 1,200\nwar-magazines, and 20,000 men belonging to Hadadezer of Damascus; 700\nchariots, 700 war-magazines, and 10,000 men belonging to Irkhulina of\nHamath; 2,000 chariots and 10,000 men belonging to Ahab of Israel\n(_Sirl\u00e2_); 500 men of the Kuans; 1,000 men from Egypt; 10 chariots and\n10,000 men from the land of Irkanat; 2,000 men belonging to Matinu-baal of\nArvad; 2,000 men from the land of Usanat; 30 chariots and 10,000 men\nbelonging to Adoni-baal of Sizan; 1,000 men belonging to Gindibuh of the\nArabians; and several hundred men belonging to Baasha, the son of Rehob,\nof the Ammonites\u2014these twelve kings led their troops to its help, and came\nto make war and fighting against me. By the supreme help which Assur, the\nlord, gave (me), with the mighty weapons which the great defender who went\nbefore me lent (to me), I fought with them. From the city of Karkar, as\nfar as the city of Guzau I overthrew them. Fourteen thousand of their\nfighting men I slew with weapons; like the Air-god I bade the storm issue\nforth upon them; with their corpses I filled the face of the waters; their\nvast armies I brought down with my weapons; there was not room enough in\nthe country for their dead bodies; to preserve the life of it I brought\nback a vast multitude, and distributed them among its men. The banks of\nthe River Orontes I reached. In the midst of this battle I took away from\nthem their chariots, their war-magazines, and their horses trained to the\nyoke.\u201d\n\nThe first question that presents itself to us when we read this\ninscription is how we are to reconcile the mention of Ahab in it with the\ndate of the battle of Karkar (B.C. 853). According to the chronology\nadopted in the margin of our Bibles, Ahab would have been dead long before\nthe event. The Assyrian monuments, however, have proved that this\nchronology exceeds the true one by more than forty years; and the date\nassigned to Ahab by the inscription harmonises completely with the dates\nthat other inscriptions assign to later kings of Israel and Judah. In all\nprobability, the battle of Karkar took place shortly before Ahab\u2019s death;\nand it was no doubt in consequence of the defeat undergone there by the\nSyrian forces that Ahab was not only enabled to shake off his subjection\nto Damascus, but also to ally himself with Judah, and endeavour to recover\nthe frontier fortress of Ramoth, of which Israel had been robbed. The\nalliance between Ahab and the king of Damascus is recorded in 1 Kings xx.\n34. The battle of Karkar must have followed not very long afterwards,\nsince the attack on Ramoth was made within three years after the\nconclusion of the alliance. Ahab\u2019s death may, therefore, be placed in B.C.\n851.\n\nAnother question that may be asked is how the Assyrian monarch can say\nthat twelve princes were arrayed in arms against him, when, according to\nhis own enumeration, the forces of only eleven nations were present, some\nof which do not seem to have been under the command of any king. The only\nanswer that can be given is that Shalmaneser is guilty of a similar\narithmetical inaccuracy to that which makes him say that 14,000 of the\nenemy fell in battle, whereas, according to other accounts, the number was\nreally 20,500; though it is possible that the latter number may include\nthe loss in other battles that took place during the campaign besides the\ndecisive one at Karkar. When, however, we find such arithmetical\ncorruptions as these in contemporaneous documents, we need not wonder that\nthe numerical statements of the Old Testament have become changed and\nuncertain in their passage through the hands of generations of copyists.\n\nWe may infer from the fifth chapter of 2 Kings that the god Rimmon was the\nchief object of worship of Hadadezer or Ben-hadad, the Syrian king. The\nAssyrian inscriptions have shown us why this was so. Rimmon is the\nAssyrian Ramman, the Air-god, and Ramman is specially identified with the\nSyrian deity Hadad, whose name enters into that of Hadadezer.\nHadad-Rimmon, in fact, was the supreme divinity of Damascus, where he\nrepresented, not the god of the air, as among the Assyrians, but Baal, the\nSun-god, himself. Hence it is that in Zechariah xii. 11, reference is made\nto the \u201cmourning of Hadad-Rimmon in the valley of Megiddo,\u201d that is to\nsay, to the yearly festival, when the women mourned for the death of the\nSun-god, slain, as it was imagined, by the winter. In Ph\u0153nicia the god was\nknown as Ad\u00f4nis, the \u201clord,\u201d or under his old Babylonian title of Tammuz.\nIt was for Tammuz, it will be remembered, that Ezekiel saw the women\nsitting and weeping within the precincts of \u201cthe Lord\u2019s house\u201d itself in\nJerusalem (Ezek. viii. 14).\n\nHadadezer was murdered between the fourteenth and eighteenth years of\nShalmaneser, and the crown seized by Hazael. In his eighteenth year the\nAssyrian king moved against the usurper, and captured his camp along with\n1,121 chariots and 470 war-magazines. The battle took place on the summit\nof Sanir or Shenir\u2014the name given to Mount Hermon by the Amorites\naccording to Deut. iii. 9\u2014\u201cwhich lies over against Lebanon.\u201d Here 16,000\nof the Syrians fell in battle, and Hazael fled to Damascus, whither he was\nfollowed by the Assyrians. Damascus, however, proved too strong to be\ncaptured, and Shalmaneser accordingly contented himself with cutting down\nthe trees by which it was surrounded, and retiring into the Haur\u00e2n, where\nhe burnt the unwalled towns, and carried away their inhabitants into\ncaptivity. He then followed the high road from Damascus to the\nMediterranean, and on the promontory of Baal-rosh, at the mouth of the Dog\nRiver, near Beyr\u00fbt, had an image of himself carved upon the rocks. At the\nsame place he received the tribute of Tyre and Sidon, as well as of\n\u201cYahua, the son of Khumri,\u201d that is to say, of Jehu, the descendant of\nOmri. In calling Jehu a descendant of Omri, the Assyrian king was\nmisinformed; he had heard nothing of the revolution which had extirpated\nthe house of Omri, and had placed Jehu upon the throne. Like Ahab,\ntherefore, Jehu was supposed to be a son of Omri, the founder of Samaria,\nwhich is frequently termed Beth-Omri, \u201cthe house of Omri,\u201d in the Assyrian\ninscriptions, though in the later days of Tiglath-Pileser II and Sargon,\n\u201cBeth-Omri\u201d is superseded by \u201cSamirina.\u201d This was the Aramaic form of the\nnative name\u2014Shimr\u00f4n, and must consequently have been derived by the\nAssyrians from the Aramaic neighbours of the Israelites.\n\nIn the Assyrian Hall of the British Museum there now stands a small\nobelisk of black marble, which was brought from Calah by Sir A. H. Layard,\non which Shalmaneser records the annals of his reign. The upper portion of\nthe monument is occupied by a series of reliefs representing the tribute\nbrought to the Assyrian monarch by the distant nations which had sought\nhis favour. Among the reliefs is one in which the ambassadors of Jehu are\ndepicted bearing their offerings of gold and silver bars, of a golden vase\nand a golden spoon, of cups and goblets of gold, of pieces of lead, of a\nroyal sceptre and of clubs of wood. Their features are those which are\nstill characteristic of the Jewish race, and their fringed robes descend\nto their ankles.\n\nThe death of Shalmaneser brought with it a period of peace for Damascus\nand Palestine. His son and successor turned his arms in other directions,\nand Hazael and his successor, Ben-hadad III, were left free to ravage\nIsrael (2 Kings xiii. 3). It was not until the Israelites, under Jeroboam\nII, had taken ample revenge upon the Syrians, and the coast of Israel was\nrestored \u201cfrom the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain,\u201d that an\nAssyrian monarch once more marched towards the west. This was\nRimmon-nirari, grandson of Shalmaneser, who reigned from B.C. 810 to 781,\nand reduced the kingdom of Damascus to a condition of vassalage. Damascus\nwas now under the government of a king called Marih, the successor,\nprobably, of Ben-hadad III, who, after undergoing a siege at the hands of\nthe Assyrians, was glad to make terms with them by acknowledging the\nsupremacy of Rimmon-nirari, and by giving him 2,300 talents of silver, 20\ntalents of gold, 3,000 talents of copper, 5,000 talents of iron,\nembroidered robes and clothes of fine linen, a couch inlaid with ivory and\nan ivory parasol, besides other treasures and furniture without number\nwhich his palace contained. It is very possible that Jeroboam\u2019s successes\nagainst the Syrians were in large measure due to the extent to which they\nhad been weakened by the Assyrians. Rimmon-nirari also claims to have\nreceived tribute from Tyre and Sidon, from Beth-Omri, from Edom, and from\nPalastu or Palestine\u2014a name under which we should probably include not\nonly the district inhabited by the Philistines, but the kingdom of Judah\nas well. The tribute was no doubt sent to him after his triumphal entry\ninto Damascus.\n\nWith Rimmon-nirari the power of the older dynasty of the Assyrian kings\ncame to an end. His successors were scarcely able to defend themselves\nagainst the attacks of their neighbours on the north and south; diseases\nand insurrections broke out in the great cities of the kingdom, and\nfinally, in B.C. 746, there was a rising in Calah; the king either died or\nwas put to death, and before the year was over, in the month of April,\nB.C. 745, the crown was seized by a military adventurer, named Pul, who\nassumed the title of Tiglath-Pileser II. Tiglath-Pileser I had been the\nmost famous monarch and most extensive conqueror of the older dynasty, and\nhad reigned over Assyria five centuries previously; by assuming his name,\ntherefore, the usurper wished to show that he intended to emulate his\ndeeds. According to later tradition, the new king had begun his career as\na gardener; whether this were true or not, he showed great military and\nexecutive capacities after he had established himself on the throne, and\nit was to him that the second Assyrian empire owed its origin.\n\nTiglath-Pileser determined to cement the various states of Western Asia\ninto a single empire, governed by satraps appointed at Nineveh, and\naccountable only to the king. Each satrapy, or province, had to provide a\ncertain number of men for the imperial army, and to pay a fixed annual\ntribute to the imperial treasury. Thus, Nineveh itself was assessed at 30\ntalents, ten of which went to the general expenditure, while the remaining\ntwenty were devoted to the maintenance of the fleet. Calah paid 9 talents;\nCarchemish, once the rich capital of the Hittites, paid 100; Arpad 30; and\nMegiddo but 15. Besides gold and silver, the cities and provinces were\ncalled upon to furnish chariots, clothing, and other similar\ncontributions.\n\nTwo years after his accession (B.C. 743) Tiglath-Pileser II turned his\nattention to the west. Arpad, now Tel-Erfad, near Aleppo, was the first\nobject of attack. It held out for three years, and did not fall until B.C.\n740. But, meanwhile, the kingdom of Hamath had been shattered by the\nAssyrian arms. Nineteen of its districts were placed under Assyrian\ngovernors, and the Assyrian forces made their way as far as the\nMediterranean Sea. Azri-yahu, or Azariah (Uzziah), the Jewish king, had\nbeen the ally of Hamath, and from him also punishment was accordingly\nexacted. He was compelled to purchase peace by the offer of submission and\nthe payment of tribute. The alliance between Judah and Hamath had been of\nlong standing. David had been the friend of its king Tou or Toi; and at\nthe beginning of Sargon\u2019s reign the king of Hamath bears a distinctively\nJewish name. This is Yahu-bihdi, or, as it is elsewhere written,\nIlu-bihdi, where the word _ilu_, \u201cgod,\u201d takes the place of the name of the\ncovenant God of Israel. It is even possible that Yahu-bihdi was a Jew who\nhad been placed on the throne of Hamath by Azariah. At any rate, the\nalliance between Judah and Hamath explains a passage in 2 Kings xiv. 28,\nwhich has long presented a difficulty. It is now clear that Jeroboam is\nhere stated to have won over Hamath to Israel, though previously it had\n\u201cbeen allied with Judah.\u201d But after Jeroboam\u2019s death, Jewish influence\nmust once more have gained an ascendency among the Hamathites.\n\nTwo years after the fall of Arpad, Tiglath-Pileser was again in the west.\nOn this occasion he held a _lev\u00e9e_ of subject princes, among whom Rezon of\nDamascus and Manahem of Samaria came to offer their gifts and do homage to\ntheir sovereign lord.(7) The tribute which Tiglath-Pileser states that he\nthen received from the Israelitish king was given, according to the Book\nof Kings, to Pul. We may infer from this, therefore, that the Assyrian\nmonarch was still known to the neighbouring nations by his original name,\nand that it was not until later that they became accustomed to the new\ntitle he had assumed. The inference is further borne out by the statement\nof an ancient Greek astronomer, Ptolemy. When speaking of the eclipses\nwhich were observed at Babylon, Ptolemy gives a list of Babylonian kings,\nwith the length of their reigns, from the so-called era of Nabonassar, in\nB.C. 747, down to the time of Alexander the Great. In this list,\nTiglath-Pileser, after his conquest of Babylon, is named Poros or Por, Por\nbeing the Persian form of Pul.\n\nDuring the lifetime of Menahem Israel remained tributary to Assyria, and\nthe Assyrian king did not again turn his arms against the west. After the\ndeath of Menahem and the murder of his son Pekahiah, however, important\nchanges took place. The usurper, Pekah, in alliance with Rezon of\nDamascus, attacked Judah with the intention of overthrowing the dynasty of\nDavid and placing on the throne of Jerusalem a vassal king whose father\u2019s\nname, Tabeel, shows that he must have been a Syrian. Jotham, the Jewish\nking, died shortly after the war began, and the youth and weakness of his\nson and successor Ahaz laid Judah open to its antagonists, who were\nfurther aided by a disaffected party within the capital itself (Isa. viii.\n6). In his extremity, therefore, Ahaz appealed to the Assyrian monarch,\nwho was already seeking an excuse for crushing Damascus, and reducing the\nJewish kingdom, with its important fortress of Jerusalem, to a condition\nof vassalage. In B.C. 734, accordingly, Tiglath-Pileser marched into\nSyria. Rezon was defeated in a pitched battle, his chariots broken in\npieces, his captains captured and impaled, while he himself escaped to\nDamascus, where he was closely besieged by the enemy. The territory of\nDamascus was now devastated with fire and sword, its sixteen districts\nwere \u201coverwhelmed as with a flood,\u201d and the beautiful gardens by which the\ncapital was surrounded were destroyed, every tree being cut down for use\nin the siege. The city itself, however, proved too strong to be taken by\nassault; so, leaving a sufficient force before it to reduce it by famine,\nTiglath-Pileser proceeded against the late allies of the Syrian king.\nIsrael was the first to be attacked. The north of the country was overrun,\nand the tribes beyond the Jordan carried into captivity. Gilead and\nAbel-beth-maachah are mentioned by name as among the towns that were taken\nand sacked.(8) The Assyrians then fell upon Ammon and Moab, which had\naided Israel and Syria in the attack on Judah, and next made their way\nalong the sea-coast into the country of the Philistines, who had seized\nthe opportunity of the late war to shake off the yoke of the Jewish king.