miiaiKAigBr

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

GIFT OF
The Eev. Avery D. Post

EGYPT AND BABYLON

SACRED AND PROFANE SOURCES

GEORGE RAWLINS ON, M. A.
Author of "Seven Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern
World," etc.

NEW YOKE :
JOHN B. ALDEN, PUBLISHER.
1885.

k

fe

^ CONTENTS.
> CHAPTER I. rAGB
> _ Notices of Babylon in the Book of Genesis, . . 7
CHAPTER II.
Notices of Babylon in the Books of Kings and
-Chronicles,  15
-X CHAPTER III.
Tj, Further Notices of Babylon in the Books of
Kings and Chronicles,  24
x CHAPTER IV.
n Notices of Babylon in Daniel,  33
^ CHAPTER V.
^ Further Notices of Babylon in Daniel, ... 41
| -^ CHAPTER VI.
Further Notices of Babylon in Daniel, . . . 50
|^ CHAPTER VII,
> Notices of Babylon in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, , 60
CHAPTER' VIII.
i? Further Notices -of Babylon in Ezekiel, ... 69

\

4 CONTENTS.
CHAPTER IX. page
Further Notices of Babylon in Daniel, ... 79
CHAPTER X.
Further Notices of Babylon in Daniel, ... 88
CHAPTER XI.
Notices of Babylon in Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
and Ezekiel,  96
1 CHAPTER XII.
Further Notices of Babylon in Isaiah and Jere
miah,  105
CHAPTER XIII.
Notices of Egypt in Genesis,  113
CHAPTER XIV.
Further Notices of Egypt in Genesis, . . . 123
CHAPTER XV.
Notices of Egypt in Exodus,  132
CHAPTER XVI.
Further Notices of Egypt in Exodus, .... 141
CHAPTER XVII.
Notices of Egypt in Exodus and Numbers, . . 150
CHAPTER XVIII.
Further Notices of Egypt in Exodus, .... 159
CHAPTER XIX.
Notices of Egypt in the First Book of Kings, 168
CHAPTER XX.
Notices of Egypt in the Second Book of Kings, 177

CHAPTER XXI.
Notices of Egypt in Isaiah,  186
CHAPTER XXII.
Notices of Egypt in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, . . 195
CHAPTER XXIII.
Notices of Egypt in Daniel,  204
CHAPTER XXIV.
Further Notices of Egypt in Daniel, . * . . 213

EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER I.
NOTICES OF BABYLON IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS.
" Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
He was a mighty hunter before the Lord : wherefore it is said, Even
as Nimrod, the mighty hunter before the Lord. And the beginning
of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in
the land of Shinar.— Gen. x. 8-10.
That this passage refers to Babylon will scarcely be dis
puted. The words " Babel " and " Shinar " are sufficient
proof. " Babel," elsewhere generally translated " Babylon "
(2 Kings xx. 12 ; xxiv. 1 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 31 ; xxxiii. 11 ;
Ps. cxxxvii. 1, etc.), is the exact Hebrew equivalent of the
native Habil, which appears as the capital of Babylonia in
the cuneiform records from the time of Agu-kak-rimi (about
b. c. 2000) to the conquest of the country by Cyrus (b. c.
538). " Shinar " is probably an equivalent of "Mesopotamia,"
" the country of the two rivers," and in Scripture always
designates the lower part of the Tigris and Euphrates
valley, the alluvial plain through which the great rivers
flow before reaching the Persian Gulf.
Four facts are recorded of Babylonia in the passage : —
1. That it became at a very early date a settled govern
ment under a king ; 2. That it contained, besides Babylon,
at least three other great cities — Erech, Accad, Calneh ; 3.
That among its earliest rulers was a great conquering mon
arch named Nimrod ; and 4. That this monarch, and there
fore probably his people, descended from Cush — i.e., was a
Cushite, or Ethiopian.

8 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The first of these facts is confirmed by Berosus, by Dio-
dorus Siculus, and by the monuments. Berosus declared that
a monarchy had been set up in Babylon soon after the flood,
which he regarded as a real occurrence, and counted 208
kings from Evechoiis, the first monarch, to Pul, the prede
cessor of Tiglath-Pileser. Diodorus believed that Babylon
had been built by Semiramis, the wife of Ninus, at a date
which, according to his chronology, would be about b.c.
2200. The monuments furnish above ninety names of kings
anterior to Tiglath-Pileser, and carry back the monarchy by
actual numerical statements to b. c. 2286, while the super
position of the remains is considered by the explorers to
indicate an even greater antiquity. An early Babylonian
kingdom, once denied on the authority of Ctesias, is now
generally allowed by historians ; the researches of Sir Henry
Rawlinson, Mr. George Smith, Professor Sayce, Mr. Pinches,
and others, having sufficiently estabhshed the fact previously
questioned. The second fact — the early existence of several large
cities in Babylonia, cities ranking almost upon a par —
is also strongly supported by the native records. In the
most ancient times to which the monuments go back', the
chief cities, according to Mr. George Smith,* were Ur,
Nipur, Karrak, and Larsa, all of them metropolitan, and all
of them places giving their titles to kings. Somewhat later,
Babylon and Erech rose to greatness, together with a city
called Agade, or Accad, according to the same authority.!
If this last identification be allowed, then three out of the
four cities mentioned in Genesis as metropolitan at this
early date will have the same rank in the native records,
and one only of the four names will lack such direct con
firmation. Certainly, no name at all resembling Calneh
occurs in the primitive geography of Babylonia. There
are, however, grounds for regarding Calneh as another name
of Nipur, % and one which superseded it for a time in the
nomenclature of the inhabitants. In this case we may say
that all the four cities of Genesis x. 10 are identified, and
shown to have had (about b. c. 2000) the eminence ascribed
to them in that passage. Mr. George Smith's reading of
'• Agad6 " is, however, questioned by some, who read the
* "History of Babylonia " (edited by Kev. A. H Sayce), ch. iii.,
pp. 63-74. t Ibid., p. 61.
t Smith's " Dictionary of the Bible,'' ad voc Calneh.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. Q
name " Agane." If this latter reading be correct, the city
Accad must be regarded as at present not identified.
The third fact — the reign of a powerful king, called
Nimrod, over Babylonia has not as yet received any con
firmation from the monuments. It is suspected that the
monarch so called had two names, and that, while Scripture
uses one of them, the Babylonian documents employ the
other. Mr. George Smith proposed to identify the scrip
tural Nimrod with a certain Izdubar, a semi-mythical, semi-
historical personage, very prominent in the primitive legends.
But the identification is a pure conjecture. The monuments
must be regarded as silent with respect to Nimrod, and we
must look elsewhere for traces of his existence and authority.
Such traces are numerous in the traditions of the East, and
among the early Jewish and Arabic writers. Josephus tells
us that Nimrod lived at the time when the attempt was
made to build the Tower of Babel, and represents him as
the prime mover in that impious enterprise. The Moham
medans have a tradition that he lived somewhat later, and
was brought into contact with Abraham, whom he at
tempted to burn to death in a furnace of fire. In Arabian
astronomy he appears as a giant who at his decease was
translated to heaven, and transformed into the constellation
which the Arabs called EUabhar, "the Giant," and the
Greeks Orion. These tales have, of course, but little value
in themselves ; they are merely important as showing how
large a space this monarch occupied in the imaginations of
the Eastern races, a fact only to be accounted for by his
having once filled a prominent position. That position is
declared in the " Nabatha3an Agriculture," an Arabic work
of great antiquity, to have been the "position of a king the
founder of a dynasty which long bore sway over the land.
Another sign of the reality of Nimrod's rule is to be found
in the attachment of his name to various sites in the Meso-
potamian region. The remarkable ruin generally called
Akkerkuf, which lies a little to the south-west of Bagljflad,
is known to many as the " Tel-Nimrud ; " the great dam
across the Tigris below Mosul is the " Sahr-el-Nimrud ; "
one of the chief of the buried cities in the same neighbor
hood is called " Nimrud " simply ; and the name of " Birs-
Nimrud " attaches to the the grandest mass of ruins in the
lower country. *
*See Rich's " Journey to Babylon," p. 2. note.