\nTheir leader, Khanun or Hanno of Gaza, fled into Egypt; but Gaza itself\nwas captured and laid under tribute, its gods carried away, and an image\nof the Assyrian king set up in the temple of Dagon. Ekron and Ashdod were\nalso punished, and Metinti of Ashkelon committed suicide in order to\nescape the vengeance of the conqueror.\n\nNow that all fear of danger in the south had been removed, Tiglath-Pileser\nmarched back into the northern kingdom, took Samaria, and (according to\nhis own account) put Pekah to death, appointing Hosea king in his place. A\nyearly tribute of ten talents of gold and a thousand of silver was at the\nsame time exacted. Shortly afterwards some of the Assyrian troops were\nsent against the Edomites and the Queen of the Arabs, who had also\nrevolted against Assyria and joined the Syro-Israelite league. Indeed,\nthis league seems to have been formed for the purpose of checking the\nAssyrian advance, and the war against Judah to have been due to a refusal\nof Jotham to take part in it. It was an anticipation of the league that\nwas afterwards formed in the time of Hezekiah against the growing power of\nSargon.\n\nMeanwhile, after a siege of two years, Damascus fell in B.C. 732. Rezon\nwas slain, his subjects transported into captivity, and a great court,\nlike a durbar in modern India, was held in his palace by Tiglath-Pileser.\nAmong the subject-princes who attended it was Ahaz of Judah. He is called\nJehoahaz in the Assyrian inscriptions, and it is therefore clear that the\nsacred historians have dropped the first part of the name, in consequence\nof the character of the king. The divine name would have been profaned by\nits association with an idolatrous and unworthy prince. As Khanun appeared\nat the court along with Kavus-melech of Edom, Metinti of Ashkelon, Solomon\nof Moab, and Sanib of Ammon, he must have succeeded in obtaining a pardon.\nIt was while Ahaz was at Damascus in attendance on the Assyrian monarch\nthat he saw the altar, the pattern of which he sent to Urijah, ordering it\nto be set up in the court of the Lord\u2019s house.\n\nTiglath-Pileser died in B.C. 727, and was succeeded by Shalmaneser IV. The\nrefusal of Hosea to continue the annual tribute brought the new Assyrian\nmonarch into the west. Tyre was besieged unsuccessfully, Hosea carried\naway captive, and Samaria blockaded for three years. During the blockade\nShalmaneser died, and the crown was seized by one of the Assyrian\ngenerals. The latter assumed the name of Sargon, in memory of the famous\nBabylonian monarch who had reigned so many centuries before. The capture\nof Samaria took place in his first year (B.C. 722); 27,280 of its\ninhabitants were sent into exile, but only fifty chariots were found in\nthe city. An Assyrian governor was appointed over it, who was commissioned\nto send each year to Nineveh the same tribute as that paid by Hosea. The\ncomparatively small number of Israelites who were carried into captivity\nshows that Sargon contented himself with removing only those persons and\ntheir families who had taken part in the revolt against him; in fact,\nSamaria was treated pretty much as Jerusalem was by Nebuchadrezzar in the\ntime of Jehoiachin. The greater part of the old population was allowed to\nremain in its native land. This fact disposes of the modern theories which\nassume that the whole of the Ten Tribes were carried away. The districts\nto which the captives were taken were Halah, the banks of the Habor, or\nriver of Gozan, and the cities of the Medes. Halah was not far from Haran\nin Mesopotamia, on the western side of the Habor, the modern Khabur, which\nflows into the Euphrates, and rises in the country called Guzana, or\nGozan, in the Assyrian inscriptions. The Medes were the tribes who lived\neastward of Kurdistan, which, like Mesopotamia, had been overrun by\nTiglath-Pileser.\n\nThe places of the captive Israelites were not supplied immediately. We\nlearn from the Old Testament that it was from Hamath and the cities of\nBabylonia that the new inhabitants were brought. Now Hamath was not\nconquered by Sargon until B.C. 720, and Babylonia not until B.C. 710.\nHamath had broken into revolt under Yahu-bihdi or Ilu-bihdi, who induced\nArpad, Damascus, and Samaria to follow its example. But its chastisement\nwas speedy and sharp. Sargon captured Ilu-bihdi in the city of Aroer, and\nflayed him alive; while Hamath received a colony of 4,300 Assyrians and an\nAssyrian governor. Samaria was next punished, and Sargon then marched\nsouthward against the combined forces of Khanun of Gaza and Sabako or So\nof Egypt. A battle at Raphia decided the fate of the struggle, and Khanun\nfell into the hands of his enemies.\n\nThe Babylonian cities from which some of the new settlers in Samaria were\ntaken were Cuthah and Sepharvaim. Cuthah is now represented by the mounds\nof Tel Ibrahim, to the north-west of Babylon. It was under the special\nprotection of Nergal, whose name means \u201cthe lord of the great city,\u201d the\ngod of the under-world. Sepharvaim, or \u201cthe two Sipparas,\u201d stood on\nopposite banks of the Euphrates. The quarter on the eastern bank, now\ncalled Abu-Habba, was Sippara proper, where, according to Babylonian\ntradition, Sisuthros had buried his books before the Deluge; the quarter\non the other bank being Agad\u00e9 or Accad, the old capital of Sargon I, which\ngave its name to the whole of the northern portion of Chaldea. In later\ntimes the two quarters were distinguished from one another as \u201cSippara of\nSamas,\u201d the Sun-god, and \u201cSippara of Anunit.\u201d Anunit was the wife of the\ngod Anu, \u201cthe sky\u201d; and when the Bible says that \u201cthe Sepharvites burnt\ntheir children in fire to Anammelech\u201d reference is made to \u201cAnu the king.\u201d\nAdrammelech, or \u201cAdar the king,\u201d was another Babylonian deity, who was\noriginally a form of the Sun-god.\n\nWe may gather from Ezra iv. 2, 10, that Samaria was colonised a second\ntime by the Assyrians, perhaps in consequence of an unsuccessful revolt.\nThis took place in the reign of Esar-haddon. His son Asnapper, or\nAssur-bani-pal, settled a number of Elamite tribes in the country, among\nthem being natives of Susa and of Apharsa or Mal Amir. Men from Babylon\nand Erech were also settled there at the same time. The names of the new\ncolonists would suit the reign of Assur-bani-pal better than that of\nEsar-haddon, since it was Assur-bani-pal, and not Esar-haddon, who\nconquered Elam and Susa, and took by storm both Babylon and Erech. It is,\ntherefore, probable that Esar-haddon in verse 2 is a scribe\u2019s error for\nAsnapper.\n\nThe reduction of the northern kingdom of Israel into an Assyrian province\nbrought the Assyrian empire to the very borders of Judah, and the Assyrian\nkings began to cast longing eyes upon the territory of the latter. Its\ncapital, Jerusalem, was an almost impregnable fortress, the possession of\nwhich would open the road into Egypt, as well as block the passage of an\nEgyptian army into Asia. But as yet there was no excuse for attacking it.\nHezekiah, the successor of Ahaz, continued to pay the tribute his father\nhad consented to give to the Assyrians, and Sargon accordingly occupied\nhimself in wars elsewhere. Suddenly, however, an event occurred which\nbrought him once more into Palestine. In order to understand this, we must\nturn our eyes for a moment or two to Babylonia.\n\nThe Babylonians had seized the opportunity offered by the death of\nTiglath-Pileser to shake off the Assyrian yoke. For five years they\nremained free. Then in B.C. 722 the country was occupied by a man of great\nenergy and ability, Merodach-baladan, the son of Yagina.(9)\nMerodach-baladan was the hereditary chief of the Kald\u00e2 or Chaldeans, a\nsmall tribe at that time settled in the marshes at the mouth of the\nEuphrates, but which, in consequence of his conquest of Babylon\nafterwards, became the dominant caste in Babylonia itself. For twelve\nyears he continued undisputed master of the country we may henceforth call\nChaldea. Sargon, however, was becoming every year more powerful, and it\nwas evident that another Assyrian invasion of Babylonia would not be long\npostponed. Merodach-baladan determined to anticipate the attack. He\ntherefore endeavoured to form a vast league between the states on both the\neastern and the western sides of the Assyrian empire, whose independence\nwas menaced by their powerful neighbour. Babylonia and Elam were the\neastern members of the league, and ambassadors were sent to the west, to\nconcert measures with the various states of Palestine, as well as with\nEgypt, for common action against Sargon.\n\nHezekiah, now in the fourteenth year of his reign (2 Kings xx. 6), had\njust recovered from a dangerous illness, which had been aggravated by the\nfear of Assyria, and the fact that as yet he had no son to succeed him.\nThe illness formed the pretext by which the conspirators hoped to blind\nthe eyes of Sargon to the real objects of the embassy; it was published to\nthe world that the ambassadors had come merely to congratulate the Jewish\nking on his recovery. But Sargon knew well that Merodach-baladan would not\nhave troubled himself to enquire after the health of a brother-king\nwithout a further motive, and he doubtless learned that Hezekiah had shown\nthe ambassadors all the treasures and arms with which he hoped to support\nthe league. The consequence was, that before the confederates were\nprepared to resist him, the Assyrian monarch had swooped down upon them\nand attacked them singly.\n\nPalestine was the first to suffer. Akhimit, whom Sargon had appointed king\nof Ashdod, had been dethroned, and the crown given to an usurper named\nYavan or \u201cthe Greek.\u201d Yavan seems to have been the nominee of Hezekiah,\nwho at this time exercised a sort of suzerainty over the Philistine\ncities, and he was set up as king for the purpose of heading the\nPhilistine revolt against Assyria. Edom and Moab also sent contingents to\nthe war, and the Ethiopian king of Egypt promised help. Of the details of\nthe struggle between Sargon and the western states we unfortunately know\nnothing. But it did not last long; neither Babylonia nor Egypt had time to\nsend any assistance to their allies. The _Tartan_ or Commander-in-chief\nwas ordered to invest Ashdod (see Isa. xx. 1), while Sargon himself\noverran \u201cthe wide-spreading land of Judah,\u201d and captured its capital\nJerusalem. This conquest of Judah by Sargon explains prophecies of Isaiah\nwhich have hitherto been unsolved mysteries. Thus an explanation is at\nlength offered of the circumstances described by the prophet in chapters\nx. and xi. Here the Assyrian army is described as marching along the usual\nhigh-road from the north-east, and as halting at Nob, only an hour\u2019s\njourney distant from Jerusalem, on the very day when the oracle was\nuttered,(10) while Isaiah declares that the capital itself shall fall into\nthe hands of the enemy (x. 6, 12, 22, 24, 34).\n\nAll this is inapplicable to the invasion of Sennacherib, when a detachment\nonly of the Assyrian army was sent against Jerusalem from the south-west,\nand when Isaiah was commissioned by God to promise that the king of\nAssyria should \u201cnot come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor\ncome before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it.\u201d The older\ncommentators were accordingly driven to the desperate expedient of\nsupposing that the invasion described by Isaiah in the tenth chapter of\nhis prophecies was an ideal one. Thanks, however, to the decipherment of\nthe cuneiform inscriptions, all is now clear, and we can now understand\nwhy it is that the Assyrian monarch, whose march is described by Isaiah,\nclaims to be the conqueror of Calno and Carchemish, of Hamath and Arpad,\nof Damascus and Samaria (w. 8-10). All these were conquests of Sargon, not\nof Sennacherib.\n\nAshdod was taken and razed to the ground, and its inhabitants sold into\ncaptivity. Yavan managed to escape to the Egyptian king, who was cowardly\nenough to give him up to his enemies. Edom and Moab were punished for the\npart they had taken in the rebellion, and the authority of Sargon was\nparamount as far as the frontier of Egypt.\n\nAll this happened in B.C. 711. The following year the whole power of\nAssyria was hurled against Merodach-baladan. The Elamites were defeated\nand their border-towns sacked, and the Babylonian king was compelled to\nretreat southwards, leaving Babylon in the hands of the Assyrians. A year\nlater he was pursued by Sargon into his last refuge; Bit-Yagina, his\nancestral capital, was taken by storm, and he himself forced to surrender.\nHis good fortune never returned. On Sargon\u2019s death he once more entered\nBabylon, but his second reign only lasted six months. After a battle which\nended in the complete victory of Sennacherib, he fled again to the\nmarshes, but was driven out of them four years later, and sailed across\nthe Persian Gulf to find a new home on the western coast of Elam. But even\nhere his implacable enemies followed him. In B.C. 697, Sennacherib manned\na fleet with Ph\u0153nician sailors and destroyed the town the old Chaldean\nprince had built. After this we hear of him no more.\n\nThe tenth chapter of Isaiah teaches us to look for references to the\ncapture of Jerusalem by Sargon in other parts of the book. It is\nimpossible not to recognise one of these in the twenty-second chapter.\nHere the prophet presents us with the picture of a siege which has already\nlasted some time, and when the inhabitants of Jerusalem are no longer\nslain by the sword, but by famine, while the city is on the point of being\nstarved out. Here also the message which Isaiah is bidden to deliver is\nnot a promise of deliverance from the enemy, but the reverse: \u201cIt was\nrevealed in my ears by the Lord of Hosts, surely this iniquity shall not\nbe purged from you till ye die, saith the Lord God of Hosts.\u201d It is only\nthe campaign of Sargon that can explain these words.\n\nTen years later Judah was again invaded by an Assyrian king, and Jerusalem\nagain threatened by an Assyrian army. Sargon had been murdered by his\nsoldiers, and succeeded by his son, Sennacherib, who mounted the throne on\nthe 12th of the month of Ab, or July, B.C. 705. He was a very different\nman from his father, weak and vain-glorious, fonder of boasting than of\ndeeds. Trusting to the support of Tirhakah, the Ethiopian king of Egypt,\nHezekiah threw off his allegiance to Assyria, and refused to send the\nyearly tribute to Nineveh. The Ph\u0153nicians did the same, while the Jewish\nking reasserted his former supremacy over the cities of the Philistines.\nPadi, the king of Ekron, who remained faithful to Assyria, was carried in\nchains to Jerusalem, and Zedekiah, who is named in the Assyrian records as\nthe king of Ashkelon, was probably of Jewish origin. It was not until\nthree years after his accession that Sennacherib found himself able to\nmarch against the rebels. In B.C. 701 he crossed the Euphrates, and made\nhis way to the shores of the Mediterranean. Great and Little Sidon,\nSarepta, Acre, and other Ph\u0153nician towns, surrendered to the invader, the\nSidonian monarch fled to Cyprus, and the kings of Arvad and Gebal hastened\nto pay their court to the conquerer. Metinti of Ashdod, Pedael of Ammon,\nChemosh-nadad of Moab, and Melech-ram of Edom, who were also suspected of\nhaving taken part in the rebellion, came at the same time. Judah and the\ndependent Philistine states alone still held out.\n\nThe rest of the history had best be told in Sennacherib\u2019s own words.\n\u201cZedekiah, king of Ashkelon,\u201d he says, \u201cwho had not submitted to my yoke,\nhimself, the gods of the house of his fathers, his wife, his sons, his\ndaughters and his brothers, the seed of the house of his fathers, I\nremoved, and I sent him to Assyria. I set over the men of Ashkelon,\nSarludari, the son of Rukipti, their former king, and I imposed upon him\nthe payment of tribute, and the homage due to my majesty, and he became a\nvassal. In the course of my campaign I approached and captured Beth-Dagon,\nJoppa, Bene-berak and Azur, the cities of Zedekiah, which did not submit\nat once to my yoke, and I carried away their spoil. The priests, the chief\nmen, and the common people of Ekron, who had thrown into chains their king\nPadi because he was faithful to his oaths to Assyria, and had given him up\nto Hezekiah, the Jew, who imprisoned him like an enemy in a dark dungeon,\nfeared in their hearts. The king of Egypt, the bowmen, the chariots and\nthe horses of the king of Ethiopia, had gathered together innumerable\nforces and gone to their assistance. In sight of the town of Eltekeh was\ntheir order of battle drawn up; they called their troops (to the battle).\nTrusting in Assur, my lord, I fought with them and overthrew them. My\nhands took the captains of the chariots and the sons of the king of Egypt,\nas well as the captains of the chariots of the king of Ethiopia, alive in\nthe midst of the battle. I approached and captured the towns of Eltekeh\nand Timnath, and I carried away their spoil. I marched against the city of\nEkron, and put to death the priests and the chief men who had committed\nthe sin (of rebellion), and I hung up their bodies on stakes all round the\ncity. The citizens who had done wrong and wickedness I counted as a spoil;\nas for the rest of them who had done no sin or crime, in whom no fault was\nfound, I proclaimed their freedom (from punishment). I had Padi, their\nking, brought out from the midst of Jerusalem, and I seated him on the\nthrone of royalty over them, and I laid upon him the tribute due to my\nmajesty. But as for Hezekiah of Judah, who had not submitted to my yoke,\nforty-six of his strong cities, together with innumerable fortresses and\nsmall towns which depended on them, by overthrowing the walls and open\nattack, by battle, engines and battering-rams I besieged, I captured. I\nbrought out from the midst of them and counted as a spoil 200,150 persons,\ngreat and small, male and female, horses, mules, asses, camels, oxen and\nsheep without number. Hezekiah himself I shut up like a bird in a cage in\nJerusalem, his royal city. I built a line of forts against him, and I kept\nback his heel from going forth out of the great gate of his city. I cut\noff his cities which I had spoiled from the midst of his land, and gave\nthem to Metinti, king of Ashdod, Padi, king of Ekron, and Zil-baal, king\nof Gaza, and I made his country small. In addition to their former tribute\nand yearly gifts I added other tribute, and the homage due to my majesty,\nand I laid it upon them. The fear of the greatness of my majesty\noverwhelmed him, even Hezekiah, and he sent after me to Nineveh, my royal\ncity, by way of gift and tribute, the Arabs and his body-guard whom he had\nbrought for the defence of Jerusalem, his royal city, and had furnished\nwith pay, along with thirty talents of gold, 800 talents of pure silver,\ncarbuncles and other precious stones, a couch of ivory, thrones of ivory,\nan elephant\u2019s hide, an elephant\u2019s tusk, rare woods, whatever their names,\na vast treasure, as well as the eunuchs of his palace, dancing men and\ndancing women; and he sent his ambassador to offer homage.\u201d\n\nThe Assyrian and the Biblical accounts complete and supplement one\nanother. Sennacherib naturally glosses over the disaster that befel him in\nPalestine, and transfers the payment of the tribute from the time when\nHezekiah vainly hoped to buy off the siege of Jerusalem to the end of the\ncampaign. But he cannot conceal the fact that he never succeeded in taking\nthe revolted city or in punishing Hezekiah, as he had punished other rebel\nkings, nor did he again undertake a campaign in the west. We find him the\nnext year in Babylonia; then he attacked the tribes of Cilicia; but he\nnever again ventured into Palestine. During the rest of his lifetime Judah\nhad nothing more to fear from the Assyrian king.\n\nAt first sight there seems to be a discrepancy between the number of\nsilver talents stated in the Bible to have been paid by Hezekiah, and the\nnumber which Sennacherib claims to have received. But the discrepancy is\nonly an apparent one. It has been shown that there were two standards of\nvalue, according to one of which 500 talents of silver would be equivalent\nto 800 talents, if reckoned by the other. A more real discrepancy is to be\nfound in the statement of Sennacherib that he had built a line of forts\nround about Jerusalem, and prevented Hezekiah from getting out of it. This\nis in flagrant contradiction to the words of Isaiah, that the Assyrian\nking should not shoot an arrow into Jerusalem, nor assault it under the\ncover of shields, nor cast a bank against it. Sennacherib claims to have\nperformed more than he actually did.\n\nAnother discrepancy has been found in the date assigned by the Biblical\nnarrative to the Assyrian invasion. The year B.C. 701 was the\ntwenty-fourth year of Hezekiah, not the fourteenth, which fell in B.C.\n711, the year of Sargon\u2019s campaign. But this very fact supplies an\nexplanation of the difficulty. In the retrospective record of the\nprophetical annalist, the two campaigns of Sargon and Sennacherib have\nbeen brought into association, though the history dwells only upon that\none which illustrated God\u2019s way of dealing with His faithful servants.\nHence it is that reminiscences of the earlier invasion are allowed to\nenter here and there into the narrative. It was Sargon, and not\nSennacherib, who was the conqueror of Hamath and Arpad, of Sepharvaim and\nSamaria (2 Kings xviii. 34-36). It was Sargon, and not Sennacherib, who\ninvaded Judah in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah\u2019s reign.\n\nThere is a bas-relief in the British Museum which represents Sennacherib\nseated on his throne in front of Lachish, and receiving the spoil of the\ncity as it passed before him. It was while he was encamped before this\ncity that Hezekiah despatched the embassy with gifts and tribute and\nprayers for pardon. Sennacherib accepted the gifts, but refused the\npardon; nothing would content him but the absolute surrender of Jerusalem\nand its king. Hezekiah then prepared for his defence. We gather from\nIsaiah\u2019s writings that there were at that period three parties in the\nState, each of which at different times gained an influence over the king\nand his councillors. There was first the party headed by Shebna\u2014whose name\nproves him to have been of Syrian parentage\u2014which advocated alliance with\nEgypt and hostility to Assyria. This was the party with which Isaiah had\nmainly to contend, but its power was not finally extinguished until after\nthe retreat of Tirhakah from the battle of Eltekeh, and this visible proof\nthat Egypt was but a bruised reed to lean upon. The second party inherited\nthe policy of Ahaz, and urged that Judah\u2019s only chance of safety lay in\nsubmission to the mighty Empire of Assyria. Isaiah was the representative\nof the third party. He announced God\u2019s own declaration, that He would\ndefend His city and temple if only its inhabitants would trust and fear\nHim, and reject all alliances with the heathen nations that surrounded\nthem. \u201cIn quietness and in confidence\u201d should be their strength. It was\nnot until events had demonstrated the truth of Isaiah\u2019s message that the\nrulers of Jerusalem reluctantly accepted it, and recognised at last that\nthe true policy of Judah was to abstain from mixing in the wars and\nintrigues of the foreign idolater.\n\nWhen the Jewish embassy arrived at Lachish, the Egyptian party seems still\nto have been in the ascendant. In spite of the prophet\u2019s warning, envoys\nhad been sent to Egypt (Isa. xxx. xxxi.), and had returned full of\nconfidence in an alliance, which yet was to be to them not \u201can help nor\nprofit, but a shame and also a reproach.\u201d The battle of Eltekeh dissipated\ntheir hopes. This was fought after the capture of Lachish, when\nSennacherib was endeavouring to take the neighbouring fortress of Libnah\n(2 Kings xix. 8, 9). The Rab-shakeh or Prime Minister had been sent\nagainst Jerusalem along with the Tartan or Commander-in-chief and the\nRab-saris or Chamberlain, and after delivering his message to its\ndefenders had returned to Sennacherib, leaving a considerable force under\nthe Tartan encamped outside its walls. The message had been delivered in\nHebrew, not in Assyrian or in Aramaic (Syrian), which at that time was the\ngeneral language of trade and diplomacy in Western Asia, like French in\nmodern Europe. Every politician was expected to speak it, and Hezekiah\u2019s\nministers take it for granted that the Rab-shakeh would be able to do so.\nThe fact that he preferred to speak in Hebrew gives us a high idea of the\neducation of the age. Every cultivated Assyrian was acquainted with\nAccadian, the old dead language of Babylonia, which was to an Assyrian\nwhat Latin is to us; and in addition to this diplomatists and men of\nbusiness were required to know Aramaic, while we here find the highest of\nAssyrian officials further able to converse in Hebrew.\n\nA reminiscence of the disaster which befel the Assyrian army was preserved\nin an Egyptian legend, which ascribed it to the piety of an Egyptian king.\nInfluenced by this legend, some scholars have supposed that it took place\nat Pelusium, on the Egyptian frontier; but the language of Scripture seems\nhardly to leave a doubt that it really happened before Jerusalem. The\nresult was the abrupt breaking up of the Assyrian camp and the termination\nof the siege of Jerusalem. Sennacherib hastened back to Nineveh, and the\ncourt annalists were bidden to draw a veil of silence over the conclusion\nof the campaign.\n\nHezekiah did not long survive his wonderful deliverance. Next to Solomon\nhe seems to have been the most cultivated of the Jewish kings. His public\nworks rendered Jerusalem one of the most formidable fortresses of the\nancient world; and if the tunnel of Siloam belongs to his reign, it is\nclear that he had at his disposal engineering skill of a high order. He\nwas not only himself a poet, but a restorer of the old psalmody and a\npatron of literature. In imitation, probably, of the libraries of Assyria\nand Babylonia, he established a library in Jerusalem, where scribes were\nemployed, as they were at Nineveh, in making new editions of ancient works\n(see Prov. xxv. 1.). Ahaz had introduced into Judah the study of\nastronomy, for which the Babylonians were renowned, and had set up a\ngnomon or sun-dial in the palace-court (2 Kings xx. 11). It is possible\nthat some of the astronomical literature of Babylonia, which has been\nrecovered from the cuneiform tablets now in the British Museum, was\nintroduced at the same time, with its multitudinous observations and\nprediction of eclipses, its notices of the appearance of comets, of the\nmovements of the planets and fixed stars, of the phases of Venus, and even\nof spots on the sun. It is also possible that the Assyrian calendar and\nthe Assyrian names of the months now first became familiar to the Jews. At\nany rate, it would seem, from Jer. xxiii. 10, 11, that clay came to be\nused in Judah as a writing material, just as it was at Babylon or Nineveh,\nthe inner clay record of a contract being covered with an outer coating,\non which was inscribed an abstract of its contents, together with the\nnames of the witnesses. Jeremiah\u2019s deed of purchase, moreover, was\npreserved in a jar, like the numerous clay deeds of the Egibi\nbanking-firm, which existed at Babylon from the age of Nebuchadrezzar to\nthat of Xerxes. These jars served the purpose of our modern safes.\n\nSennacherib lived for twenty years after his withdrawal from Palestine. In\nB.C. 681 he was murdered by his two elder sons, Adar-melech and\nNergal-sharezer, who were jealous of the favour shown by him towards their\nyounger brother Esar-haddon. A curious evidence of this favour exists\namong the tablets in the British Museum. This is nothing less than the\nwill of Sennacherib, made apparently some years before his death, in which\nhe bequeaths to Esar-haddon certain private property. The document reads\nas follows:\u2014\u201cI, Sennacherib, king of multitudes, king of Assyria, bequeath\narmlets of gold, quantities of ivory, a platter of gold, ornaments, and\nchains for the neck, all these beautiful things of which there are heaps,\nand three sorts of precious stones, one and a half manehs and two and a\nhalf shekels in weight, to Esar-haddon my son, whose name was afterwards\nchanged to Assur-sar-illik-pal by my wish. The treasure is deposited in\nthe house of Amuk.\u201d The king was excused the necessity of having his will\nattested by witnesses, as was obligatory in the case of other persons; and\nit is plain that at the time when it was made Esar-haddon was not the\nrecognised heir to the throne.\n\nThe murder of the old king took place, according to the Bible, \u201cas he was\nworshipping in the house of Nisroch his god.\u201d The reading of the god\u2019s\nname, however, is corrupt, since no such deity was known to the Assyrians,\nand it is possible that Nusku, the companion of Nebo, the patron of\nliterature, is intended. A war was going on at the time between Assyria\nand Armenia, and the murderers finding, apparently, no adherents in\nNineveh, fled to Erimenas, the Armenian king. Esar-haddon, at the head of\nthe Assyrian veterans, met them and the Armenian forces, a few weeks\nafterwards, at a place not far from Melitene, the modern Malatiyeh, in\nKappadokia. The battle ended in the complete victory of the Assyrians, and\nEsar-haddon was saluted \u201cking\u201d on the spot by his soldiers. He then\nreturned to Nineveh, and there formally ascended the throne.\n\nEsar-haddon resembled his father but little. He was one of the ablest\ngenerals Assyria ever produced, and was distinguished from his\npredecessors by his mild and conciliatory policy. Under him the Assyrian\nempire reached its furthest limits, Egypt being conquered, and placed\nunder twenty Assyrian satraps, while an Assyrian army penetrated into the\nvery heart of the Arabian desert. But the conquests which had been won in\nwar were cemented by a policy of justice and moderation. Thus Babylon,\nwhich had been razed to the ground by Sennacherib in B.C. 691, and the\nadjoining river choked with its ruins, was rebuilt, and Esar-haddon\nendeavoured to win over the Babylonians by residing in it during half the\nyear. This affords an explanation of a fact mentioned in the Second Book\nof Chronicles (xxxiii. 11), which has long been a stumbling-block in the\nway of critics. It is there said that the king of Assyria, after crushing\nthe revolt of Manasseh, carried him away captive to Babylon. The cause of\nthis is now clear. As Esar-haddon spent part of his time at Babylon it\nmerely depended on the season of the year to which of his two capitals,\nNineveh or Babylon, a political prisoner should be brought. The treatment\nof Manasseh was in full accordance with the treatment of other rebel\nprinces in the time of Esar-haddon\u2019s son, Assur-bani-pal. Like them, he\nwas at first loaded with chains, but was afterwards allowed to return to\nhis kingdom and reinstated in the government of it.\n\nThe name of \u201cManasseth, king of Judah,\u201d twice occurs on the Assyrian\nmonuments. Once he is mentioned among the tributaries of Esar-haddon, once\namong those of Assur-bani-pal. It is clear, therefore, that at some period\nshortly after Hezekiah\u2019s death, Judah was again forced to pay tribute and\ndo homage to the Assyrian king. When Esar-haddon passed through Palestine\non his way to Egypt, he found there only submission and respect. Sidon\nalone withstood him, and Sidon was accordingly destroyed.