10 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The fourth fact; — that Nimrod, and therefore probably his
people, was of Cushite origin, has been strenuously denied
by some, even among modern critics.* But ancient classical
tradition and recent linguistic research agree in establishing
a close connection between the early inhabitants of the lower
Mesopotamian plain and the people, which, under the vari
ous names of Cushites, Ethiopians, and Abyssinians, has
long been settled upon the middle Nile. Memnon, king
of Ethiopia, according to Hesiod and Pindar, led an army
of combined Ethiopians and Susianians to the assistance of
Priam, king of Troy. Belus, according to the genealogists,
was the son of Libya (or Africa) ; he married AnchinOe,
daughter of Nilus, and had issue JEgyptus. Names which
are modifications of Cush have always hung about the lower
Mesopotamian region, indicating its primitive connection
with the Cush upon the Nile. The Greeks called the Susi
anians " Kissii," and a neighboring race " Kossaei." The
early Babylonians had a city, " Kissi," and a leading tribe in
their country was called that of the "Kassu." Even now
the ancient Susiania is known as " Khuzistan," the land of
Khuz, or of the Cushites. Standing alone, these would be
weak arguments ; but weight is lent them by the support
which they obtain from the facts of- language. Sir Henry
Rawlinson, the first translator of primitive Babylonian docu
ments, declares the vocabulary employed to be " decidedly
Cushite or Ethiopian," and states that he was able to inter
pret the inscriptions chiefly by the aid which was furnished
to him from published works on the Galla (Abyssinian) and
the Mahra (South Arabian) dialects.f
" The whole earth was pf one language and of one speech. And
it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east [eastward, marg.], that
they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And
they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them
throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for
mortar. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower,
whole top may reach unto heaven ; and let us make us a name, lest
we b»scattered abroad upon the face cf the whole earth. And Ihe
Lord Simo down to see the city and the tower, which the children of
men builded. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they
have all one language ; and this they begin to do ; and now nothing
will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go
to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may
not understand one another's speech. So the Lord scattered them
* See Bunsen's "Philosophy of History," vol. iii., pp. 190, 191.
t See the author's "Herodotus," vol. i., p. 441.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 11
abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off
to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel, because
the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth ; and from
thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the
earth." — Gen. xi. 1-9.
We have here the scriptural account of the meaning of
the name "Babel," the primitive term which the Greeks
converted into " Babylon," but which remains even now
attached to a portion of the ruins that mark the site of the
great city, almost in its original form.* The etymology was
not accepted by the Babylonians themselves, who wrote the
word in a way which shows that they considered it to mean
" the Gate of God." This has been regarded by some as a
contradiction of the scriptural account ; but we may recon
cile the two by supposing either that the name was first
given in scorn, and that afterwards a better meaning was
found for it, or (more probably) that the word, having been
intended by the Babylonians themselves in the sense of " the
Gate of God," was from the first understood in a different
sense by others, who connected it with the " confusion " of
tongues. The word is capable of both etymologies, and may
from the first have been taken in both senses by different
persons. The account of the origin of the name is connected with
an historical narrative, of which the following are the chief
incidents: — 1. A body of men, who had occupied the plain
of Shinar, disliking the idea of that dispersion which was
continually taking place, and scattering men more and more
widely over the earth, determined to build a city, and to
adorn it with a lofty tower, in order that they might get
themselves a name, and become a centre of attraction in the
world. 2. The materials which they found to their hand,
and which they employed in building, were burnt brick and
"slime,!' or bitumen. 3. They had built their' city, and
raised their tower to a certain height, when God interfered
with their work. By confounding the language of the work
men, He made it impossible for them to understand each
other's speech, and the result was that the design, for the
time at least, fell through. The people " left off to build
the city," and the mass of them dispersed, and "were scat
tered abroad upon the face of the earth."
* The northernmost of the three great mounds which mark the
ruins of Babylon is called by the Arabs Babil.

12 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
It would not have been surprising if profane history had
contained no notice of this matter. It belongs clearly to a
very remote antiquity, a time anterior — as it might have
been supposed — to records, and lost in the dark night of
ages. But the fact seems to be that the Babylonians either
recorded at the time, or at any rate bore in memory, the
transaction. Two Greek writers, who drew their Baby
lonian histories from native sources, noticed the occurrence,
and gave an account of it, which is in most respects very
close to the biblical narrative. Alexander Polyhistor said,
that " Once upon a time, when the whole race of mankind
were of one language, a certain number of them set to work
to build a great tower, thinking to climb up to heaven ; but
God caused a wind to blow, and cast the tower down, at the
same time giving to every man his own peculiar speech. On
which account the city was called Babylon." Abydenus, a
somewhat later historian, treated the subject at greater
length. " At this time," he said, " the ancient race of men
were so puffed up with their strength and tallness of stature,
that they began to despise and contemn the gods, and la
bored to erect that very lofty tower, which is now called
Babylon, intending thereby to scale heaven. But when the
building approached the sky, behold, the gods called in the
aid of the winds, and by their help overthrew the tower, and
cast it to the ground. The name of the ruins is still called
Babel ; because until this time all men had used the same
speech, but now there was sent upon them a confusion of
many and diverse tongues."
These passages have long been known, and have been ad
duced as probable evidence that the native Babylonian records
contained a notice respecting the tower of Babel and the con
fusion of human speech. But it is only recently that such a
record has been unearthed. Among the clay tablets brought
from Babylonia by Mr. George Smith, and deposited in the
British Museum, is one unfortunately much mutilated, which
seems clearly to have contained the Babylonian account of
the matter. The main portions of this document are as
follows : — "Babylon corruptly to sin went,' and
Small and great were mingled on the mound ;
Babylon corruptly to sin went, and
Small and great were mingled on the mound.
» * * #

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 13
Their work all day they builded;
But to their stronghold in the night
Entirely an end God made.
In His anger also His secret counsel He poured forth,
He set His face to scatter;
He gave command to make strange their speech;
Their progress He impeded.
* * # *
In that day He blew, and for [all] future time
The mountain (was demolished ?);
Lawlessness stalked forth abroad ;
And, though God spake to them,
Men went their ways, and strenuously
Opposed themselves to God.
He saw, and to the earth came down;
No stop he made, while they
Against the gods revolted 
* * * *
Greatly they wept for Babylon;
Greatly they wept." *
¦* It came to pass in the days of Amraphel, king of Shinar, Arioch,
king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, and Tidal, king of
nations, that these made war with Bera, king of Sodom, and with
Birsha, king of Gomorrah, Shinab, king of Admah, and Shemeber,
king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela, which is Zoar. All these were
joined together in the vale of Siddim, which is the salt sea. Twelve
years they served Chedorlaomer." — Gen. xiv. 1-4.
The chief fact relating to Babylon, which this passage
contains, is its subjection in the time of Abraham to a neigh
boring country called here Elam. Amraphel, the king of
Shinar, the country whereof Babylon was the capital (Gen.
x. 10; xi. 2-9), is plainly, in the entire narrative (Geri. xiv.
1-17), secondary and subordinate to Chedorlaomer, king of
Elam. The conquered monarchs "serve" Chedorlaomer
(ver. 4), not Amraphel ; Chedorlaomer leads both expedi
tions, the other kings are " with him " (vers. 5, 17), as sub
ordinate allies, or, more probably, as tributaries. This is an
inversion of the usual position occupied by Babylonia towards
its eastern neighbor, of which, until recently, there was no
profane confirmation.
Recently, however, traces have been found of an Elamitic
conquest of Babylon, and also of an Elamitic dynasty there
at an early date, which show that there were times when the
more eastern of the two countries which lay side by side urjon
the Lower Tigris had the greater power, and exercised do
minion over the more western. Asshur-bani-pal, the son of
* See " Records ot the Past," vol. vii., pp. 131, 132.

14 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Esar-haddon, relates that in his eighteenth year (b. c. 651)
he restored to the Babylonian city of Erech certain images
of gods, which had been carried off from them as trophies of
victory 1635 years previously by Kudur-Nakhunta, king of
Elam, to adorn his capital city of Susa. The primitive
Babylonian monuments also show a second conquest of
Babylon from the same quarter, and the establishment of a
dynasty there, which is known as " Elamite," * about b. c.
1600, or a little later. This dynasty consisted of two kings,
Kudur-Mabuk and Rim-agu (a name which has been compared
with "Arioch").
It is thus evident that Elam was, in the early period of
Babylonian history, a country of about equal power with
Babylon, and one which was able from time to time to ex
ercise dominion over her neighbor. It appears also that its
kings affected, as one of the elements in their names, the
word "Chedor" or "-Kudur," which is believed to have
meant " servant," — Chedorlaomer (or Chedor-Lagamer, as
the word might be transliterated) being " the servant of
Lagamer," a Susianian god, Kudur-Nakhunta, " the servant
of Nakhunta," another god; and Kudur-Mabuk, "the servant
of Mabuk," a goddess. We may add, that " Amar " (Amra
in " Amra-phel ") appears also as a root in the early Baby
lonian titles, f while Arioch is perhaps identical with the
name of Rim-agu (or Eriaku), Kudur-Mabuk's son and suc
cessor. Thus the notice in Gen. xiv. 1-4, without being
directly confirmed by the monuments, is in close harmony
with them, both languistic and historical.
* George Smith's "History of Babylonia," pp. 11, 74,
t Ibid., p. 10.

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 15

CHAPTER II.
NOTICES OF BABYLON IN THE BOOKS OF KINGS AND
CHRONICLES.
Scripture is silent on the subject of Babylon through
the whole period from Genesis to Kings.* Israel, during
the sojourn in Egypt, the wanderings in the wilderness, the
time of the Judges, and the greater part of the time of the
Kings, was never brought in contact with Babylonia or
Babylonians ; and Scripture, which traces the religious
history of the people of God, has therefore no occasion to
mention the southern Mesopotamian power. Another power
has interposed itself between Israel and Babylon — the great
empire of Assyria/ — and has barred the path by which alone
they could readily communicate. It is not till Assyria,
under the Sargonidse, is seriously threatening the independ
ence of both countries, that a common danger brings them
together, and Babylon once more claims the attention of the
sacred historians. The first notice of Babylon in the Books
of Kings is the following : —
" At that time " [the time of Hezekiah's illness] " Berodach-
Baladan, the son of Baladan, king of Babylon, sent letters and a pres
ent unto Hezekiah : for he had heard that Hezekiah had been sick.
And Hezekiah hearkened unto them, and showed them all the house
of his precious things, the silver, and the gold, and the spices, and
the precious ointment, and all the house of his armor, and all that
was found in his treasures : there was nothing in his house, nor in all
his dominion, that Hezekiah showed them not." — 2 Kings xx., 12. 13.
The same circumstance is related, almost in the same
words, by the prophet Isaiah, in one of his historical chap
ters. Isaiah says —
" At that time Merodach-Baladan, the son of Baladan, king of
Babylon, sent letters and a present to Hezekiah ; for he had heard
that he had been sick, and was recovered. And Hezekiah was glad
of them, and showed them the house of his precious things, the
silver, and the gold," etc. — Isa. xxxix. 1, 2.
* The " Babylonish garment " coveted by Achan (Josh. vii. 21)
scarcely constitutes an exception.