\n\nThe \u201cburden\u201d pronounced upon Egypt by Isaiah (ch. xix.) must belong to the\nage of Esar-haddon. The condition of Egypt at the time was exactly that\ndescribed by the prophet. The country was divided into hostile kingdoms,\nwhich fought \u201cevery one against his brother, and every one against his\nneighbour; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom.\u201d Tirhakah the\nEthiopian, whom the Assyrians had driven out, invaded it from the south,\nand Esar-haddon came down upon it from the north. He it is who is \u201cthe\nfierce king\u201d who, the Lord declared, should rule over the Egyptians. For\nabout twenty years the unhappy country was wasted with fire and sword. The\ntwenty governors appointed by the Assyrians were constantly intriguing\nagainst one another and their suzerain; and again and again the Assyrian\narmies were called upon to return to Egypt to suppress a revolt. It was\nduring one of these campaigns\u2014that which happened about B.C. 665, in the\nreign of Assur-bani-pal\u2014that Thebes, the ancient capital of Upper Egypt,\nwas destroyed. It is termed Ni in the Assyrian texts, a name which\ncorresponds to the Hebrew No-Amon, or No of Amun, the supreme god of the\ncity. Its temples and palaces were overthrown, their treasures were\ncarried away, and two obelisks, which together weighed over seventy tons,\nwere sent as trophies to Nineveh. Nahum (iii. 8) alludes to this\ndestruction of Thebes as a recent event, and thus fixes the approximate\nage of his life and ministry.\n\nThe reign of Esar-haddon was a short one. In B.C. 670, on the 12th day of\nIyyar, or April, he convened by edict a great assembly in Nineveh, and\nthere associated his son Assur-bani-pal, whom the Greeks called\nSardanapalus, in the government. Two years later he died, and\nAssur-bani-pal was proclaimed sole king on the 27th of Ab, or July.\nAssur-bani-pal, the _grand monarque_ of Assyria, whose long reign was a\ncontinuous series of wars, and building, and magnificent patronage of art\nand literature, has little direct contact with Biblical history. The\nconquest of Elam by his generals removed the last civilized power which\ncould struggle with Assyria; but it was not fully accomplished when the\nmighty empire began to totter to its fall. A general rebellion broke out,\nat the heart of which was Assur-bani-pal\u2019s own brother, the viceroy of\nBabylonia. All the strength of Assyria was spent in crushing it; and\nEgypt, which had revolted through the help of Gyges of Lydia, was never\nreconquered. Palestine, strangely enough, seems to have been but little\naffected by the almost universal outbreak; indeed, Chemosh-khalta of Moab\nmaterially assisted Assur-bani-pal, by defeating the Kedarites and sending\ntheir sheikh in chains to Nineveh. One or two Ph\u0153nician cities alone took\noccasion to refuse their tribute. We do not know the year of\nAssur-bani-pal\u2019s death, but it was probably about B.C. 630. He left a\ntroubled heritage to his successors. The viceroy of Babylonia was becoming\nmore and more independent; Elam, the latest Assyrian conquest, was\nthreatened by the Persians, and a new and ferocious enemy had appeared in\nthe north. These were the Scythians, who had descended upon the civilised\nworld from the steppes of Southern Russia. They extended their ravages as\nfar as Palestine, and their occupation of Beth-Shan caused it to be known\nin later days as Scythopolis, \u201cthe city of the Scythians.\u201d The earlier\nprophecies of Jeremiah refer to the miseries inflicted on the country by\nthese barbarians, who must have entered it towards the middle of Josiah\u2019s\nreign. By this time the authority of Assyria in the west could have been\nbut nominal. Nineveh itself had undergone a siege at the hands of the\nMedes, and was only saved from utter destruction by the Scythian\nirruption. Hence we can understand how it was that Josiah was able to\nre-unite the monarchy of David, and extend his sway over what had once\nbeen the kingdom of Samaria. There was no longer an Assyrian governor to\nforbid his overthrowing the altar at Bethel or the \u201chouses of the high\nplaces that were in the cities of Samaria.\u201d\n\nThe date of the final fall and destruction of Nineveh is not certain, and\nmuch depends on the interpretation given to the words \u201cthe king of\nAssyria\u201d in 2 Kings xxiii. 29. If, as is usually supposed, these really\nsignify the king of Babylon, who had succeeded to the power of Assyria, we\nmay place the fall of the Assyrian capital in B.C. 610; otherwise the date\nmust be as late as B.C. 606. It cannot be later, since, when Jeremiah\nreviews in this year the existing nations of the east (xxv. 19-26), he\nsays not a word about either Nineveh or Assyria. The vengeance the\nprophets had predicted for the Assyrians had already fallen upon them.\nWhat it was to be like we may gather from the language of Nahum.\n\nThe last king of Assyria was Esar-haddon II, called Sarakos by the Greek\nwriters. He has left us a few records, which were written when his enemies\nwere gathering about him, and when his people were vainly calling upon\ntheir gods for help. The Medes, the Minni, the Kimmerians or Gomer, had\nall banded themselves together, and were steadily approaching Nineveh. The\nfrontier cities had been stormed, and the enemy was spreading like an\ninundation over the whole country. In their despair the Assyrian rulers\nordained a solemn fast of 100 days and 100 nights, and besought the\nSun-god to pardon their sin. But all was in vain. The measure of the\niniquities of Assyria was filled up; the time had come when the desolater\nshould himself be desolate, and Nineveh, as God\u2019s prophets had threatened,\nwas laid utterly waste.(11)\n\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII. NEBUCHADREZZAR AND CYRUS.\n\n\n    _Rise of the Babylonian empire.\u2014Media.\u2014Pharaoh-Necho.\u2014The battle\n    of Carchemish.\u2014Nebuchadrezzar ascends the throne.\u2014The splendour of\n    Babylon.\u2014No monuments yet discovered recording Nebuchadrezzar\u2019s\n    Jewish and Syrian campaigns.\u2014Evil-Merodach.\u2014Clay documents\n    recently discovered in Babylonia.\u2014New light thrown on the empire\n    of Cyrus.\u2014The cylinder of Cyrus.\u2014Cyrus not a monotheist.\u2014The\n    Babylonian King of Isaiah xiv.\u2014Cyrus not a King of Persia at\n    all.\u2014Babylon not besieged by Cyrus.\u2014How Cyrus came to let the Jews\n    return.\u2014Correspondence between the language of Cyrus and of\n    Scripture.\u2014__\u201c__The god who raises the dead to life.__\u201d__\u2014Prayer\n    after a bad dream.\u2014Babylonian penitential psalms.\u2014A translation of\n    one of them.\u2014Chronological table of the events of the chapter._\n\n\nThe empire of Babylonia arose out of the ashes of the empire of Assyria.\nWhile the bands of the enemy were gathering round the doomed city of\nNineveh, Nabopolassar, the viceroy of Babylonia, seized the opportunity\nfor revolt. There were no armies now, as in former days, that could pour\nout of the gates of the Assyrian capital to punish the rebel, and\nNabopolassar was allowed to establish his new monarchy undisturbed. But\nthe fall of the imperial city left the other provinces of the Assyrian\nempire without a master or a defence. Its latest conquest, Elam, seems to\nhave recovered its independence for a short time\u2014at all events, Jeremiah\n(xxv. 25) in the year 606 B.C. speaks of \u201cthe kings of Elam\u201d\u2014but elsewhere\nits possessions became the battle-ground of the three rival powers of\nBabylon, of Media, and of Egypt.\n\nMedia was the name given by Persian and Greek writers to the kingdom of\nEkbatana, a city now represented by Hamadan. Its native name, at all\nevents in the time of Sargon, was Ellip, and the title of Media applied to\nit in later history seems to have been due to a confusion between the\nAssyrian words _Mad\u00e2_ \u201cMedes,\u201d and _Manda_, \u201cbarbarian.\u201d As we shall see,\nAstyages, the king of Ekbatana, is called \u201cthe king of the people of\n_Manda_,\u201d or \u201cbarbarians,\u201d by the Babylonian king Nabonidos. The tablets\nwhich describe the approach of the last enemies of Nineveh draw a careful\ndistinction between Kaztarit, or Kyaxares, \u201clord of the city of\nCar-Cassi,\u201d and Mamiti-arsu, \u201clord of the city of the Medes.\u201d For the\nAssyrians, the Medes were only the small tribes which inhabited the\nregions eastward of Kurdistan. The error, however, which turned the\nkingdom of Ekbatana into a kingdom of Media has fixed itself in\nliterature, and the Old Testament also has adopted in regard to it the\ncurrent language of the day. It is now too late to disturb the\ntime-honoured title, and we shall therefore continue to speak of a Median\nempire and a Median kingdom, even though we now know that the terms rest\non an ancient mistake.\n\nAs the power of Assyria had dwindled, the power of Egypt had increased.\nThe Egyptian kings began to dream again of an Asiatic empire, such as they\nhad once held in days long gone by, and their first efforts were directed\ntowards securing afresh the cities of the Philistines. Gaza and Ashdod\nwere captured after a long siege;(12) Cyprus became an Egyptian province,\nand Pharaoh Necho, whose Ph\u0153nician fleet had circumnavigated Africa, set\nabout the task of conquering Asia. Josiah was now on the throne of Judah.\nHe still called himself a vassal of Assyria, and could not but see with\nalarm the rise of a new enemy, just as the old one had ceased to be\nformidable. In the name of his suzerain, therefore, he attempted to bar\nthe advance of Necho; the two armies of Egypt and Judah met on the plain\nof Megiddo, where the battle ended in the death of the Jewish king and the\nslaughter of the flower of the Jewish soldiery. The death of Josiah proved\nan irremediable disaster to the Jewish state. He left behind him a family\ntorn by jealousies and supported by rival factions, a people hostile to\nthe religious reforms he had carried through, and an army which had lost\nboth its leader and its veterans. From henceforth Judah was no longer able\nto defend itself from an invader, whether Egyptian or Babylonian; and even\nthe strong walls of Jerusalem no longer proved a defence in days when the\nmethod of warfare had changed, and a victorious army was content to sit\ndown for years before a fortress until its defenders had been starved out.\n\nNecho\u2019s triumph, however, was short-lived. Three years after the battle of\nMegiddo (B.C. 606), he had to meet the Babylonian army, under its young\ngeneral Nebuchadrezzar, the son of Nabopolassar, at the ford of the\nEuphrates, which was protected by the old Hittite city of Carchemish.\nNabopolassar was now independent king of Babylonia, and his son had given\nevidence of great military capacities. He had disputed with the Median\nkingdom of Ekbatana the possession of Mesopotamia; and though the ruins of\nNineveh and other Assyrian cities on the eastern bank of the Tigris\ncontinued to remain in the hands of the Median ruler, as well as the high\nroad which led across Northern Mesopotamia into Asia Minor, and passed\nthrough the patriarchal city of Haran, he had secured for his father the\nsouthern regions enclosed between the Tigris and the Euphrates. The battle\nof Carchemish finally decided who should be the master of Western Asia.\nThe Egyptian forces were completely shattered, and Necho retreated with\nthe wreck of his army to his ancestral kingdom. Judah and the countries\nwhich adjoined it passed under the yoke of Babylonia.\n\nTwo years later, in B.C. 604, Nabopolassar died, and Nebuchadrezzar\nsucceeded to the throne. His name is written Nabu-kudur-uzur, \u201cO Nebo,\ndefend the crown,\u201d in the cuneiform, so that the form Nebuchadrezzar,\nwhich is found in the Book of Jeremiah, is the only correct one,\nNebuchadnezzar being a corruption of it, like Asnapper for Assur-bani-pal.\nNebuchadrezzar was not only a great general, he was also a great builder\nand an able administrator. Under him, Babylon, which had been little more\nthan a provincial town, became one of the most splendid cities in the\nancient world. In the middle of it rose the gigantic temple of Bel or\nBaal, in eight stages, now represented by a mound of ruins, which goes\nunder the name of Babil. A winding road led from the foot of it to the\nshrine on the summit, wherein was a golden image of the god, forty feet\nhigh, and a golden table in front of it for the showbread.\nNebuchadrezzar\u2019s palace, now called the Kasr mound, was on a scale equally\nvast, though the wall that surrounded it, according to the king\u2019s own\nstatement, had been built in fifteen days; within were the famous hanging\ngardens, raised on lofty arcades, and watered by means of a screw. In the\nsuburb of Borsippa, on the western side of the Euphrates, stood another\ntemple, the modern Birs-i-Nimrud. This was dedicated to Nebo, and had been\nbegun by an earlier king. But it was completed by Nebuchadrezzar, who\ncalled it \u201cthe temple of the seven lights of the earth,\u201d and built it in\nseven stages, each coloured according to the supposed colours of the seven\nplanets. The upper stages were artificially vitrified, wood having been\npiled up against the surfaces of the bricks of which they were composed,\nand then set on fire. Both Borsippa and Babylon were surrounded by a\nsingle line of fortification, consisting of a double wall. It was pierced\nby a hundred gates, all of bronze. So broad were the walls, that two\nchariots could pass one another upon them. Walls were also built on either\nside of the river, which flowed through the centre of the city, and was\nfurnished with handsome quays. There were gates in these walls at the end\nof each of the wide and straight streets by which the city was\nintersected, and between every gate a ferry-boat plied. Besides the\nferry-boats there was also a drawbridge, which was drawn up every night.\nSuch was \u201cgreat Babylon,\u201d which Nebuchadrezzar boasted he had built \u201cfor\nthe house of the kingdom, by the might of his power, and for the honour of\nhis majesty.\u201d\n\nRecords of Nebuchadrezzar\u2019s building operations exist in plenty, but of\nhis annals only a small fragment has as yet been discovered. This,\nhowever, contains an allusion to his campaign in Egypt, of which Jeremiah\nand Ezekiel prophesied, and which an over-hasty criticism has denied. The\ncampaign, we learn, took place in the thirty-seventh year of his reign.\nOther references to it have been detected on the Egyptian monuments, and\nwe gather from these that the Babylonian army swept the whole of the\nnorthern part of Egypt, and penetrated as far south as Assouan, from\nwhence they were forced to retreat by the Egyptian general Hor. Amasis was\nat this time king of Egypt, having dethroned and murdered Apries, the\nPharaoh Hophra of the Bible, whose miserable end had been foretold by\nJeremiah (xliv. 30).\n\nNo account has yet been discovered among the cuneiform documents of the\ncampaigns of Nebuchadrezzar against Tyre and Judah. But a curious memorial\nof them was found two years ago on the northern bank of the Nahr el-Kelb,\nor Dog River, about eight miles to the north of Beyr\u00fbt. The ancient high\nroad from Damascus to the sea-coast led along the gorge through which this\nriver makes its way to the sea, and traces of it can still be seen cut\nhere and there in the rock. The foreign conquerors of Asia, whether\nEgyptian or Assyrian have left monuments of themselves carved by the side\nof this old road, where it winds round a promontory that forms the\nsouthern bank of the river. Ramses II, Sennacherib, Esar-haddon, all have\nrecorded their names and deeds upon the face of the cliff; and the\nobliterated monuments of other and perhaps older kings may still be seen\nnear to them. The existence of these monuments has long been known. But it\nwas never suspected that a long inscription of Nebuchadrezzar also existed\non the loftier cliff on the northern side of the river, completely\nconcealed from view under a mass of luxuriant shrubs and drooping\nmaiden-hair fern. It was brought to light by an accident, and though much\ninjured by time and weather is still partly decipherable. Unfortunately,\nthe royal author gives no history in it of his Syrian and Jewish\ncampaigns; the clearest part of the text is occupied only with a list of\nthe wines of the Lebanon, among which the wine of Helbon, near Damascus,\nwas the most highly prized.(13)\n\nNebuchadrezzar had a long reign of nearly forty-three years. His son and\nsuccessor, Evil-Merodach (\u201cthe man of the god Merodach\u201d), lived hardly\nthree years after his accession, and then was murdered by his\nbrother-in-law, Nergal-sharezer, who seized the crown. The latter calls\nhimself the son of \u201cBel-suma-iskun, king of Babylon\u201d\u2014a title to which his\nfather could have had no right\u2014and he seems to have been the Rab-Mag (a\nword of unknown signification) who is mentioned by Jeremiah (xxxix. 3) as\namong the princes of Babylon at the time of the capture of Jerusalem. The\nchief event of his short reign of four years and four months was the\nconstruction of a new palace. His son, who succeeded him, was but a mere\nboy, and was murdered after a brief reign of four months. The throne was\nthen usurped by Nabu-nahid, the Nabonidos of the Greeks, who does not seem\nto have belonged to the royal family, and calls his father,\n\u201cNabu-balatsu-ikbi, the _Rubu-emga_,\u201d which may possibly be the Rab-Mag of\nthe Old Testament. Nabonidos reigned for seventeen years, and witnessed\nthe rise of a new power in the east. This was the empire of Cyrus, about\nwhom the cuneiform records have recently given us information of a most\nstartling kind.\n\nAmong the clay documents lately discovered in Babylonia by Mr. Rassam are\nthree inscriptions, which have been published and translated by Sir Henry\nRawlinson and Mr. Pinches. The first of these is a cylinder, inscribed by\norder of Cyrus, the second a tablet which describes the conquest of\nBabylonia by Cyrus and the causes which led up to it, while the third is\nan account given by Nabonidos of his restoration of the temple of the\nMoon-god at Haran, and of the temples of the Sun-god and of Anunit at\nSepharvaim. Haran, we are told in the last-mentioned record, had been\ntaken and destroyed by the _Manda_, or \u201cbarbarians,\u201d of Ekbatana, and the\ntemple of the Moon-god had shared in the general ruin of the city. \u201cThen,\u201d\nsays Nabonidos, \u201cat the beginning of my long reign, Merodach, the great\nlord, and Sin (the Moon-god), the illuminator of heaven and earth, the\nstrong one of the universe, revealed unto me a dream. Merodach spake with\nme (thus): \u2018O Nabonidos, king of Babylon, go up with the horse of thy\nchariot; make bricks for the Temple of Rejoicing, and let the seat of Sin,\nthe great lord, enter within it.\u2019 Reverently I spake to Merodach, the\nlords of the gods: \u2018I will build this house whereof thou hast spoken. The\nbarbarians went about it, and their forces were terrible.\u2019 Merodach\nanswered me: \u2018The barbarians of whom thou hast spoken shall not exist,\nneither they nor their lands, nor the kings their allies.\u2019 In the third\nyear when it came, when they (_i.e._, the barbarians) had caused Cyrus,\nthe king of Elam, his young servant, to march amongst his army, they\nprovoked him (to battle); the wide-spread barbarians he overthrew; he\ncaptured Astyages, king of the barbarians, and seized his treasures; to\nhis own land he took (them).\u201d After this Nabonidos carried out the will of\nthe gods. His \u201cvast army\u201d was summoned from Gaza on the one side to the\nPersian Gulf on the other, and set to work to restore the temple of Haran,\nwhich had been built three centuries before by the Assyrian king,\nShalmaneser II, and subsequently repaired by Assur-bani-pal.\n\nTwo statements will be noticed in the inscription which will appear\nstrange to students of ancient history. Cyrus is called \u201cthe young\nservant\u201d of Merodach, the patron-deity of Babylon, and \u201cking of Anzan,\u201d or\nElam, not of Persia. But both statements will be found to be borne out by\nthe two inscriptions of Cyrus himself, which we shall now quote. Both on\nhis cylinder and in the annalistic tablet Cyrus, hitherto supposed to be a\nPersian and a Zoroastrian monotheist, appears as an Elamite and as a\npolytheist.\n\nThe annalistic tablet, which is unfortunately somewhat mutilated, begins\nwith the first year of the reign of Nabonidos. The first three years after\nhis accession seem to have been occupied with disturbances in Syria. Then,\nin the sixth year, we are informed, \u201cAstyages gathered (his army) and\nmarched against Cyrus, king of Elam. But the soldiers of Astyages revolted\nfrom him, and seized him and delivered him up to Cyrus. Cyrus (proceeded)\nto the land of Ekbatana, the royal city. The silver, the gold, the\nfurniture, and the spoil of the land of Ekbatana he carried away, and\nbrought the furniture and the spoil which he has taken to the land of\nElam.\u2014The seventh year the king (Nabonidos) was in the town of Tema (a\nsuburb of Babylon). The king\u2019s son, the nobles, and his soldiers were in\nAccad (or Northern Babylonia). The king did not go to Babylon, neither did\nNebo nor Bel. But they kept a festival; they sacrificed peace-offerings in\nthe temples of Saggil and Zida to the gods for (the preservation) of\nBabylon and Borsippa. The governor inspected the garden and the temple.\u2014In\nthe eighth year (no event took place).\u2014The ninth year Nabonidos, the king,\nwas in Tema, the king\u2019s son, the nobles, and his soldiers were in Accad.\nUntil the month of Nisan (March) the king did not go to Babylon, neither\ndid Nebo nor Bel. But they kept a festival; they sacrificed\npeace-offerings to the gods in the temples of Saggil and Zida for the\npreservation of Babylon and Borsippa. On the fifth day of Nisan, the\nking\u2019s mother, who was in the fortress of the camp on the river Euphrates,\nabove Sippara, died. The king\u2019s son and his soldiers mourned for her three\ndays running. In the month Sivan (May), there was a mourning for the\nking\u2019s mother throughout the land of Accad. In the month Nisan, Cyrus,\nking of Persia, collected his soldiers and crossed the Tigris below\nArbela, and the following month (marched) against the land of.... Its king\ntook (his) silver and himself; he made his own children mount (the pyre);\nafterwards both king and children were (burnt) in the midst (of it)\u2014The\ntenth year the king was in Tema; the king\u2019s son, the officers, and his\nsoldiers were in Accad. Until (Nisan) the king (did not go to Babylon),\nneither did Nebo nor Bel. But they kept the festival; they sacrificed\npeace-offerings to the gods in the temples (of Saggil and Zida) for the\npreservation of Babylon and Borsippa. On the 21st day of Sivan (the\nsoldiers) of Elam marched into Accad. A prefect (was appointed?) in\nErech.\u2014The eleventh year the king was in Tema; the king\u2019s son, the nobles,\nand his soldiers were in Accad. Until Elul (August), the king did not come\nforth (to worship) Bel, but they kept the festival; they sacrificed\npeace-offerings (to the gods in the temples of Saggil and Zida for the\npreservation of) Babylon and Borsippa.\u201d\n\nHere a break occurs in the record. When the inscription becomes legible\nagain we find ourselves transported to the seventeenth year of Nabonidos,\nwhen the tribes on \u201cthe lower sea\u201d or Persian Gulf were in revolt. Cyrus,\nwho had failed to break through the Babylonian army in Accad, had spent\nhis time in intriguing with a disaffected party\u2014probably the Jews\u2014within\nBabylonia itself, and at last, when all was ripe, prepared to attack his\nenemy from the south-east. Nabonidos now turned to the gods for help, and\nhad the images of them brought to Babylon from their various shrines, in\nthe vain hope that their presence would save the city from capture. \u201cThe\ngods of Marad, Zamama and the gods of Kis, Beltis and the gods of\nKharsak-kalama, were brought to Babylon; up to the end of Elul, the gods\nof Accad which are above and below the sky were brought to Babylon but the\ngods of Borsippa, of Cuthah, and of Sippara, were not brought. In the\nmonth Tammuz (June) Cyrus gave battle to the army of Accad in the town of\nRutum, upon the river Nizallat. The men of Accad broke into revolt. On the\n14th day (of the month) the garrison of Sippara was taken without\nfighting. Nabonidos flies. On the 16th day Gobryas, the governor of Gutium\n(Kurdistan) and the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without fighting.\nAfterwards he takes Nabonidos, and puts him into fetters in Babylon. Up to\nthe end of the month Tammuz, some rebels from Kurdistan kept the gates of\nthe temple of Saggil closed, but there was nothing in the way of weapons\nin the temple of Saggil, nor was there an opportunity (for fighting). On\nthe 3rd day of Marchesvan (October), Cyrus entered Babylon. The roads(?)\nbefore him were covered. He grants peace to the city, to the whole of\nBabylon Cyrus proclaims peace. Gobryas, his governor, was appointed over\nthe (other) governors in Babylon, and from the month Chisleu (November) to\nthe month Adar (February) the gods of Accad, whom Nabonidos had brought to\nBabylon, were restored to their shrines. On the 11th day of the previous\nMarchesvan, Gobryas (was appointed) over (Babylon), and the king\n(Nabonidos) died. From the 27th of Adar to the 3rd of Nisan, (there was) a\nmourning in Accad; all the people smote their heads. On the 4th day,\nKambyses, the son of Cyrus, arranged the burial in the temple of the\nSceptre of the World. The priests of the temple of the Sceptre of Nebo\nwent (to it).\u201d The rest of the text, which is very imperfect from this\npoint, describes the honours paid by Cyrus and his son to the Babylonian\ngods, their sacrifices of victims to Bel, and their restoration of Nebo to\nhis old shrine.\n\nIt is at this place that the cylinder of Cyrus comes in to complete the\nstory. Cyrus here says that Nabonidos had neglected the worship of the\ngods, who accordingly were angry with him: \u201cThe gods dwelling within them\nleft their shrines in anger when (Nabonidos) brought them into Babylon.\nMerodach went about to all men, wherever were their seats; and the men of\nSumer and Accad, whom he had sworn should attend him (besought him to\nreturn). The favour he granted, he came back; all lands, even the whole of\nthem, rejoiced and ate. And he appointed a king to guide aright in the\nheart what his hand upholds; Cyrus, king of Elam, he proclaimed by name\nfor the sovereignty: all men everywhere commemorate his name. The men of\nKurdistan and all the barbarians (of Ekbatana) he made bow down to his\nfeet, the men of the black-headed race (the Accadians), whom he had\nconquered with his hand, he governed in justice and righteousness.\nMerodach, the great lord, the restorer of his people, beheld with joy the\ndeeds of his vicegerent, who was righteous in hand and heart. To his city\nof Babylon he summoned his march, and he bade him take the road to\nBabylon; like a friend and a comrade he went at his side. The weapons of\nhis vast army, whose number, like the waters of a river, could not be\nknown, he marshalled at his side. Without fighting or battle he caused him\nto enter into Babylon; his city of Babylon feared; in a place difficult of\naccess Nabonidos, the king, who worshipped him not, he gave into his hand.\nThe men of Babylon, all of them, (and) the whole of Sumer and Accad, the\nnobles and priests who had revolted, kissed his feet, they rejoiced in his\nsovereignty, their faces shone. The god who in his ministry raises the\ndead to life, who benefits all men in difficulty and prayer, has in\ngoodness drawn nigh to him, has made strong his name. I am Cyrus, the king\nof legions, the great king, the powerful king, the king of Babylon, the\nking of Sumer and Accad, the king of the four zones, the son of Kambyses\nthe great king, the king of Elam; the grandson of Cyrus the great king,\nthe king of Elam; the great-grandson of Teispes, the great king, the king\nof Elam; of the ancient seed-royal, whose rule has been beloved by Bel and\nNebo, whose sovereignty they cherished according to the goodness of their\nhearts. At that time I entered Babylon in peace. With joy and gladness in\nthe palace of the kings I enlarged the seat of my dominion. Merodach, the\ngreat lord, (cheered) the heart of his servant, whom the sons of Babylon\n(obeyed each) year and day.... My vast armies he marshalled peacefully in\nthe midst of Babylon; throughout Sumer and Accad I had no revilers. The\nsanctuaries of Babylon and all its fortresses I established in peace. As\nfor the sons of Babylon ... their ruins I repaired, and I delivered their\nprisoners. For the work (of restoring the shrine) of Merodach, the great\nlord, I prepared, and he graciously drew nigh unto me, Cyrus, the king,\nhis worshipper, and to Kambyses, my son, the offspring of my heart, and to\nall my army, and in peace we duly restored its front (in) glory. All the\nkings who dwell in the high-places of all regions from the Upper Sea to\nthe Lower Sea, who dwell in (the high-places) of the kings of Ph\u0153nicia and\nSutar, all of them brought their rich tribute, and in the midst of Babylon\nkissed my feet. From (the city of) ... to the cities of Assur and Istar\n... Accad, Marad, Zamban, Me-Turnat, and Duran as far as the border of\nKurdistan, the fortresses (which lie) upon the Tigris, wherein from of old\nwere their seats, I restored the gods who dwelt within them to their\nplaces, and I enlarged (for them) seats that should be long-enduring; all\ntheir peoples I assembled, and I restored their lands. And the gods of\nSumer and Accad, whom Nabonidos, to the anger of the lord of gods\n(Merodach), had brought into Babylon, I settled in peace in their\nsanctuaries by the command of Merodach, the great lord. In the goodness of\ntheir hearts may all the gods whom I have brought into their strong places\ndaily intercede before Bel and Nebo that they should grant me length of\ndays; may they bless my projects with prosperity, and may they say to\nMerodach my lord that Cyrus the king, thy worshipper, and Kambyses his son\n(deserve his favour).\u201d\n\nSuch are the records, which have risen up, as it were, out of the tomb, to\nrevolutionise all our previous conceptions of that part of ancient history\nwith which they are concerned. We must give up the belief that Cyrus was a\nmonotheist, bent on destroying the idols of Babylon; on the contrary, from\nthe time when we first hear of him, he is a worshipper of Bel-Merodach,\nthe patron-god of Babylon, and the first care of himself and his son,\nafter his conquest of Babylonia, is to restore the Babylonian gods to the\nshrines from which they had been impiously removed by Nabonidos. He asks\nthe gods to intercede on his behalf with Bel and Nebo, the two supreme\ngods of Babylonian worship. It is clear, therefore, that Cyrus was a\npolytheist, who, like other polytheists in other ages, adopted the gods of\nthe country he had conquered from motives of State policy. The Egyptian\nmonuments give the same account of his son Kambyses. They show that the\nstory told by Herodotus how Kambyses had scoffed at the gods of Egypt, had\ndestroyed their images, and had finally stabbed the sacred bull Apis, was\na mere Greek fable. Kambyses appears on contemporaneous monuments as the\nfriend of the Egyptian priests, the adorer of their gods, and the\nbenefactor of their temples. The very bull he was said to have murdered\nhas been discovered in its huge sarcophagus of granite, with a sculpture\nabove, wherein Kambyses is represented as kneeling before the bull-god,\nwhile an inscription states that the bull was honoured with the usual\nfuneral, in which Kambyses himself took part.