16 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The author of Chronicles, without relating the circum
stance, makes a short comment upon it. After describing
the riches, honor, and prosperity of Hezekiah, he adds —
" Howbeit in the business of the ambassadors of the princes of
Babylon, who sent unto him to inquire of the wonder that was done
in the land, God left him, to try him, that he might know all that was
in his heart." — 2 Chron. xxxii. 31.
The reign of a Babylonian monarch, called Merodach-
Baladan, at about the period indicated — the latter part of
the eighth century b. c. — is recorded in the famous " Canon
of Ptolemy," which assigns him the years between b. c. 722
and b. c 710. That the same monarch, after being deprived
of his throne, was restored to it, and bad a second reign of
six months' duration, is related by Alexander Polyhistor, the
friend of Sulla.* This latter reign appears to have belonged
to the year b. c. 703. So much is known to us from the
classical writers. From the Assyrian monuments we learn
that the relations between Babylonia and Assyria, during
the reign of Merodach-Baladan, were hostile. Sargon re
lates that he attacked this king, 'whom he viewed as a rebel,
in his first year, + defeated his ally, the king of Elam, and
ravaged his territory, but without coming into contact with
the Babylonian monarch himself. After this, troubles else
where forced him to leave Merodach-Baladan in peace for
eleven years; but in his twelfth year he again invaded
Babylonia, took Babylon, and made Merodach-Baladan apris-
oner.J Five years after this, as we learn from Sennacherib's
annals,§ on the death of Sargon, Babylonia revolted. Mero
dach-Baladan, escaping from the custody in which he was
held, hastened to Babylon, and re-established his authority
over the whole southern kingdom. But Sennacherib at once
marched against him, defeated his forces, recovered Babylon.
and drove him to take refuge in the marshes of southern
Chaldaea ; whence, after a short time, he fled across the
Persian Gulf to southern Elam, where he died in exile.'
The embassy of Merodach-Baladan to Hezekiah falls, by
Archbishop Usher's chronology, which is here founded upon
Ptolemy's Canon, into the year b. c. 713. It would thus^
* Ap. Euseb. " Chron. Can." pars, i., c. 5. Both reigns are noticed
in a recently deciphered Babylonian tablet. ("Proceedings of the
Society of Bibl. Archaeology " for 1884, pp. 169-8. )
t George Smith, " History of Babylonia, p. 116.
t Ibid., p. 123. § Ibid., p. 125.

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES.^ \"
have taken place between Sargon's first and second attack,
very shortly before the latter. The monuments do not
mention it ; but they show that at this time Merodach-Bala
dan was expecting the Assyrians to invade his country} was
looking out for allies, and doing his best to strengthen his
position. Under these circumstances it would be natural
that he should seek the alliance of Hezekiah, who, at the op
posite end of the Assyrian dominions, had " rebelled against
the king of Assyria, and served him not " (2 Kings xviii.
7). That he should cloak his design under the double pre
text that his object was to congratulate the Jewish king on
his recovery from a dangerous illness (Isa. xxxix. 1), and to
inquire concerning the astronomical " wonder done in the
land " (2 Chron. xxxii. 31), is intrinsically probable, being
consonant with diplomatic practice both in the East and in
the West. An astronomical marvel, such as that of the go
ing back of the shadow on the dial of Ahaz (2 Kings xx. 11 ;
Isa. xxxviii. 8), would naturally attract attention in Baby
lonia, where the phenomena of the heavens were observed.
with the utmost diligence from a very remote period.
It must not be concealed that there is one important dis
crepancy between the scriptural narrative and the history
of Merodach-Baladan, as recorded upon the Assyrian monu
ments. Merodach-Baladan is stated, both by Isaiah and by
the compiler of the Book of Kings, to have been " the son
of Baladan" — on the monuments he is always called " the
son of Yakina," or " Yakin." Mr. George Smith has sug
gested that Yakin was the name of the tribe whereto
Merodach-Baladan belonged ; * but it can scarcely be argued
that he was called '* son of Yakin " on this account. Yakin
must have been a person ; and if not the actual father of
Merodach-Baladan, at any rate one of his, progenitors. Per
haps the true explanation is, that Yakin was a more or less
remote progenitor, the founder of the house, and Baladan
(Bel-iddina ?) the actual father of Merodach-Baladan. By
the former designation he was popularly known, by the latter
in his official communications.
" The Lord spake to Manasseh and to his people, but they would
not hearken. Wherefore the Lord brought upon them the captains of
the host of the king of Assyria, which took Manasseh among the thorns,
and bound him with fetters, to carry him to Babylon. And when he
was in affliction, be besought the Lord his God, and humbled himself
* " History of Babylonia," p. 113.

18 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
greatly before the God of his fathers ; and he prayed unto Him, and
He was intreated of him, and heard his supplication, and brought
him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom." — 2 Chbon. xxxiii. 10-13.
It appears by this passage, 1. That Manasseh, after hav
ing provoked God by a long course of wicked conduct, was
attacked and made prisoner by the generals of a king of
Assyria, who " took him among the thorns," or rather
" took him with hooks," and bound him with fetters and
so carried him with them to Babylon ; 2. That after hav
ing suffered captivity for a time, and repented of his
wickedness, he was allowed by the king of Assyria to quit
Babylon, and return to Jerusalem, where he was once more
established in his kingdom. Three things are especially re
markable in this narrative : (a) the generals of the Assyrian
monarch conduct Manasseh to their master, not at Nineveh,
but at Babylon ; (b) they bring him into the royal presence
" with hooks" and fettered ; (c) by an act of clemency,
very unusual in the East, the Assyrian king pardons him
after a time, and goes so far as to reinstate him in his gov
ernment. We have to consider what light profane history
throws upon these facts.
And, first, how comes a king of Assyria to hold his court
at Babylon? Nineveh is the Assyrian capital, and ordinarily
the court is held there. If not there, it is held at Dur-sargina,
where Sargon built, himself a palace, or at Calah (Nimrud),
where were the palaces of Asshur-izir-pal, Shalmaneser II.,
and Tiglath-Pileser II. What has caused the anomaly of
a transfer of the court to the capital of another country ?
The Assyrian records fully explain this circumstance. Sen
nacherib, Hezekiah's contemporary, was succeeded by his
son, Esar-haddon, who would thus be Manasseh's contempo
rary. The Assyrian monuments tell us that this monarch
inaugurated a new policy with respect to Babylonia. Most
Assyrian kings who found themselves strong enough to re
duce that country to subjection, governed it by means of a
native or Assyrian viceroy ; and this was the plan adopted
by Sennacherib, Esar-haddon's father. But Esar-haddon,
when he came to the throne, acted differently. He assumed
the double title of "King of Assyria and "Babylonia," ap
pointed no viceroy, but, having built himself a palace in
Babylon, reigned there in person, holding his court some
times at the northern, sometimes at the southern capital.
Towards the end of his life, he relinquished Nineveh alto-

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 19
gether to his eldest son, Asshur-bani-pal, and contented him
self with ruling the southern kingdom from his palace in
Babylon.* The anomaly is thus fully explained, and what
once apeared a difficulty turns out a confirmation.
What our translators intended to be understood by the
expression, " which took Manasseh among the thorns," is
perhaps doubtful. But they convey to most minds the idea
of a caitiff monarch endeavoring to hide himself from his
pursuers in a thorny brake, but detected, and dragged from
his concealment. The words in the original have no such
meaning. D'fTin Qchdkhim), the term translated " thorns,"
is indeed capable of that rendering ; but it has also another
sense, much more suitable to the present context. Gesenius f
explains it as " instrumentum ferreum, circulus vel hamus, in
modum spina?, aucleatse quo olim captivi figebantur, et quo
Turcae suos captivos detinent vinctos." In the singular number
the word is translated " hook" in Job xli. 2 ; and a term nearly
identical, khdkh has the same rendering in 2 Kings xix.
28 ; Isa. xxxvii. 29 ; Ezek. xxix. 4 ; xxxviii. 4, etc. These
passages sufficiently fix the meaning of the phrase used in
Chronicles. The captains of the king of Assyria " took
Manasseh away with hooks" (comp. Amos iv. 2), and hav
ing also " bound him with fetters," brought him into the
presence of Esar-haddon.
The practice of bringing prisoners of importance into the
presence of a conquering monarch by means of a thong at
tached to a hook or ring passed through their upper or their
under lip, or both, is illustrated by the sculptures both of
Babylonia and Assyria. Sargon is seen in his palaces at
Khorsabad receiving prisoners whose lips arc thus perforat
ed ; % and one of the few Babylonian sculptures still extant
shows us a vizier conducting into the presence of a monarch
two captives held in durance in the same wr.y.§. Cruel and
barbarous as such treatment of a captured king seems to us,
there is no doubt that it was an Assyrian usage. To put a
hook in a man's mouth, and a bridle in his jaws (2 Kings
xix. 28), was no metaphor expressive of mere defeat and
capture, but a literal description of a practice that was com
mon in the age and country — a practice, from which their
royal rank did not exempt even captured monarchs.
* G. Smith, " History of Babylon." pp. 141, 142.
t " Hebrew Lexicon," ad voc. HiH
f See " Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., pp. 153, 137, note 30.
§ Ibid., vol. iii., p. 7.

20 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The pardon extended by Esar-haddon to Manasseh, little
consonant as it is with general Oriental practice, agrees well
with the character of this particular monarch, whose rule
was remarkably mild, and who is proved by his inscriptions
to have been equally merciful on other occasions. When a
son of Merodach-Baladan, who had been in revolt against his
authority, quitted his refuge in Susiana, and presented him
self before Esar-haddon's footstool at Nineveh, that mon
arch received him favorably, accepted his homage, and ap
pointed him to the government of a large tract upon the
Persian Gulf, previously ruled by his father, and afterwards
by his elder brother.* Again, when the chief of the Gam-
balu, an Aramaean tribe upon the Euphrates, after revolt,
submitted himself, and brought the arrears of his tribute,
together with a present of buffaloes, Esar-haddon states that
he forgave him, strengthened his city with fresh works, and
continued him in the government of it.f
" Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he began to reign, i
and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem; and he did that which was
evil in the sight of the Lord his God. Against him came up Nebu
chadnezzar, king of Babylon, and bound him in fetters, to carry him
to Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar also carried of the vessels of the house
of the Lord to Babylon, and put them in his temple at Babylon." — 2
Chron. xxxvi. 5-7.
With this notice may be compared the following, which
relates to the same series of occurrences : —
" In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, came
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.
And the Lord gave Jehoiakim. king of Judah, into his hand, with part
of the vessels of the house of God; which he carried into the land of
Shinar to the house of his god ; and he brought the vessels into the
treasure house of his god. " — Dan. i. 1,, 2.
In these passages we have brought before us, 1. The in
dependence of Babylon, which, when last mentioned (2 Chron-
xxxiii. 11), was subject to the king of Assyria ; 2. Its govern
ment by a prince named " Nebuchadnezzar," or, as Ezekiel
transliterates the word from the Babylonian, " Nebuchad
rezzar " (Ezek. xxvi. 7) ; 3. The fact that this prince made a
great expedition into Palestine in the third year of Jehoia
kim, king of Judah, besieged Jerusalem, and took it, and
made Jehoiakim a prisoner ; 4. The further fact, that he
*" Ancient Monarchies," vol i., p. 469. t Ibid., p. 471.

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 21
carried off from the Jewish temple a certain portion of the
holy vessels, conveyed them to Babylon, and placed them
there " in the house of his god."
With respect to the first point, profane history tells us
by the mouth of a large number of writers,* that toward the
close of the seventh century b. c. the Assyrian empire came
to an end, Nineveh was destroyed, and Babylon stepped into
a position of greatly augmented power and authority. The
exact date of the change is undetermined ; but it was cer
tainly not earlier than b. c. 625, and not later than b. c. 6GC.
The third year of Jehoiakim seems to have been B.C. 605.
Thus the independence of Babylonia, distinctly implied in
the above passages, was beyond all doubt a fait accompli at
the time mentioned.
The second point — the government of Babylonia at this
exact time by a prince named Nebuchadnezzar or Nebuchad
rezzar — is to some extent a difficulty. The name indeed
is abundantly confirmed. Nine-tenths of the baked bricks
found in Babylonia bear the stamp of Mdbw-ltudurri-uzur,
the son of Nabu-pal-uzur, king of Babylon." And Berosus,
Abydenus, and Alexander Polyhistor, all give the name with
little variation. But Babylonian chronology made Nebu
chadnezzar ascend the throne, not in b. c, 605, but in b. c
604 ; and Berosus expressly stated that the first expedition
conducted by Nebuchadnezzar into Syria, Palestine and the
north-eastern parts of Egypt, fell into the lifetime of his
father, Nabopolassar, and preceded his own establishment
on the Babylonian throne. f The difficulty is sometimes met
by the supposition that Nebuchadnezzar was associated in
the kingdom by his father before setting out upon his expe
dition (and association was certainly a practice not unknown
to the Babylonians) ; but the more probable explanation is,
that the sacred writers call Nebuchadnezzar " king of'Baby-
lon," on first making mention of him, because he became
such ; just as we ourselves might say, " King George the
Fourth received the allied sovereigns on their visit to Eng
land after Waterloo;" or, " The Emperor Louis Napoleon
was long a prisoner in the fortress of Ham ; " although
George the Fourth received the sovereigns as prince regent,
and Louis Napoleon was not emperor till many years after
* As Herodotus (i. 106, 178), Polyhistor, Abydenus, the writer of
the Book of Tobit (xiv. 13), and others.
t Berosus, Fr. 14.

22 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
his imprisonment was over.* Or, it may have been assumed
by the Jews that the leader of the great expedition was the
king of the people whom he led against them, and the sacred
writers may have received no directions to correct the popu
lar misapprehension. The expedition itself, and its synchronism with Jehoia-
kim's third year, is generally allowed. Berosus related, that
in the last year of Nabopolassar's reign, which by the Canon
of Ptolemy was b. c. 605, he sent his son Nebuchadnezzar
to crush a revolt of the western provinces. Nebuchadnezzar
was successful, conquered Syria and Phcenicia, and had in
vaded Egypt, when news of his father's death reached him,
and forced him to return to his own capital.
The fourth point — one of comparative detail — receives
very curious illustration from the Babylonian monuments.
Nebuchadnezzar is said to have placed the holy vessels which
he carried off from Jerusalem in his temple at Babylon,"
" the house of his god" and to have brought them into tlie
treasure house of his god." These expressions are at first
sight surprising, considering that the Babylonian religion
was polytheistic, that Babylon had many temples, and that
the kings, as a general rule, distributed their favors impar
tially among the various personages of the pantheon. It is,
however, an undoubted fact that Nebuchadnezzar formed an
exception to the general rule. He was a devotee of Merodach.
He calls Merodach "his lord," "his gracious lord," "his
maker," " the god who deposited his germs in his mother's
womb," " the god who created him, and assigned him the em
pire over multitudes of men." One of the foremost of his own
titles is " Worshiper of Merodach." He regards Merodach as
" the great lord," " the lord of lords," " the chief of the gods,"
" the king of heaven and earth," " the god of gods." Even
on the cylinders which record his dedication of temples to
other deities it is Merodach whom he principally glorifies.*
Sir H. Rawlinson says : " The inscriptions of Nebuchad
nezzar arc for the most part occupied with the praises of
Merodach, and with prayers for the continuance of his favoi;.
The king ascribes to him his elevation to the throne : ' Mero
dach, the great lord, has appointed me to the empire of the
world, and has confided to my care the far-spread people of
the earth ; ' ' Merodach, the great lord, the senior of the
* See Br. Pusey's "Daniel," p. 400.
t See " Records of the Past," vol. vii., pp. 71-78.

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 23
gods, the most ancient, has given all nations and people to
my care,' etc. The prayer also to Merodach, with which the
inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar always terminate, invokes
the favor of the god for the protection of the king's throne
and empire, and for its continuance through all ages to the
end of time." *
The temple of Merodach at Babylon is properly called
" Nebuchadnezzar's temple," because he completely rebuilt
and restored it. It was the great temple of Babylon, and
known to the Greeks as the " temple (or tower) of Belus."
To its ruins the name of " Babil " still attaches. Nebuchad
nezzar describes his restoration of it at great length in his
" Standard Inscription ; " f and his statement is confirmed
by the fact that all the inscribed bricks which have ever
been found in it bear his name. Special mention of the
" treasure-house " attached to the temple has not been found
in the Babylonian remains ; but it was probably the building
at the base of the great tower, which is described by Hero
dotus as a " second temple," and said to have contained
furniture and figures in solid gold, together with many other
offerings. %
* Bawlinson, "Herodotus," vol. i., p. 652 (3d edition).
t See " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 116-120.
t Herod., i., 183.

24 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER III.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN THE BOOKS OF KINGS AND
CHRONICLES.
The numerous expeditions of the Babylonians against
Jerusalem, subsequently to the first attack in b. c. 605, re
ceive no direct confirmation from the cuneiform monuments,
probably owing to the fact that no general historical inscrip
tion descriptive of the events of Nebuchadnezzar's reign has
been as yet discovered. The records of his time which
modern research has unearthed, consist almost entirely either
of invocations addressed to the gods, or of descriptions and
measurements connected with his great works.* Alexander
Polyhistor, however, noticed an expedition of Nebuchad
nezzar's into these parts, which appears to have been that
conducted in the year b. c. 597, against Jehoiakim, whereof
we have the following notice in the Second Book of
Kings : —
" The Lord sent against him" (i.e. Jehoiakim) "bands of the
Chaldees, and bands cf the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and
bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to
destroy it, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by His
servants the prophets." — 2. Kings xxiv. 2.
Polyhistor tells us f that the expedition was one in which
Nebuchadnezzar called in the aid of his allies, among others,
of the Median king called by him Astibaras, who seems to
represent Cyaxares. The number of troops employed was
unusually great, amounting, according to the same authority,
to ten thousand chariots, one hundred and twenty thousand
* Until the year 1878, no historical inscription of Nebuchadnez
zar's had come to light. In that year a small and mutilated cylinder,
giving an account of some events belonging to his thirty-seventh year,
was purchased by tho British Museum. Further reference will be
mr.de to this cylinder in a future chapter.
t Fragm. Hist. Gr., vol. iii., p. 229, Fr. 24.