\n\nThe theory, accordingly, which held that Cyrus had allowed the Jews to\nreturn to their own land, because, like them, he believed in but one\nsupreme god\u2014the Ormazd or good spirit of the Zoroastrian creed\u2014must be\nabandoned. God consecrated Cyrus to be His instrument in restoring His\nchosen people to their land, not because the king of Elam was a\nmonotheist, but because the period of Jewish trial and punishment had come\nto an end. God\u2019s instruments may be unworthy as well as worthy; it was\nthrough the hardness of heart of an unbelieving Pharaoh that the\ndeliverance from Egypt had been accomplished in days long before. Nor is\nthere any contradiction between the treatment actually experienced by the\nBabylonians and that which is predicted for them in the Book of Isaiah.\nThe language of the prophet is necessarily figurative, and when he\ndeclares (Isa. xlvi. 1, 2) that Bel and Nebo had gone into captivity,\nnothing more is meant than that the people whose gods they were, and whom\nthey represented, had passed under the yoke of a foreign conqueror.\n\nAnd yet, though the prophet\u2019s language was thus figurative, the prediction\nwas eventually fulfilled in a very literal way. The empire of Cyrus was\nbroken up after the death of Kambyses, and had to be reconquered by Darius\nthe son of Hystaspes, the real founder of the Persian Empire. Darius was a\nZoroastrian monotheist as well as a Persian, and under him and his\nsuccessors polytheism ceased to be the religion of the State. Twice during\nhis reign he had to besiege Babylon. Hardly had he been proclaimed king\nwhen it revolted under a certain Nidinta-Bel, who called himself\n\u201cNebuchadrezzar, the son of Nabonidos.\u201d A cameo exists with his helmeted\nprofile, engraved by a Greek artist, and surrounded by the words, \u201cTo\nMerodach, his lord, Nebuchadrezzar, the king of Babylon, has made (it) for\nhis life;\u201d unless, perhaps, Professor Schrader is right in referring the\nportrait, not to the pretender, but to the real Nebuchadrezzar of Biblical\nhistory. Babylon endured a siege of two years, and was at last captured by\nDarius only by the help of a stratagem. Six years afterwards it again rose\nin revolt, under an Armenian, who professed, like his predecessor, to be\n\u201cNebuchadrezzar, the son of Nabonidos.\u201d Once more, however, it was\nbesieged and taken, and this time the pretender was put to death by\nimpalement. His predecessor, Nidinta-Bel, seems to have been slain while\nthe Persian troops were forcing their way into the captured city. After\nthe second capture of Babylon Darius pulled down its walls; and his son\nXerxes completed the work of destruction by destroying the great temple of\nBel, and carrying away the golden image of the god.\n\nIn Nidinta-Bel the line of independent Babylonian kings may be regarded as\nhaving come to an end, since the leader of the second revolt was not a\nnative, but an Armenian settler. To him, therefore, we may apply the\nmagnificent description of the death of the last Babylonian monarch on the\nbattle-field, and his descent into the under-world, which we read in\nIsaiah xiv. Illustrations have been taken by the prophet from Babylonian\nmythology, in order to heighten the horror of the scene. The king of\nBabylonia is compared to the morning star, whose movements the Babylonians\nhad been the first of mankind to record. He is represented as saying in\nhis heart, \u201cI will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the\n(other) stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the assembly (of\nthe gods) in the furthest regions of the north.\u201d This mount, as we have\nseen in an earlier chapter, was the Olympos of the Accadians, by whom it\nwas called Kharsak-kurra \u201cthe mountain of the east.\u201d Its peak was the\npivot on which the sky rested, and it was therefore also known as \u201cthe\nmountain of the world.\u201d It lay far away in the regions of the north-east,\nthe entrance, as it was supposed, to the lower world, and it was sometimes\nidentified with the mountain of Nizir, the modern Rowandiz, on whose\nsummit the ark of the Chaldean Noah was believed to have rested. From the\nheights of this mountain, where he had vainly dreamed of sitting among the\ngods, the Babylonian king was to be hurled into the world below. Here\nagain the prophet borrows his illustration from the mythology of Accad.\nThe heroes of the past are placed before us seated in Hades on their\nshadowy thrones, from which they rise to greet the arrival of their new\ncomrade.\n\nThe best commentary on the description is to be found in the words of an\nold Babylonian poem, which tells of the descent of the goddess Istar into\nHades, in search of her dead husband Tammuz. The poem opens as follows:\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cTo Hades, the land whence none return, the land of darkness,\n    Istar the daughter of the Moon-god inclined her ear,\n    Yea, the daughter of the Moon-god inclined her ear.\n    To the house of darkness, the dwelling of the god Irkalla,\n    To the house out of which there is no exit,\n    To the road from which there is no return,\n    To the house from whose entrance the light is taken,\n    The place where dust is their nourishment, and mud their food;\n    Light is never seen, in darkness they dwell.\u201d\n\n\nParallel with this is the description of Hades, supposed to be given by\nthe dead friend of Gisdhubar, in the great Chaldean epic in which the\naccount of the deluge is embodied. Here we read\u2014\n\n\n    \u201cTo Hades, the land whence none return, I turn myself,\n    I spread like a bird my hands.\n    I descend, I descend, to the house of darkness, the dwelling of\n                the god Irkalla.\n    To the house out of which there is no exit.\n    To the road from which there is no return,\n    To the house from whose entrance the light is taken,\n    The place where dust is their nourishment, and mud their food,\n    And its chiefs are like birds covered with feathers;\n    Light is never seen, in darkness they dwell.\n    In that house, O my friend, which I shall enter.\n    There is treasured up for me a crown.\n    With those wearing crowns, who from days of old ruled the earth.\n    To whom the gods Anu and Bel have given names of rule.\u201d\n\n\nBut it is time for us to return to the inscriptions of Cyrus. Next to the\nfact that he was a polytheist, the most startling revelation they make is\nthat he was not a king of Persia at all. Persia seems to have been\nacquired by him after his conquest of Astyages, at some time between the\nsixth and ninth year of Nabonidos. Both he and his ancestors were kings of\nAnzan or Elam. It is true, he could trace his descent back to a member of\nthe royal Persian clan, Teispes, who appears to have taken possession of\nElam during the troublous period that followed the fall of Assyria, and to\nhave resigned his Persian dominions to his son Ariaramnes, the\ngreat-grandfather of Darius. It must be this conquest of Elam which was\nprophesied by Jeremiah at the beginning of Zedekiah\u2019s reign (Jer. xlix.\n34-39), and the result of it was to make Cyrus an Elamite in education and\nreligion. The empire which he founded was not a Persian one; Darius, the\nson of Hystaspes, was the real founder of that. It was only as the\npredecessor of Darius, and for the sake of intelligibility to the readers\nof a later day, that Cyrus could be called a king of Persia, as he is in\nthe Book of Ezra, where the original words of his proclamation, \u201cking of\nElam\u201d have been changed into the more familiar and intelligible \u201cking of\nPersia\u201d (Ez. i. 2.). Elsewhere in the Bible (Isa. xxi. 1-10), where the\ninvasion of Babylonia is described, there is no mention of Persia, only of\nElam and Media, that is to say, of the ancestral dominions of Cyrus and\nthat kingdom of Ekbatana which he had annexed. This is in strict\naccordance with the revelations of the monuments, and is a most\ninteresting testimony to the accuracy of the Old Testament records.\n\nAnother fact of an equally revolutionary kind which the inscriptions teach\nus is that Babylon was not besieged and taken by Cyrus. It opened its\ngates to his general long before he came near it, and needed neither\nfighting nor battle for its occupation. It thus becomes evident that the\nsiege of Babylon described by Herodotus really belongs to the reign of\nDarius, and has been transferred by tradition to the reign of Cyrus, and\nthat the late Mr. Bosanquet was right in asserting that the Darius of the\nBook of Daniel is Darius the son of Hystaspes. Belshazzar, as we know from\nan inscription of Nabonidos, which mentions him, was the eldest son of\nthat monarch, and he is no doubt the \u201cking\u2019s son\u201d who commanded the\nBabylonian army, according to the tablet translated above.\n\nBut besides the main facts to be derived from these newly found\ninscriptions, there is much else in them which is worthy of regard. This\nis especially the case with the inscription on the clay cylinder, in which\nwe find a reference to the restoration of the Babylonian captives to their\nseveral homes. The experience of Cyrus had taught him that the old\nAssyrian and Babylonian system of transporting conquered nations was an\nerror, and did but introduce a dangerously disaffected people into the\ncountry to which they had been brought. Through this conviction, which\nseemed to Cyrus himself merely the result of his own experience and\npolitical sagacity, God worked to bring about the fulfilment of His\npromises to the Jewish exiles. Those who chose to return to Jerusalem were\nallowed to do so, and there rebuild a fortress which Cyrus considered\nwould be useful to him as a check upon Egypt. The nations which had been\nbrought from east and west were restored to their lands, along with their\ngods, whom they were henceforth to worship in peace. Among them, as we\nlearn from the Old Testament, were the captives of Judah, the worshippers\nof the one true God.\n\nAnother fact which we gather from the words of Cyrus is that Nabonidos had\noffended the Babylonian priesthood, and had been accused by some of them\nof impiety. His removal of the images of the local deities from their\nshrines seems to have been regarded as a peculiar sin; and Cyrus goes so\nfar as to assert that Nabonidos had brought them into Babylon, \u201cto the\nanger of the lord of gods.\u201d Indeed, he even says that the Babylonian king\nhad not worshipped the patron god of his own capital. How little, however,\nthis statement was really justified may be seen from the inscription of\nNabonidos quoted above, in which reference is made for the first time to\nCyrus, \u201cthe young servant\u201d of Merodach.\n\nThe language used of himself by Cyrus reminds us sometimes of the inspired\nwords in which he is spoken of in the prophecies of Isaiah. When he says\nthat he \u201cgoverned in justice and righteousness,\u201d and that Merodach \u201cbeheld\nwith joy the deeds of his vicegerent, who was righteous in hand and\nheart,\u201d we cannot help thinking of God\u2019s declaration that He had \u201craised\nhim up in righteousness,\u201d (Isa. xlv. 13). When he says that \u201cMerodach, who\nin his ministry raises the dead to life, who benefits all men in\ndifficulty and prayer, has in goodness drawn nigh to him, has made strong\nhis name,\u201d we almost fancy we hear an echo of the words of Scripture: \u201cFor\nJacob My servant\u2019s sake, and Israel Mine elect, I have even called thee by\nthy name; I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known Me. I am the\nLORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside Me. I girded thee,\nthough thou hast not known Me\u201d (Isa. xlv. 4, 5).\n\nThe title given to Merodach\u2014\u201cthe god who raises the dead to life\u201d\u2014is a\nremarkable one, but it was a title which was applied to the god as early\nas the Accadian epoch. In the religious hymns of the Accadians, Merodach\nplays the part of a mediator and intercessor; if the gods are angry, it is\nMerodach who intercedes for man. Mankind, in fact, are his especial care;\nhe was supposed to heal their diseases and to raise them after death to\nlife. Whether there was any reference here to the doctrine of the\nresurrection is doubtful: more probably nothing further was meant than\nthat the spirit of the dead man, through the help of Merodach, was allowed\nto drink of \u201cthe waters of life,\u201d that bubbled up in Hades beneath the\ngolden throne of the spirits of earth, and so to ascend to the Accadian\nheaven, \u201cthe land of the silver sky,\u201d where the heroes lay reclined among\nthe gods on couches, feasting at banquets which knew no end.\n\nMerodach was originally the Sun-god, and when Babylonia passed into the\nhands of the Semites he still continued to be worshipped, as the\ninterceding god who hears prayers and \u201craises the dead to life.\u201d But he\nwas now more specially honoured as Bel or Baal, \u201clord\u201d a title which\nproperly belonged to an older deity, but which came in time to be almost\nconfined to Merodach, alone. When Bel and Nebo are mentioned together in\nthe Bible (Isa. xlvi. 1), it is Merodach, the tutelary divinity of\nBabylon, that is meant, Nebo, \u201cthe prophet,\u201d to whom peculiar honour was\npaid at Babylon after the rise of the dynasty of Nebuchadrezzar, being\nusually associated with him.\n\nA large number of prayers have been discovered addressed for the most part\nto Merodach, though there are some which are addressed also to the other\ndeities. These prayers are written in Assyrian, and constitute a sort of\nmanual of devotion. They are seldom of great length, one of the longest\nbeing a prayer after a bad dream, which is, however, addressed to the\ngoddess Istar as well as to Merodach. Portions of it have been lost; what\nremains may be quoted as an example of this species of literature, and is\nas follows: \u201cMay the lord set my prayer at rest, (may he remove) my heavy\n(sin)! May the lord (grant) a return of favour. By day direct unto death\nall that disquiets me. O my goddess, be gracious unto me; when (wilt thou\nhear) my prayer? May they pardon my sin, my wickedness, (and) my\ntransgression. May the exalted one deliver, may the holy one love. May the\nseven winds carry away my groaning. May the worm lay it low, may the bird\nbear it upwards to heaven. May a shoal of fish carry it away; may the\nriver bear it along. May the creeping thing of the field come unto me; may\nthe waters of the river as they flow cleanse me. Enlighten me like a mask\nof gold. Food and drink perpetually before thee may I get. Heap up the\nworm, take away his life. The steps of thine altar, thy many ones, may I\nascend. With the worm make me pass, and may I be kept with thee. Make me\nto be fed, and may a favourable dream come. May the dream I dream be\nfavourable; may the dream I dream be fulfilled, May the dream I dream turn\nto prosperity. May Makhir, the god of dreams, settle upon my head. Let me\nenter Beth-Saggil, the palace of the gods, the temple of the lord. Give me\nunto Merodach, the merciful, to prosperity, even to prospering hands. May\nthy entering be exalted, may thy divinity be glorious; may the men of my\ncity extol thy mighty deeds.