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 25
horsemen, and one hundred and eighty thousand infantry.
These numbers imply an army gathered from many nations^
and account for the expressions, " bands of the Chaldees,
and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and
bands of the children of Ammon," in the passage of Kings,
as well as for the following in Ezekiel : —
"Then the nations set against him on every side from the prov
inces, and spread their net over him: he was taken in their pit."—
Ezek. xix. 8.
The context of this passage shows that the monarch in
tended is Jehoiakim.
On passing from the reign of Jehoiakim to that of
Jehoiachin, the author of Kings makes the following re
mark : —
" And the King of Egypt came not again any more out of his
land, for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto
the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt." — 2
Kings, xxiv. 7.
This remark, though interposed at this point, belongs,
so far as it bears on Babylon, to an anterior time. The
king of Egypt, the writer intends to say, did not at this
time lend any help to Jehoiakim against Nebuchadnezzar,
did not even set foot beyond his borders, because some years
previously the Egyptians had been worsted in an encounter
with the Babylonians, and had lost to them the whole of
their Asiatic dominions — the entire tract between the tor
rent (nakhal) of Egypt, or the Wady el Arish, and the
Euphrates. The event glanced at is among the most im
portant in the history of the East. When Necho, king of
Egypt, in b. c. 608, carried the Egyptian arms triumphantly
from the Nile valley to the Upper Euphrates, it seemed as
if the old glories of the Thothmeses and Amenhoteps were
about to be renewed, as if Egypt was about to become once
more the dominant power in western Asia, and to throw the
hordes of Asiatic invaders back upon their own continent.
A permanent advance of Egypt, and retrocession of Babylon,
at this time would greatly have complicated the politi
cal problem, and might seriously have checked that aggres
sive spirit which was already moving Asia to attempt the
conquest of Europe. When Nabopolassar, therefore, in the
last year of his reign, sent his son Nebuchadnezzar to

26 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
challenge Necho to a trial of strength, and the hosts of
Africa and Asia met in battle array at the great frontier
fortress of Carchemish (Jer. xlvi. 2.) the issue raised was of
no small importance, being nothing less than the question
whether African power and influence should not maintain
itself in Syria and the adjoining regions, should or should
not establish its superiority over the power of Asia, should
or should not step into a position which would have brought
it shortly into direct contact with the civilization of the
Greeks. The battle of Carchemish, as it is called, decided
these questions. The armies of Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh-
Necho met in the vicinity of Carchemish (now Jerablus), in
the fourth year of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, which was the
accession year of Nebuchadnezzar, and contended in a great
battle, wherein ultimately the Babylonians were victorious.
The battle is prophetically, but very graphically, described
by the prophet Jeremiah : —
" Order ye the buckler and shield, and draw near to battle," he
says; "harness the horses, and get up, ye horsemen" (or rather,
" mount, ye chariotmen "), '¦ and stand forth with your helmets; fur
bish the spears; put on the brigaudiues. Wherefore have I seen
them dismayed and turned away back ? Their mighty men are beaten
down, and are fled apace, and look not back ; for fear was round about,
saith the Lord. Let not the swift flee away, nor the mighty man
escape, they shall stumble and fall toward the north by the river
Euphrates. Who is this that cometh up as a flood, whose waters toss
to and fro as the rivers ? Egypt riseth up like a flood, and his waters
are tossed to and fro like the rivers ; and he saith, I will go up, and will
cover the earth ; I will destroy the city and the inhabitants thereof.
Come up, ye horses ; and rage ye chariots ; and let the mighty
men come forth, Cush and Phut that handle the shield, and
Lud that handle and bend the bow. For this is the day of the
Lord God of hosts, a day of vengeance, that He may avenge
Him of His adversaries ; and the sword shall devour, and it
shall be satiate and made drunk with their blood; for the Lord
God of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north country by the river
Euphrates. Go up into Gilead, and take balm, O virgin, the daughter
of Egypt: in vain shalt thou use many medicines; for thou shalt not
be cured. The nations have heard of thy shame, and thy cry hath
filled the land : for the mighty man hath stumbled against the
mighty, and they are fallen both together."— Jer. xlvi. 3-12.
A fierce struggle is here indicated, a hardly contested
battle, terminating in a complete defeat. Egypt is not sur
prised — not taken at disadvantage. She has ample time to
call together her armed force of natives and auxiliaries,
Cush and Phut and Lud. Her chariots are marshaled in
their gallant array, together with her horsemen: she, "rises

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 27
up like a flood," bent on conquest rather than on mere
resistance. But all is in vain. " It is the day of the Lord
God of hosts, a day of vengeance." By the river Euphrates
the mighty men stumble and fall — they are dismayed and
beaten down ; in a short time they are compelled to fly —
they " flee apace, and look not back." The mighty man
hath met a mightier ; the forces of Asia have proved too
strong for those of Africa ; the Nile flood is swept back on
its own land.
Profane history, while touching the struggle itself only
in a single sentence,* amply signalizes the result. With
the battle of Carchemish, Babylon, for long ages oppressed
and held in subjection, springs up to notice as an empire.
Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine, hitherto threatened alternately
by Egypt and Assyria, now find a new foe in the great city
on the lower Eujmrates, and become fiefs of the Babylonian
crown. Egypt's attempt to recover, under the Psamatiks,
the Asiatic dominion which had been hers under the Thoth-
meses and Amenhoteps, is rudely checked. Her own terri
tory is invaded, and she becomes for a time a " base king
dom," the subject-ally and tributary of another. Babylon is
recognized as one of the " great powers" of Asia, sends her
armies within the Cilician gates, wastes Tyre, destroys Jeru
salem, makes alliances with Media and Lydia. The general
position of affairs in Western Asia for the next sixty years
was determined by the events of that campaign, wherein
" the king of Babylon took from the river of Egypt unto the
river Euphrates all that pertained unto the king of Egypt."
" They burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jeru
salem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with Are, and destroyed all
the goodly vessels thereof : and them that had "escaped from the
sword earned he away to Babylon, where they were servants to him
and his sons, until the reign of the kingdom of Persia." — 2 Chkon.
xxxvi. 19, 20.
The complete destruction of Jerusalem, and transfer of
its inhabitants' from Palestine to Babylonia, momentous
events as they were in the history of the Jewish nation, and
in that discipline of severity which was to purge out its
dross from the people of God, and fit them to hold up the
torch of truth to' the nations for another half millennium,
did not greatly attract the attention of the world at large,
or even obtain record generally at the hands of the historio
graphers who were engaged in chronicling the events of the
* Beros. ap. Joseph., Contr. Ap. i. 19, § 2.

28 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
time. In Babylon, indeed, it must have been otherwise.
There, if nowhere else, the final capture and ruin of so great,
so renowned, so ancient a city, after a siege which lasted
eighteen months, must beyond a doubt have been entered
upon the records, with the view of its being handed down
to posterity. But, unfortunately, it happens that at present,
as already observed, Nebuchadnezzar's historical inscriptions
remain undiscovered. ; and consequently we are still deprived
of such light as a Babylonian account of the capture of
Jerusalem would naturally have thrown on the whole sub
ject. The fragments of Berosus might have been expected
to supply the deficiency ; but, at the best, they are scanty,
and for the time of Nebuchadnezzar they furnish nothing
but a bare outline. They do just state that Nebuchadnezzar
made an expedition into Palestine and Egypt, carried all
before him, and, after burning the temple at Jerusalem, bore
away into captivity the whole Jewish people, and settled
them in different places in Babylonia; but they give no
further particulars. Not even is the name of the Jewish
king mentioned, nor that of the general to whom Nebuchad
nezzar entrusted the execution of his orders for the destruc
tion of the city.
Direct illustration of the destruction of Jerusalem, and
captivity of the Jewish people, is therefore at present im
possible. Still history may be said to illustrate indirectly
this portion of the sacred records by the examples which it
sets forth of parallel instances. The complete destruction
of a great city by the powers which conquer it is a rare
event, requiring as it does a dogged determination on the
part of the conqueror, and a postponement of immediate
gain to prospective advantage. But the complete destruction
of Nineveh, which is abundantly attested, had taken place
not very long before, and must have been fresh in the minds
of men at the time, furnishing a precedent for such extreme
severity, while a sufficient motive may be discerned in the
important position of Jerusalem, and the persistency of the
rebellious spirit in its inhabitants.
Transplantations of conquered nations are unknown in
modern warfare, and scarcely belong to the history of the
West. But in the East they were common anciently, and
are still not wholly unknown. The Kurds, who protect the
north-eastern frontier of Persia against the raids of the Turk
omans, were transported thither by Nadir Shah, after a

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 29
revolt in Kurdistan, being thus transferred from the extreme
vest almost to the extreme cast of his empire. Sargon
transported the Samaritans to Gozan and Media; Senna
cherib carried off 200,000 Jews from Judaaa; Esarhaddon
placed Elamites, ' Susianians and Babylonians in Samaria.
Darius Hystaspis brought the nation of the Pasonians from
Europe into Asia Minor,* removed the Barcasans to Bactria f
and the Eretrians to Ardericca, near Susa.J The forcible
removal of large populations from their native countries to
a remote region was a portion of the system under which
great empires were administered in the oriental world from
the time of Sargon downwards, and was regarded as especially
suited for the case where a race distinguished itself by per
sistence in revolt.
" It came to pass in the seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of
Jehoiachin, king of Judah, in the twelfth month, on the seventh and
twentieth day of the month, that Evil-Merodach, king of Babylon, in
the year that he began to reign, did lift up the head of Jehoiachin,
king of Judah, out of prison; and he spake kindly to him, and set his
throne above the thrones of the kings that were with him in Babylon;
arid changed his prison garments : and he did eat bread continually
before him all the days of his life." — 2 Kings xxv. 27-29.
Evil-Merodach was mentioned as the son and successor
of Nebuchadnezzar by Berosus and Abydenus. His name
has also been found on no fewer than eleven Babylonian
contract tablets, and is transliterated by the best authorities,
" Avil-Marduk." There can be no doubt of the position of
this king in the Babylonian list between Nebuchadnezzar
and Neriglissar, or Nergal-sar-uzur. Jehoiachin was carried
captive to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar in the eighth year of
his reign (2 Kings xxiv. 12), and Nebuchadnezzar reigned
forty-three years, according to Berosus, Ptolemy, and the
tablets— commencing his reign in b. c. 605, and ending it in
b. c 562 — the " seven and thirtieth year of the captivity of
Jehoiachin" would exactly coincide with the first regnal year
of Evil-Merodach, which was b.c. 561.
The mild treatment of a rebel, whom Nebuchadnezzar
had kept in durance for so many years, was perhaps regarded
by the Babylonians as a wrongful departure from their cus
toms. At any rate, we learn from Berosus that within two
years of his accession Evil-Merodach was put to death by
* Herod., v. 17. t Ibid., iv. 204. t Ibid., vi. 119.

30 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
his subjects, on the charge of ruling in a lawless and intem
perate fashion. As Jehoiachin " did eat bread continually
before Evil-Merodach all the days of his (*'. e. Jehoiachin's)
life," we must suppose that he died within less than two
years from his release. He would have been at the time
between fifty and sixty years of age.
" Those that had escaped from the sword carried he " (i.e. Nebu
chadnezzar) " away to Babylon, where they were servants to him and
his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia; to fulfil the word
of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed
her sabbaths; for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to
fulfil threescore and ten years." — 2 Chkon. xxxvi. 20, 21.
The statement that the Israelites, " were servants, to
Nebuchadnezzar and his sons" is at first sight contradictory'
to the Babylonian history, as delivered to us by profane
authors. According to them, Nebuchadnezzar was succeeded
by one son only, viz., Evil-Merodach, after whom the crown
fell to a certain Neriglissar, or Nergal-sar-uzur, who was
not a blood relation. Neriglissar, however, had married a
daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, and having thus become a son-
in-law, may conceivably be termed a " son." He was suc
ceeded by his own son, Laborosoarchod, probably a grandson
of Nebuchadnezzar, who would come under the term " son "
by the ordinary Hebrew usage. The successor of Laboroso
archod was, we are told, " in no way related " to the family
of Nebuchadnezzar. There are some reasons, however, for
believing that he, too, married a daughter of the great mon
arch ; so that he, too, may have been regarded as " a son "
in the same sense with Neriglissar.
The seventy years of the captivity, during which the
land lay waste, and " enjoyed its sabbaths," may be counted
from different dates. In this place the year of. the final
destruction of Jerusalem seems to be taken as the terminus
a quo. This was b. c. 586, the nineteenth year of Nebuchad
nezzar (2 Kings xxv. 3-8 ; Jer. Iii. 6-12), and the passage
would therefore seem to point to b. c. 516 as the termina
tion of the captivity period. Now b. c. 516, the sixth of
Darius Hystaspis, was, in fact, the close of the period of de
pression and desolation, so far as the temple was concerned
(Ezra vi. 15). But the personal captivity; the desolation
of the land through loss of inhabitants, both began and
ended earlier. Jeremiah evidently intended his " seventy
years " to count from the first capture of Jerusalem by Nebu-

NOTICES IN KINGS AND CHRONICLES. 31
chadnezzar (Jer. xxv. 1-12), which was in b. c. 605 ; and
Daniel must have counted from the same date when he felt,
in b. c 538, that the time of release was approaching (Dan.
ix. 2). It is questionable, however, whether the full term of
the prophetic announcement, thus understood, was actually
reached. If Nebuchadnezzar carried away his first captives
from Jerusalem in b. c. 605, and Cyrus issued his edict for
the return in his first year (2 Chron. xxxvi. 22 ; Ezra, i. i),
which was b. c. 538, the seventieth year had certainly not
'then commenced. Even if the captives did not take im
mediate advantage of the edict, but made the journey from
Babylonia to Palestine in the year following the proclama
tion, b. c. 537, which is not improbable, still the captivity
had not endured seventy years, but only sixty-eight. It is
usual to meet the difficulty by the supposition that the first
year of Cyrus in Scripture is really the third year from his
conquest of Babylon, Darius the Mede having been made
viceroy of Babylon under Cyrus during the first two years
after the conquest. This is, no doubt, a possible explana
tion. But it is perhaps as probable that the round number
" seventy," in the prophecy of Jeremiah, was not intended
to be exact, but approximate, and that the actual duration
of the captivity fell short by a year or two of the threatened
period. That " the reign of the kingdom of Persia " immediately
succeeded to that of Babylon, which was swallowed up by
the great Aryan power within seventy years of the acces
sion of Nebuchadnezzar, is declared with one voice by the
classical historians, and has been recently confirmed by more
than one native document. Two inscriptions, brought from
Babylonia within the last decade, describe the circumstances
under which the great empire of Babylon collapsed before
the arms of Cyrus the Great, and was absorbed into his
dominions. The details of the subjection will have to be
considered hereafter, when we comment on those passages of
Scripture which treat directly of the fall of the city. At
present we desire simply to note the confirmation by the
monuments of the Persian conquest, effected by Cyrus the
Great, in the seventeenth year of Nabonidus, which was the
sixty-eighth year after the accession of Nebuchadnezzar and
his first capture of Jerusalem. *
* See the Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archozology, voL
vi., pp. 47-61.

32 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER IV.
NOTICES OF BADYLON IN DANIEL.
The history of the chosen people during the period of
the Babylonian captivity is carried on in a book which We
are accustomed to regard as prophetical, but in which the
historical element decidedly preponderates. The first six
chapters of Daniel contain a continuous and most important
narrative. The scene of the history has been transferred from
Jerusalem to Babylon. We are introduced into the court
of the great King Nebuchadnezzar, and shown his grandeur,
his pride, his cruelty, his relentings, his self-glorification, his
punishment. We find the Jews his captives, scattered in
various parts of his territories (ch. ix. 7), without organiza
tion or national life, a mere herd of slaves, down-trodden
and oppressed for the most part. At the court, however,
it is different. There four Jews, of royal, or at any rate noble
blood, occupy a position of some importance, take rank among
the courtiers, hold communication with the monarch, and
are called upon to advise him in circumstances of difficulty
(ch. i. 17-20). After a time they rise still higher in the
king's favor, and are promoted to some of the chief govern
mental offices in the kingdom (ch. ii. 48, 49). One, the
writer of great part of the book, if not even of the whole,
becomes the very first person in the kingdom next to the
king, and lives and prospers under four monarchs, called
respectively, Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Cyrus, and Darius.
Wc have thus a considerable body of Babylonian history in
this (so-called) prophetical book ; and numerous points pre
sent themselves on which some illustration of the history
from profane sources is possible.
Let us take, first, the character of Nebuchadnezzar's
court. It is vast and complicated, elaborate in its organiza
tion, careful in its etiquette, magnificent in its ceremonial.
Among the most important personages in it are a class who
profess to have the power of expounding dreams, and gene
rally foretelling future events by means ol magic sorcery, and

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 33
astrology (ch. ii. 2, 10, 27, etc.). Next to these are the civil ad
ministrators, " princes, governors, captains, judges, treasurers,
councilors, sheriffs, and rulers of provinces " (ch.iii. 2), who
are specially summoned to attend in full numbers on certain
grand occasions, The king is waited on by eunuchs, some
times of royal descent, who are subjected to a three years'
careful training, and are under the superintendence of a
" master of the eunuchs," who is an officer of high position
(ch. i. 3-5). The monarch has, of course, a "body-guard,"
which is under the command of a "captain" (ch. ii. 14),
another high official. Music is used at the court in ceremo
nials, and is apparently of an advanced kind, the bands com
prising performers on at least six different musical instru
ments (ch. iii. 5, 7, 10, etc.).
The Babylonian and Assyrian remains amply illustrate
most of these particulars. Magic holds a most important
place in both nations, and the monarchs set a special value
on it. Their libraries contained hundreds of tablets, copied
with the utmost care, on which were recorded the exorcisms,
the charms, the tabsmans and the astronomical prognostics,
which had come down from a remote antiquity, and which
were implicitly believed in. The celestial phenomena were
constantly observed, and reports sent to the court from the
observatories, which formed the groundwork of confident
predictions.* Eclipses were especially noted, and, according
to the month and day of their occurrence, were regarded as
portending events, political, social, or meteorological, f We
give a specimen from an astronomical calendar : —
" In the month of Elul (August), the 14th day, an eclipse happens;
in the north it begins, and in the south and east it ends ; in the evening
watch it begins, and in the night watch it ends. To the king of Mul-
lias a crown is given. . . . There are rains in heaven, and in the
channels of the rivers floods. A famine is in the country, and men
sell their sons for silver.
"An eclipse happens on the 15th day. The king's son murders his
father, and seizes on the throne. The enemy plunders and devours
the land.
"An eclipse happens on the 16th day. The king of the Hittites
plunders the land, and on the throne seizes. There is rain in heaven,
and a flood descends in the channels of the rivers.
" An eclipse happens on the 20th day. There are rains in heaven,
and floods in the rivers. Country makes peace with country, and
keeps festival. * " Records, of the Past," vol. i., pp. 153-157.
t Ibid., pp. 158-161. " "