\u201d\n\nThe tone of this prayer is not very high, and it reveals how much\nsuperstition was mixed with even the best aspirations of Assyrian\nspiritual life. It is, therefore, somewhat surprising that a series of\npenitential psalms exists, coming down from the earliest period of\nBabylonian history, which breathe a much more exalted and purer spirit.\nThese psalms are not written in Accadian, but in the closely-allied\ndialect of Sumer or Shinar, and an Assyrian interlinear translation is\nattached to them. From time to time expressions that occur in them remind\nus of the Book of Psalms. No more suitable way can be found of concluding\nour review of the illustrations of the Old Testament Scriptures afforded\nby modern discovery, than by giving at full length a translation of one of\nthese touching relics of old time. In reading it we do indeed feel that\neven in the darkest ages of ignorance and heathenism God was still moving\nthe hearts of men, \u201cthat they should seek the Lord, if haply they might\nfeel after Him and find Him:\u201d\n\n\n    \u201cMy Lord is wroth in his heart; may he be appeased again.\n    May God be appeased again, for I knew not that I sinned.\n    May Istar, my mother, be appeased again, for I knew not that I\n                sinned.\n    God knoweth that I knew not; may he be appeased.\n    Istar, my mother, knoweth that I knew not; may she be appeased.\n    May the heart of my God be appeased.\n    May the heart of Istar, my mother, be appeased.\n    May God and Istar, my mother, be appeased.\n    May God cease from his anger.\n    May Istar, my mother, (cease from her anger).\n    The transgression (I committed my God) knew.\n              [The next few lines are obliterated.]\n    The transgression (I committed Istar, my mother, knew).\n    (My tears) I drink like the waters of the sea.\n    That which was forbidden by my God, I ate without knowing.\n    That which was forbidden by Istar, my mother, I trampled on\n                without knowing.\n    O my Lord, my transgression is great, many are my sins.\n    O my God, my transgression is great, many are my sins.\n    O Istar, my mother, my transgression is great, many are my sins.\n    O my God, who knowest that I knew not, my transgression is great,\n                many are my sins.\n    O Istar, my mother, who knowest that I knew not, my transgression\n                is great, many are my sins.\n    The transgression that I committed I knew not.\n    The sin that I sinned I knew not.\n    The forbidden thing did I eat.\n    The forbidden thing did I trample on.\n    My Lord, in the anger of his heart, has punished me.\n    God in the strength of his heart has received me.\n    Istar, my mother, has seized upon me and put me to grief.\n    God, who knoweth that I knew not, has afflicted me.\n    Istar, my mother, who knoweth that I knew not, has caused\n                darkness.\n    I prayed and none takes my hand.\n    I wept and none held my palm.\n    I cry aloud; but there is none that will hear me.\n    I am in darkness and hiding, I dare not look up.\n    To God I refer my distress, I utter my prayer.\n    The feet of Istar, my mother, I embrace.\n    To God, who knoweth that I knew not, my prayer I utter.\n    To Istar, my mother, who knoweth that I knew not, my prayer I\n                address.\n                [The next four lines are lost.]\n    How long, O God (shall I suffer)?\n    How long, O Istar, my mother (shall I suffer)?\n    How long, O God, who knoweth that I knew not, (shall I feel thy)\n                strength?\n    How long, O Istar, my mother, who knoweth that I knew not, shall\n                thy heart (be angry)?\n    Thou writest the number (?) of mankind, and none knoweth it.\n    Thou callest man by his name, and what does he know?\n    Whether he shall be afflicted, or whether he shall be prosperous,\n                there is no man that knows.\n    O my God, thou givest not rest to thy servant.\n    In the waters of the raging flood take his hand.\n    The sin he has sinned turn into good.\n    Let the wind carry away the transgression I have committed.\n    Destroy my manifold wickedness like a garment.\n    O my God, seven times seven are my transgressions, my\n                transgressions are (ever) before me.(14)\n\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX I.\n\n\nThe text of the Treaty between the Hittites and Ramses II (Dr. Brugsch\u2019s\ntranslation):\u2014\n\nIn the year 21, in the month of Tybi, on the 21st day of the month, in the\nreign of king Ramessu Mi-Amun, the dispenser of life eternally and for\never, the worshipper of the divinities, Amun-Ra (of Thebes), Hor-em-khu\n(of Heliopolis), Ptah (of Memphis), Mut, the lady of the Asher Lake (near\nKarnak), and Khonsu, the peace-loving, there took place a public sitting\non the throne of Horus among the living, resembling his father, Hor-em-khu\nin eternity, in eternity, evermore.\n\nOn that day the king was in the city of Ramses (Zoan), presenting his\npeace-offerings to his father, Amun-ra, and to the gods, Hor-em-khu-Tum,\nthe lord of Heliopolis (On), and to Amun of Ramessu Mi-Amun, to Ptah of\nRamessu Mi-Amun, and to Sutekh, the strong, the son of Nut, the goddess of\nheaven, that they might grant to him many thirty years\u2019 jubilee feasts,\nand innumerable happy years, and the subjection of all peoples under his\nfeet for ever.\n\nThen came forward the ambassador of the king and the governor (of his\nhouse, by name..., and presented the ambassadors) of the great king of the\nHittites (Khita), Khita-sir, who were sent to Pharaoh to propose\nfriendship with the king, Ramessu Mi-Amun, the dispenser of life eternally\nand for ever, just as his father, the Sun-god (dispenses it), each day.\n\nThis is the copy of the contents of the silver tablet, which the great\nking of the Hittites, Khita-sir, had caused to be made, and which was\npresented to the Pharaoh by the hand of his ambassador Tartibus and his\nambassador Ra-mes, to propose friendship to the king, Ramessu Mi-Amun, the\nbull among the princes, who places his boundary-marks where it pleases him\nin all lands.\n\nThe treaty which had been proposed by the great king of the Hittites,\nKhita-sir, the powerful, the son of Maro-sir, the great king of the\nHittites, the powerful, the grandson of Sapalili, the great king of the\nHittites, the powerful, on the silver tablet, to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the\ngreat prince of Egypt, the powerful, the grandson of Ramessu I, the great\nking of Egypt, the powerful,\u2014this was a good treaty for friendship and\nconcord, which assured peace (and established concord) for a longer period\nthan was previously the case for a long time. For it was the agreement of\nthe great prince of Egypt in common with the great king of the Hittites,\nthat the god should not allow enmity to exist between them, on the basis\nof a treaty.\n\nTo wit, in the times of Mauthaner, the great king of the Hittites, my\nbrother, he was at war with (Meneptah Seti I) the great prince of Egypt.\n\nBut now, from this very day forward, Khita-sir, the great king of the\nHittites, shall look upon this treaty, so that the agreement may remain,\nwhich the Sun-god, Ra, has made, which the god Sutekh has made, for the\npeople of Egypt and for the people of the Hittites, that there should be\nno enmity between them for evermore.\n\nAnd these are the contents:\u2014\n\nKhita-sir, the great king of the Hittites, is in covenant with Ramessu\nMi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, from this very day forward, that there\nmay subsist a good friendship and a good understanding between them for\nevermore.\n\nHe shall be my ally; he shall be my friend. I will be his ally; I will be\nhis friend; for ever.\n\nTo wit: in the time of Mauthaner, the great king of the Hittites, his\nbrother, Khita-sir, after his murder, placed himself on the throne of his\nfather as the great king of the Hittites. I strove for friendship with\nRamessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, and it is (my wish) that the\nfriendship and the concord may be better than the friendship and the\nconcord which before existed, and which was broken.\n\nI declare: I, the great king of the Hittites, will hold together with\n(Ramessu Mi-Amun) the great prince of Egypt, in good friendship and good\nconcord. The sons of the sons of the great king of the Hittites will hold\ntogether and be friends with the sons of the sons of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the\ngreat prince of Egypt.\n\nIn virtue of our treaty for concord, and in virtue of our agreement (for\nfriendship, let the people) of Egypt (be bound in friendship) with the\npeople of the Hittites. Let a like friendship and a like concord subsist\nin such measure for ever.\n\nNever let enmity rise between them. Never let the great king of the\nHittites invade the land of Egypt, if anything has been plundered from it\n(the land of the Hittites). Never let Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of\nEgypt, overstep the boundary of the land (of the Hittites, if anything\nshall have been plundered) from it (the land of Egypt).\n\nThe just treaty which existed in the times of Sapalili, the great king of\nthe Hittites, likewise the just treaty which existed in the times of\nMauthaner, the great king of the Hittites, my brother, that will I keep.\n\nRamessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, declares that he will keep it.\n(We have come to an understanding about it) with one another at the same\ntime from this day forward, and we will fulfil it, and will act in a\nrighteous manner.\n\nIf another shall come as an enemy to the lands of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the\ngreat prince of Egypt, then let him send an embassy to the great king of\nthe Hittites to this effect: \u201cCome, and make me stronger than him.\u201d Then\nshall the great king of the Hittites (assemble his warriors), and the king\nof the Hittites (shall come) and smite his enemies. But if it should not\nbe the wish of the great king of the Hittites to march out in person, then\nhe shall send his warriors and his chariots that they may smite his\nenemies. Otherwise (he would incur) the wrath of Ramessu Mi-Amun (the\ngreat prince of Egypt. And if Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt,\nshould banish for a crime) subjects from his country, and they should\ncommit further crime against him, then shall the king of the Hittites come\nforward to kill them. The great king of the Hittites shall act in common\nwith (the great prince of Egypt).\n\n(If another should come as an enemy to the lands of the great king of the\nHittites, then shall he send an embassy to the great prince of Egypt with\nthe request that) he would come in great power to kill his enemies; and if\nit be the intention of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt,\n(himself) to come, he shall (smite the enemies of the great king of the\nHittites. If it is not the intention of the great prince of Egypt to march\nout in person, then he shall send his warriors and his two)-horse\nchariots, while he sends back the answer to the people of the Hittites.\n\nIf any subjects of the great king of the Hittites have offended him, then\nRamessu Mi-Amun (the great prince of Egypt, shall not receive them in his\nland, but shall advance to kill them) ... the oath with the wish to say, I\nwill go ... until ... Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, living\nfor ever ... that he may be given for them (?) to the lord, and that\nRamessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, may speak according to his\nagreement for evermore....\n\n(If servants shall flee away) out of the territories of Ramessu Mi-Amun,\nthe great prince of Egypt, to betake themselves to) the great king of the\nHittites, the great king of the Hittites shall not receive them, but the\ngreat king of the Hittites shall give them up to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the\ngreat prince of Egypt (that they may be punished).\n\nIf servants of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, leave his\ncountry, and betake themselves to the land of the Hittites, to make\nthemselves servants of another, they shall not remain in the land of the\nHittites, (but shall be given up) to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of\nEgypt.\n\nIf, on the other hand, there should flee away (servants of the great king\nof the Hittites, in order to betake themselves to) Ramessu Mi-Amun, the\ngreat prince of Egypt, (in order to stay in Egypt), then those who have\ncome from the land of the Hittites in order to betake themselves to\nRamessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, shall not be (received) by\nRamessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, (but) the great prince of\nEgypt, Ramessu Mi-Amun, (shall deliver them up to the great king of the\nHittites.\n\nAnd if shall leave the land of the Hittites persons) of skilled mind, so\nthat they come to the land of Egypt to make themselves servants of\nanother, then Ramessu Mi-Amun shall not allow them to settle, he shall\ndeliver them up to the great king of the Hittites.\n\nWhen this (treaty) shall be known (by the inhabitants of the land of Egypt\nand of the land of the Hittites, then shall they not offend against it,\nfor all that stands written on) the silver tablet, these are words which\nwill have been approved by the company of the gods, among the male gods,\nand among the female gods, among those, namely, of the land of the\nHittites, and by the company of the gods among the male gods and among the\nfemale gods, among those, namely, of the land of Egypt. They are witnesses\nfor me (to the validity) of these words, (which they have allowed.\n\nThis is the catalogue of the gods of the land of the Hittites:\u2014\n\n(Sutekh of the city of) Tunep,\nSutekh of the land of the Hittites,\nSutekh of the city of Arnema,\nSutekh of the city Zaranda [_or_ Ta-Orontes],\nSutekh of the city of Pilka [_or_ Pairaka],\nSutekh of the city of Khisasap,\nSutekh of the city of Sarsu,\nSutekh of the city of Aleppo,\nSutekh of the city of...,\n(Sutekh of the city of...),\nSutekh of the city of Sarpina,\nAstartha [_or_ Antarata] of the land of the Hittites,\nThe god of the land of Zaiath-khirri,\nThe god of the land of Ka...,\nThe god of the land of Kher...,\nThe goddess of the city of Akh...,\n(The goddess of the city of....) and of the land of A ... ua,\nThe goddess of the land of Zaina,\nThe god of the land of ... nath ... er.\n\n(I have invoked these male and these) female (gods of the land of the\nHittites, these are the gods) of the land, as (witnesses to) my oath.\n(With them have been associated the male and the female gods) of the\nmountains, and of the rivers of the land of the Hittites, the gods of the\nland of Kazawatana. Amun, Ra, Sutekh, and the male and female gods of the\nland of Egypt, of the earth, of the sea, of the winds, and of the storms.\n\nWith regard to the commandment which the silver tablet contains for the\npeople of the Hittites and for the people of Egypt, he who shall not\nobserve it shall be given over (to the vengeance) of the company of the\ngods of the Hittites, and shall be given over (to the vengeance of the)\ncompany of the gods of Egypt, (he) and his house and his servants.