34 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
" An eclipse happens on the 21st day. The enemy's throne does
not endure. A self-appointed king rules in the land. After a year the
Air god causes an inundation. After a year the king does not
remain. His country is made small." *
The application of the ethnic term "Chaldaean" (Kas-
dim) to the learned caste, or class, which occupied itself with
the subjects of magic and astrology, so frequent in Daniel
(ch. ii. 2, 4, 5, 10 ; v. 11), is found also in profane writers, as
Strabo, Diodorus, Cicero, and others,t who distinguish be
tween Chaldaeans and Babylonians, making the latter term
the ethnic appellative of the nation at large, while they
reserve the former for a small section of the nation, distin
guished by the possession of abstruse and recondite learning.
The distinction seems to have originated in the later
period of the empire, and to have been grounded on an
identification of the Chaldseans with the Akkad, and on the.
fact that the old Akkadian language and learning was in.
the later times the special possession of a literary class, who
furnished to the nation its priests, astrologers, magicians,
and men of science. What the real connection was between
the Chaldseans and the Akkad is still uncertain ; but some
ethnic affinity may be regarded as probable.
The division of the learned class into three distinct bodies,
devoted to different branches of the mystic lore in which all
participated, receives illustration from the native remains,
where the literature of magic comes under three principal
heads : (1). Written charms or talismans, which were to be
placed on the bodies of sick persons, or on the door-posts of
afflicted houses ; X (2). Formulae of incantation, which had
to be recited by the learned man in order to produce their
proper effect; § and (3). Records of observations, intended
to serve as grounds for the prediction of particular events,
together with collections of prognostics from eclipses or
other celestial phenomena, regarded as having a general ap
plicability. || The preparation of the written charms or
talismans was probably the special task of the " magicians,"
or khertummim, whose name is formed from the root kheret,
* "Records of the Past," vol. i., p. 160.
t Diod. Sic. ii. 29; Strab. xvi. 1, § 6; Cic. De Div. i. 1, § 2; 42, § 93;
Plin. H.N. vi. 30, § 123, etc.
1 See " Records of the Past," vol. iii., p. 142.
§ Ibid., vol. iii., pp. 147-152, and xi., 128-138.
a Ibid., vol. i., pp. 153-163.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 35
which signifies "an engraving tool,'' or "stylus." The com
position and recitation of the formulae of incantation belonged
to the ashshaphim or mecashaphim, the " astrologers " and
" sorcerers " of our version, whose names are derived from
the root ashaph, or cashaph, which means "to mutter."*
The taking of observations and framing of tables of prognos
tics is probably to be assigned to the gazerim or " dividers,"
in our version " soothsayers " who divided the heavens into
constellations or " houses '' for astronomical and astrological
purposes.")- The attention paid to dreams (ch. ii. I^i6 ; iv. 5-27) by
the Babylonian monarch is quite in accordance with what
we know of the state of opinion, both in Babylonia and
Assyria, about the time of Nebuchadnezzar. The Assyrians
had a " dream deity," whom they called Makhir, and regarded
as " the daughter of the Sun," and to whom they were in
the habit of praying, either beforehand, to send them favor
able dreams, or after they had dreamed, to " confirm " their
dream, or make it turn out favorably to them.} A late
Assyrian monarch records that, in the course of a war which
he carried on with Elam or Susiana, one of his ' ' wise men "
dreamed a remarkable dream, and forthwith communicated
to him the particulars. " Ishtar," he said, " the goddess of
war had appeared to him in the dead of night, begirt with
flames on the right hand and on the left ; she held a bow in
her hand, and was riding in a chariot, as if going forth to
war. Before her stood the king, whom she addressed as a
mother would her child. . . . ' Take this bow,' she said, ' and
go with it to the battle. Wherever thou shalt pitch thy
camp, I will come to thee.' Then the king replied, ' O
queen> of all the goddesses, wherever thou goest, let me ac
company thee.' She made answer, 'I will protect thee,
and march with thee at the time of the feast of Nebo. Mean
while, eat meat, drink wine, make music, and glorify my
divinity, until I come to thee and this vision shall be ful
filled.' " Rendered confident by this dream, the Assyrian
monarch marched forth to war, attacked the Elamites in
their own country, defeated them, and received their sub
mission. §
Not very long after the time of Nebuchadnezzar, Nabo-
*Furst, " Concordant," p. 133.
t "Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., p. 207.
t " Records of tbe Past," vol. ix., p. 152. § Ibid.,v ol. vii., p. 68.

36 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
nidus, one of his successors, places on record the following
incident : " In the beginning of my long reign," he says,
" Merodach, the great lord, and Sin, the illuminator of heaven
and earth, the strengthener of all, showed me a dream.
Merodach spake thus with me : ' Nabonidus, king of Baby
lon, come up with the horses of thy chariot ; build the walls
of Ehulhul ; and have the seat of Sin, the great lord; set with
in it.' Reverently I .made answer to the lord of the gods,
Merodach, ' I will build this house of which thou speakest.
The Sabmanda destroyed it, and strong was their might.'
Merodach replied to me, ' The Sabmanda of whom thou
speakest, they and their country, and the king who rules over
them, shall cease to exist. In the third year he (i.e., Mero
dach) caused Cyrus, king of Ansan, his young servant, to go
with his little army: he overthrew the wide-spreading
Sabmanda; he captured Istumegu (i.e., Astyages), king of
Sabmanda, and took his treasures to his own land."f
The civil organization of the Babylonian kingdom is very
imperfectly known tous. Neither sacred nor profane autho
rities furnish more than scattered and incomplete notices of
it. We gather from Daniel merely that it was elaborate and
complicated, involving the employment by the crown of
numerous officers, discharging distinct functions, and possess
ing different degrees of dignity. The names given to the
various officers by Daniel can scarcely be those which were
in actual use under the Babylonian monarch, since they are
in many cases of Aryan etymology. Most likely they are the
equivalents under the Medo-Persic system, which was estab
lished before Daniel wrote his book, of the Babylonian terms
previously in vogue. Still in some instances the names suf
ficiently indicate the offices intended. The "princes" (liter
ally " satraps ") of Dan. iii. 2, 3, 27, can only be governors
of provinces (compare ch. vi. 1), chief rulers under the mon
arch of the main territorial divisions of his empire. Such
persons had been generally employed by the Assyrian kings
in the government of the more settled part of their do
minions, and were no doubt continued by the Babylonians
when the territories of Assyria were divided between them
aud the Medes. Gedaliah held the office in Judaea imme
diately after its conquest by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxv.
22-25; Jer. xl. 5). Another such Babylonian governor is
* " Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaelogy ," November.
1882, p. 7. '

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 37
actually called a " satrap " by Berosus* Babylonian wit
nesses to contracts still in existence often sign themselves
" governor," sometimes " governor " of a province, which
they mention.! The sagans (" governors " in our version)
may be " governors of towns," who are often mentioned in
the inscriptions as distinct from governors of provinces. The
" judges " (literally " noble judges ") are no doubt the heads
of the judicature, which was separate from the executive in
Babylonia, as in Persia.} They, too, appear in the inscrip
tions^ as do "treasurers" and " captains. "|| It is not in
tended to assert that the correspondence between Daniel's
account of the civil administration and that indicated by the
Babylonian remains is very close or striking, but the general
features certainly possess considerable resemblance, and
there is as much agreement in the details as could fairly be
expected. - The employment of. eunuchs at the Babylonian court,
under the presidency of a " master of the eunuchs," is analo
gous to the well-known practice of the Assyrians, where the
president, or " master," bore the title of rab-saris, or " chief
eunuch "(2 Kings xviii. 17). It also receives illustration
from the story of Nanarus, as told by Nicholas of Damascus,
a writer whose Asiatic origin makes him a high authority
upon the subject of Oriental habits. Nanarus, according to
him, was one of the later Babylonian monarchs, a successor
of the Belesis who appears to represent Nabopolassar. His
court was one in which, eunuchs held all the most important
positions ; and the head eunuch, Mitraphemes, was the chief
counselor of the king. IT
The delight of the Babylonians in music, and the ad
vanced condition of the art among them, is confirmed and
illustrated by the same story of Nanarus, Nanarus, accord
ing to Nicholas maintained at his court no fewer than a
hundred and fifty female musicians, of whom some sang,
while others played upon instruments. Among the instru
ments indicated are three of those mentioned in Daniel — the
flute, the cithern ("harp," A.V.), and the psaltery. Sculpt
ure does not readily lend itself to the representation of so
*Ap. Joseph., Contr. Apion., i., 19.
t "Records of the Past," vol. ix., pp. 34, 92, 98, 107.
1 Herod, iii. 81.
§ " Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 120; vol. xi., 103.
|| Ibid., vol. ix., p. 104; vol. xi., p. 103.
f See the Fragm. Hist. Gr. vol. iii., pp. 359-363.