\n\nBut he who shall observe these commandments, which the silver tablet\ncontains, whether he be of the people of the Hittites or (of the people of\nthe Egyptians), because he has not neglected them, the company of the gods\nof the land of the Hittites and the company of the gods of the land of\nEgypt shall secure his reward and preserve life (for him) and his\nservants, and those who are with him and who are with his servants.\n\nIf there flee away of the inhabitants (one from the land of Egypt), or two\nor three, and they betake themselves to the great king of the Hittites,\n(the great king of the Hittites shall not) allow them (to remain, but he\nshall) deliver them up, and send them back to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great\nprince of Egypt.\n\nNow with regard to the (inhabitant of the land of Egypt), who is delivered\nup to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, his fault shall not be\navenged upon him, his (house) shall not be taken away, nor his (wife), nor\nhis (children). There shall not be (put to death his mother, neither shall\nhe be punished in his eyes, nor in his mouth, nor on the soles of his\nfeet), so that thus no crime shall be brought forward against him.\n\nIn the same way shall it be done, if inhabitants of the land of the\nHittites take to flight, be it one alone, or two or three, to betake\nthemselves to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt; Ramessu Mi-Amun,\nthe great prince of Egypt, shall cause them to be seized, and they shall\nbe delivered up to the great king of the Hittites.\n\n(With regard to) him who (is delivered up, his crime shall not be brought\nforward against him). His (house) shall not be taken away, nor his wives\nnor his children, nor his people; his mother shall not be put to death, he\nshall not be punished in his eyes, nor on his mouth, nor on the soles of\nhis feet, nor shall any accusation be brought forward against him.\n\nThat which is in the middle of this silver tablet and on its front side is\na likeness of the god Sutekh ... surrounded by an inscription to this\neffect: \u201cThis is the (picture) of the god Sutekh, the king of heaven and\n(earth).\u201d At the time (?) of the treaty which the great king of the\nHittites, Khita-sir made....\n\n\n\n\n\nAPPENDIX II.\n\n\nTranslation of a cylinder of Nabonidos, king of Babylonia, containing the\nname of Belshazzar. The cylinder is one of four, each containing the same\ntext and buried at the four corners of the temple of Sin, the Moon-god, at\nMugheir or Ur.\n\nCOL. I.\n\n\u201cNabonidos, the king of Babylon, the beautifier of Bit-Saggil and\nBit-Zida, the worshipper of the great gods, am I. The temple of the king\nwho provides plenty (Sin), the tower of the temple of Gis-nu-gal,(15)\nwhich is within Ur, which Lig-Bagas, an ancient king, had made but did not\nfinish, Dungi, his son, completed its work. I looked into the cylinders of\nLig-Bagas and Dungi his son, and (read) how Lig-Bagas had made this tower\nbut did not finish it, and how Dungi his son completed its work.\nSubsequently this tower became old, and accordingly above the old platform\nwhich Lig-Bagas and Dungi his son had made I built the walls(16) of this\ntower, as of old, with cement and brick, and I founded and erected them\nfor Sin, the lord of the gods of heaven and earth, the king of the gods,\neven the gods of gods, who inhabit heaven, the great ones, the lord of the\ntemple of Gis-nu-gal within Ur, my lord.\u201d\n\nCOL. II.\n\n\u201cO Sin, lord of the gods, king of the gods of heaven and earth, even the\ngods of gods, who inhabit heaven, the great ones, for this temple, with\njoy at thy entrance, may thy lips establish the blessings of Bit-Saggil,\nBit-Zida, and Bit-Gis-nu-gal, the temples of thy great divinity; set the\nfear of thy great divinity in the hearts of his (_i.e._, Nabonidos\u2019) men\nthat they err not; for thy great divinity may their foundations remain\nfirm like the heavens. As for me, Nabonidos, the king of Babylon, preserve\nme from sinning against thy great divinity, and grant me the gift of a\nlife of long days; and plant in the heart of Bilu-sarra-utsur\n(Belshazzar), the eldest son, the offspring of my heart, reverence for thy\ngreat divinity, and never may he incline to sin; with fulness of life may\nhe be satisfied.\u201d\n\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\nAbraham, origin of word, 46;\n  birthplace of, 46;\n  campaign of, 47;\n  in Egypt, 50.\n\nAccadian account of the Deluge, 27;\n  translation of, 29.\n\nAccadian Olympos, 35.\n\nAccadians, the, 20.\n\nAch\u00e6menian inscriptions, 10.\n\nAdam, origin of word, 27.\n\nAhab, date of death of, 103.\n\nAlphabet, origin of, 74.\n\nAram, 44.\n\nArarat, 35.\n\nArpad, fall of, 108.\n\nArphaxad, 43.\n\nAsshur, or Assur, 43.\n\nAssur-bani-pal, 131.\n\nAssyrian king, the last, 132.\n\nAssyrian prayers, 157.\n\nAssyrian texts of inscriptions, 13.\n\nAssyrians, rites of, 67.\n\nBabel, Tower of, 37.\n\nBabylon, description of, 138;\n  rebuilt by Esar-haddon, 129.\n\nBabylonian empire, rise of, 135.\n\nBabylonian gem, 25.\n\nBabylonian king, the last, 151.\n\nBabylonian libraries, 21.\n\nBabylonian psalm, 159.\n\nBabylonian Sabbath, 24.\n\nBabylonians, rites of, 67.\n\nBel, prayer to, 68.\n\nCanaan, 41.\n\nCarchemish, battle of, 138.\n\nChald\u00e6an account of the Deluge, 27;\n  translation of, 29.\n\nChald\u00e6ans, meaning of the word, 21.\n\nChedor-laomer, campaign of, 47.\n\nCherub, origin of word, 26.\n\nChronological tables, 133, 161.\n\nCircumcision, rite of, 66.\n\nCreation, legend of the, 22;\n  translation of, 23.\n\nCuneiform inscriptions, decipherment of, 9;\n  Grotefend\u2019s guess, 10;\n  studies of Lassen and Rawlinson, 12;\n  discoveries of Layard, 14;\n  of Smith and Rassam, 15;\n  hieroglyphic origin of, 15.\n\nCush, 40.\n\nCyprus, names of, 40.\n\nCyrus, empire of, 141;\n  not a Persian, 143;\n  cylinder of, 146;\n  a polytheist, 149;\n  not King of Persia, 153;\n  language of, 156.\n\nDamascus, capture of, 107;\n  overthrow of, 111.\n\nDarius, 150.\n\nDeluge, Accadian account of, 27.\n\nEgypt during sojourn of Israelites, 58.\n\nEgypt, the burden of, 130.\n\nEgyptian traditions, 49.\n\nElam, 42.\n\nEsar-haddon, 130.\n\nEvil-Merodach, 141.\n\nExodus, the, time of, 60; stages of, 62.\n\nFall of man, Babylonian account of, 25.\n\nGenesis, Book of, confirmations of, 19;\n  the creation, 22;\n  the Sabbath, 24;\n  the fall of man, 25;\n  the site of Paradise, 26;\n  the Deluge, 27;\n  monotheism of, 34;\n  site of Ararat, 35;\n  the Tower of Babel, 37;\n  dispersion of mankind, 38;\n  Abraham, 46;\n  Joseph, 51.\n\nGisdhubar, adventures of, 28.\n\nGomer, 39.\n\nGoshen, land of, 56.\n\nGrotefend, guess of, as to decipherment of inscriptions, 10.\n\nHam, 38.\n\nHamath, discovery of Hittite inscriptions at, 95.\n\nHaran, site of, 46.\n\nHazael, contest of, with Shalmaneser, 105.\n\nHebrew inscriptions, 82.\n\nHezekiah, illness of, 116;\n  deliverance of, 126;\n  library of, 127.\n\nHiddekhel, origin of word, 26.\n\nHittite inscriptions, discovery of, 95.\n\nHittites, empire of, discovery of, 92;\n  cities of, 94;\n  origin of, 96;\n  dress of, 97;\n  art of, 98.\n\nHyksos, the, 50.\n\nIstar, descent of, into Hades, 152.\n\nJaphet, 38.\n\nJavan, 39.\n\nJehovah, origin of the word, 63.\n\nJerusalem, capture of, by Shishak, 100;\n  capture of, by Sargon, 117.\n\nJerusalem, underground, 91.\n\nJoseph in Egypt, 51.\n\nJosiah, 137.\n\nKadesh, 94.\n\nKirjath-sepher, 94.\n\nKlein, Dr., discovers Moabite Stone, 76.\n\nLassen\u2019s studies of inscriptions, 12.\n\nLud, 44.\n\nMadai, 39.\n\nMedia, 136.\n\nMerodach, the god who raises the dead to life, 156.\n\nMerodach-baladan, wars of, 116.\n\nMizraim, 40.\n\nMoab, language of, 79.\n\nMoabite Stone, the, discovery of 76;\n  translation of inscription, 77;\n  language of, 79;\n  forms of the letters, 82.\n\nMonths, names given to, 72.\n\nMoses, origin of the word, 66.\n\nNabonidos, inscription concerning, 141.\n\nNaville, M., discovery of, 62.\n\nNebuchadrezzar, 138;\n  wars of, 139;\n  inscription of, 140.\n\nNimrod, 44.\n\nNineveh, fall of, 132.\n\nNizir, land of, 35.\n\nOmri, tribute of, 105.\n\nPalestine, early travels in, 59.\n\nParadise, site of, 26.\n\nPharaoh, origin of word, 51.\n\nPharaoh Necho, 136.\n\nPh\u0153nician ritual, 68.\n\nPhut, 41.\n\nPishon, origin of word, 26.\n\nPithom, site of, 62.\n\nPool of Siloam, site of, 84;\n  recent discoveries at, 90.\n\nRamses, sites of, 60.\n\nRawlinson\u2019s studies of inscriptions, 12.\n\nRimmon, 104.\n\nRimmon-nirari, conquests of, 107.\n\nRowandiz, 35.\n\nSabbath, Babylonian, 24.\n\nSamaria, capture of, 113;\n  re-settlement of, 114.\n\nSarah, origin of word, 46.\n\nSargon, wars of, 116;\n  capture of Jerusalem by, 117;\n  death of, 120.\n\nScythians, the, 131.\n\nSennacherib, wars of, 120;\n  inscription of, 120;\n  bas-relief of, 124;\n  at Lachish, 125;\n  defeat of, 126;\n  murder of, 127.\n\nShalmaneser II, campaigns of, 101;\n  inscription of, 102;\n  conquers Hazael, 105;\n  erects his own image, 105;\n  obelisk of, 106.\n\nShem, 38.\n\nShishak, capture of Jerusalem by, 100.\n\nSiloam inscription, discovery of, 83;\n  site of, 84;\n  translation of, 87;\n  language of, 88;\n  date of, 88.\n\nSisuthros, adventures of, 28;\n  translation of legend concerning, 29;\n  meaning of the name, 36.\n\nSumirians, the, 20.\n\nTariff of Sacrifices, translation of, 69.\n\nTiglath-Pileser, campaigns of, 108;\n  death of, 112.\n\nTwo Brothers, Tale of the, 54.\n\nUr, site of, 46.\n\n\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n    1 Deut. ii. 23, Jer. xlvii. 4, Amos ix. 7.\n\n    2 Brugsch, \u201cHistory of Egypt\u201d (Eng. Tr.) I, p. 158.\n\n    3 Brugsch, \u201cHistory of Egypt\u201d (Eng. Tr.), I, pp. 309-311.\n\n    4 Called Anab, \u201c(the city of) grapes,\u201d in Josh. xi. 21.\n\n    5 The invention of the existing Masoretic system of vowel-points and\n      accents is ascribed to Mokha of Tiberias (A.D. 570) and his son\n      Moses, who are said to have based it on a system invented shortly\n      before by Akha the Babylonian. Only a very few MSS. are known\n      written in the Babylonian system of punctuation.\n\n    6 A coin from Gaza, of the fourth century B.C., is now in the British\n      Museum, on one side of which is the figure of the Canaanitish Baal\n      in a chariot of fire, but otherwise with the attributes of the Greek\n      Zeus, and with the word YHU (_i.e._, Yahu or Yeho) written above him\n      in old Ph\u0153nician letters.\n\n    7 The Assyrian inscriptions show that the true form of the name of the\n      king of Damascus was Rezon, like that of the founder of the kingdom\n      (1 Kings xi. 23), the Biblical form with _i_ being due to the same\n      vocalic change as that in _Toi_ (2 Sam. viii. 9) by the side of\n      _Tou_ (1 Chr. xviii. 9), or Hiram (1 Kings v. 1) by the side of\n      Huram (2 Chr. ii. 11). Hezion in 1 Kings xv. 18 is probably a\n      copyist\u2019s error for Rezon.\n\n    8 Compare 2 Kings xv. 29.\n\n    9 The name of Baladan in 2 Kings xx. 12 (and Isa. xxxix. 1) is due to\n      the error of a copyist, like Berodach for Merodach. His eye must\n      have run back to the name of Merodach-baladan in the preceding line.\n      Merodach-baladan means \u201cMerodach has given a son,\u201d and without\n      \u201cMerodach\u201d would be incomplete.\n\n   10 \u201cThat day\u201d in the A. V. should be corrected into \u201cto-day\u201d (Isa. x.\n      32).\n\n   11 The following chronological table will enable the reader to\n      understand without difficulty the order of the events described in\n      the preceding chapter:\u2014\n\n      B.C.\n\n      1130. Reign of Tiglath-Pileser I, in Assyria: campaigns in Syria and\n      Cilicia.\n\n      900. Recovery of Assyria after a period of decline.\n\n      858. Accession of Shalmaneser II.\n\n      853. Battle of Karkar.\n\n      851. Death of Ahab.\n\n      850. Campaign of Shalmaneser against Hadadezer (Ben-hadad II).\n\n      845. Campaign against Hadadezer.\n\n      843. Murder of Hadadezer by Hazael.\n\n      841. Campaign against Hazael; tribute paid to Shalmaneser by Jehu.\n\n      823. Shalmaneser II succeeded by Samas-Rimmon.\n\n      810. Samas-Rimmon succeeded by Rimmon-nirari.\n\n      804. Damascus captured by the Assyrians: tribute paid by Samaria.\n\n      781. Rimmon-nirari succeeded by Shalmaneser III.\n\n      773. Campaign against Damascus.\n\n      745. April. Pul, who takes the name of Tiglath-Pileser II, usurps\n      the Assyrian throne.\n\n      743-40. War with Hamath; submission of Uzziah; fall of Arpad.\n\n      738. Tribute paid to the Assyrians by Menahem and Rezon.\n\n      734. Damascus besieged; the tribes beyond the Jordan carried away;\n      Jehoahaz (Ahaz) of Judah becomes an Assyrian vassal.\n\n      733 (? 729). Pekah put to death; Hosea succeeds.\n\n      732. Damascus taken; Rezon slain. Ahaz at Damascus.\n\n      727. Tiglath-Pileser succeeded by Shalmaneser IV.\n\n      722. Sargon seizes the throne and captures Samaria.\n\n      721. Merodach-baladan conquers Babylonia.\n\n      720. Hamath conquered; Sabako (So) of Egypt defeated at Raphia.\n\n      712. Embassy of Merodach-baladan to Hezekiah.\n\n      711. Capture of Jerusalem and Ashdod by Sargon.\n\n      710. Merodach-baladan driven from Babylonia.\n\n      705. Murder of Sargon; his son Sennacherib succeeds on the 12th of\n      Ab.\n\n      704. Merodach-baladan holds Babylon for six months.\n\n      701. Campaign against Judah; battle of Eltekeh; retreat of\n      Sennacherib from Jerusalem.\n\n      681. Murder of Sennacherib; accession of Esar-haddon.\n\n      676. Manasseh appears among the Assyrian tributaries. Egypt\n      conquered.\n\n      670. Assur-bani-pal (Sardanapalus) associated in the government on\n      the 12th of Iyyar.\n\n      668. Esar-haddon dies; Assur-bani-pal succeeds on the 27th of Ab.\n\n      665. Destruction of Thebes (No-Amun) by the Assyrians.\n\n      ?606. Fall of Nineveh, Esar-haddon II or Sarakos being the last\n      king.\n\n   12 See Jer. xlvii. 1.\n\n   13 Compare Ezek. xxvii. 18.\n\n   14 The following chronological table will assist the reader in\n      understanding the sequence of events in the preceding chapter:\u2014\n\n      B.C.\n\n      609. Battle of Megiddo; Josiah slain; Pharaoh Necho overruns Western\n      Asia.\n\n      606. Necho defeated at Carchemish by Nebuchadrezzar; foundation of\n      the Babylonian empire.\n\n      604. Nebuchadrezzar succeeds his father Nabopolassar.\n\n      599. Jerusalem captured; Jehoiachin sent to Babylon.\n\n      588. Destruction of Jerusalem; murder of Gedaliah.\n\n      567. The Babylonians overrun Egypt, then governed by Amasis.\n\n      561. Nebuchadrezzar succeeded by his son Evil-Merodach.\n\n      559. Nergal-sharezer, son of Bel-sum-iskun, seizes the Babylonian\n      crown.\n\n      555. Nergal-sharezer succeeded by Laborosoarchod.\n\n      555. The crown seized by Nabonidos, son of Nabu-balatsu-ikbi.\n\n      552. The dream of Nabonidos.\n\n      549. Conquest of Astyages of Ekbatana (Media) by Cyrus, king of\n      Elam.\n\n      548. Death of \u201cthe king\u2019s mother\u201d (Nitokris).\n\n      538. Overthrow and death of Nabonidos; Cyrus occupies Babylon.\n\n      529. Death of Cyrus and accession of Kambyses.\n\n      521. Darius, the son of Hystaspes, elected to the throne of Persia.\n\n      520-19. Revolt of Babylon under Nidinta-Bel.\n\n      513. Second revolt of Babylon under Arakha.\n\n   15 \u201cThe wood of the great prince.\u201d\n\n   16 Literally, \u201cI took the framework.\u201d","title":"Fresh light from the ancient monuments : $b A sketch of the most striking confirmations of the Bible, from recent discoveries in Egypt, Palestine, Assyria, Babylonia, Asia Minor","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":48830}