38 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
large a crowd, but we see in a bas-relief of a date, a little
anterior to Nebuchadnezzar a band of twenty-six performers.*
At least eight or nine different instruments were known to
the Assyrians,! and we can therefore feel no surprise that
six were in use among the Babylonians of Nebuchadnezzar's
time. Considerable difficulty has been felt with respect to the
names of several of the Babylonian instruments. These
names have a Greek appearance ; and it has been asked by
critics of reputation, " How could Greek musical instruments
have been used at Babylon late in the seventh, or early in
the sixth century before our era ? " A searching analysis of
the words themselves has thrown a good deal of doubt on
several of the supposed Greek etymologies. Karna and
x£p<*<:, kitheros and x'^PTj sabkah and oaji&vxv are no doubt
connected ; but one of them is a root common to Semitic
with Aryan, while the other two passed probably from the
Orientals to the Greeks. The Chaldee karna is Hebrew
keren, and is at least as old in Hebrew as the Pentateuch ;
kitheros in Persian sitareh, Greek x^dpic, German zither,
modern Arabic koothir ; sabkah is from sabak, a well-known
Semitic root, and is an appropriate name for a " harp " in
Hebrew ; X whereas oa/ipvxn is an unmeaning name in Greek.
To derive mashrokitha from ovpiyg requires a very hardy ety
mologist. The two words may conceivably be derivatives-
from one root ; but neither can possibly have been the direct
parent of the other. Even pesanterin and sumphonyah
though so near to iiaXr^pmv and av/upavia, are not allowed
by all critics to be of Greek origin. § Supposing, however,
that they are, and that they imply the use by the Baby
lonians of Greek instruments, which brought their names
with them from their native country, as " pianoforte " and
" concertina " have done with us, there is nothing extraor
dinary in the circumstance. The Assyrians, and the Greeks
came into contract in Cyprus as early as the reign of Sar
gon, || whose effigy has been found at Idalium. Esar-haddon
obtained building materials from several Cyprian kings with
Greek names.1T As the inheritress of Assyrian luxury and
* "Ancient Monarchies," vol i., p. 311.
tlbid., pp. 305-310.
t Pusey's "Daniel," p. 24, note 9. § Ibid., pp.27-30.
|| " Ancient Monarchies." vol. ii., p. 150.
T " Records of the Past," vol. iii., p. IOS.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 39
magnificence, Babylon would necessarily have some connec
tion with Greeks. We hear of a Greek having served in
Nebuchadnezzar's army, and won glory and reward under
his banners.* Direct intercourse with Hellenes may thus
have brought Hellenic instruments to Babylon. Or the in
tercourse may have been indirect. The Phoenicians were
engaged in a carrying trade between Europe and Asia from
a time anterior to Solomon ; and their caravans were con
tinually passing from Tyre and Sidon, by way of Tadmor
and Thapsacus, to the Chaldaean capital. Nothing would be
more natural than the importation into that city, at any
time between b. c. 605 and b. c. 538, of articles manufac
tured in Greece, which the Babylonians were likely to
appreciate. The position of the king in the Babylonian court, as abso
lute lord and master of the lives and liberties even of the
greatest of his subjects, able to condemn to death, not only
individuals (ch. iii. 19), but a whole class, and that class the
highest in the state (ch. ii. 12-14), is thoroughly in accord
ance with all that profane history tells us of the Babylonian
governmental system. In Oriental monarchies it was not
always so. The writer of the Book of Daniel shows a just
appreciation of the difference between the Babylonian and
the Medo-Persian systems, when he makes Darius the'Mede
influenced by his nobles, and compelled to do things against
his will by a " law of the Medes and Persians, which altered
not " (ch. vi. 14-17) ; while Nebuchadnezzar the Babylonian
is wholly untrammeled, and does not seem even to consult
his lords on matters where the highest interests of the state
are concerned. Babylonian and Assyrian monarchs were
absolute in the fullest sense of the word. No traditional
"law" restrained them. Their nobility was an official no
bility,, like that of Turkey at the present day. They them
selves raised it to power ; and it. lay with them to degrade
its members at their pleasure. Officers such as the tartan,
or " commander-in-chief," the rabshakeh, or " chief cup
bearer," and the rab-saris, or " chief eunuch," held the high
est positions (2 Kings xviii. 17) — mere creatures of the king,
whom a " breath had made," and a breath could as easily
" unmake." The kings, moreover, claimed to be of Divine
origin, and received Divino honors. " Merodach," says Nebu-
* Strab. xiii. 3, § 2.

40 EGYPT AND BABYLON.'
chadnezzar, " deposited my germ in my mother's womb." *
Khammurabi claims to be the son of Merodach and Ri.f
He was joined in inscriptions with the great gods, Sin, Sha-
mas, and Merodach, during his lifetime, and people swore
by his name.} Amaragu and Naram-sin are also said to
have been deified while still living. § It was natural that
those who claimed, and were thought to hold so exalted a
position, should exercise a despotic authority, and be unre
sisted, even when they were most tyrannical.
* " Records of the Past," vol. v., p. 113.
t Ibid., vol. i., p. 8. 1 Ibid., vol. v., p. 109.
§ See note on Dan. vi. 7, in the Speakers' Commentary."

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 41

CHAPTER V.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN DANIEL.
The character of Nebuchadnezzar, as depicted in the
Book of Daniel, is confirmed as fully as could be expected,
considering the nature of the materials that have come down
to us from profane sources. These materials are scanty, and
- of a peculiar character. They consist of a very few brief
notices in classical writers, and of some half-dozen inscriptions
belonging to the reign of Nebuchadnezzar himself, and ap
parently either composed by him or, at least, put forth under
his authority. These inscriptions are in some cases of con
siderable length,* and, so far, might seem ample for the pur
pose whereto we propose to apply them ; but, unfortunately,
they present scarcely any variety. With the exception of one,
which is historical, but very short and much mutilated,")" they
are accounts of buildings, accompanied by religious invoca
tions. It is evident that such records do not afford much
opportunity for the display of more than a few points of
-character. They can tell us nothing of those qualities which
are called forth in action, in the dealings of man with man,
in war, in government, in domestic intercourse. Thus the
confirmation which it is possible to adduce from this source
can only be partial ; and it is supplemented only to a very
small extent from the notices of the classical writers.
The most striking features of Nebuchadnezzar's charac
ter, as portrayed for us in Scripture, and especially in the
Book of Daniel, will probably be allowed to be the follow
ing : 1. His cruelty. Not only is he harsh and relentless in
his treatment of the foreign enemies who have resisted him
in aims, tearing thousands from their homes, and carrying
* One of them consists of ten columns, with an average of sixty-
two lines in each, and in the " Records of the Past " occupies twenty-
three pages (vol. iii., pp. 113-135).
t See the " Transactions of the Society of Bibl. Archaeology," vol.
vii., pp. 218-222.

42 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
them off into a miserable and hopeless captivity, massacring
the chief men by scores (2 Kings xxv. 18-21), blinding rebel
kings (ver. 7), or else condemning them to perpetual im
prisonment (ver. 27), and even slaying their sons before
their eyes (ver. 7) ; but at home among his subjects he can
condemn to death a whole class of persons for no fault but
inability to do what no one had ever been asked to do be
fore (Dan. ii. 10-13), and can actually cast into a furnace of
fire three of his best officers, because they decline to worship
an image (iii. 20-23). 2. His pride and boastfulness. The
pride of Nebuchadnezzar first shows itself in Scripture in
the contemptuous inquiry addressed to the " three children"
(Dan iii. 15), " Who is that God that shall deliver you out
of my hands ? " Evidently he believes that this is beyond
the power of any god. He speaks, as Sennacherib spoke by
the mouth of Rab-shakeh : " Hearken not to Hezekiah, when
he persuadeth you, saying, The Lord will deliver us. Hath
any of the gods of the nations delivered at all his land out
of the hand of the king of Assyria? Where are the gods of
Harmath and of Arpad ? Where are the gods of Sephar-
vaim, Hena, and Ivah ? Have they delivered Samaria out
of mine hand ? Who are they among the gods of the coun
tries, that have delivered their country out of mine hand,
that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem out of mine hand ? "
(2 Kings xviii. 32-35.) The event shows him that he is
mistaken, and that there is a God who can deliver his ser
vants, and " change the king's word " (Dan. iii. 38), and
then for a time he humbles himself ; but, later on, the be
setting sin breaks out afresh ; " his heart is lifted up, end
his mind hardened in pride " (ch. v, 20), and he makes the
boast which brings upon him so signal a punishment : "Is
not this great Babylon that I havelbuilt for the house of my
kingdom, by the might of my power, and for the honor of my
majesty ? " The punishment inflicted once more humbled
him, and he confessed finally that there was one, " the King
of heaven, all whose works were truth, and His ways judg
ment ; " and that " those who walk in pride he was able to
abase " (ch. iv. 37). 3. His religiousness. The spoils which
Nebuchadnezzar carried off from the Temple at Jerusalem
he did not convert to his own use, nor even bring into the
national treasury; but " put them in his temple at Babylon "
(2 Chron. xxxvi. 7), and " brought them into the treasure-
house of his god" (Dan. i. 2). When Daniel revealed to

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 43
him his dream and its interpretation (ch. ii. 27-45), he at
once confessed, " Of a truth your God is a God of gods, and
a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldst
reveal this secret." The image which he made, and set up
on the plains of Dura, was not his own image, but an image
of a Babylonian god- (ch. iii. 12, 14, 18), to whom he was
anxious that all his subjects should do honor. His anger
against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego was not so much
because they resisted his will, as because they would not
" serve his god." When the fiery furnace had no power on
them, he accepted the fact as proving that there was another
God, whom he had not known of previously, and at once
commanded that this new God should be respected through
out his dominions (ch. iii. 29). But his religiousness culmi
nates in the last scene of his life that is presented to us in
Scripture. After his recovery from the severe affliction
whereby his pride was punished, he at once " lifted up his
eyes to heaven," and " blessed the Most High, and praised
and honored Him that liveth forever " (ch. iv. 34), and made
a proclamation, which he caused to be published throughout
the length and breadth of his vast dominions (ver. 1), ac
knowledging his sin, and declaring that he " honored and
extolled the King of heaven " (ver. 37), and " thought it
good to show the signs and wonders that the high God had
wrought toward him " (ver. 2), since His signs were great,
and His wonders mighty, and His kingdom an everlasting
kingdom, and His dominion from generation to generation"
(ver. 3).
A fourth and special characteristic of Nebuchadnezzar,
peculiar to him among the heathen monarchs brought under
our notice in Scripture, is the mixed character of his religion,
the curious combination which it presents of monotheism
with polytheism, the worship of one God with that of many.
Nebuchadnezzar's polytheism is apparent when he addresses
Daniel as " one in whom is the spirit of the holy gods " (ch.
iv. 8, 9, 18), and again when he calls the figure which he
sees walking with the " three children " in the furnace " a
son of the godsVrfrtt~7&bar-eldhm(ch.m.25),a,n&stU.].more
plainly when he recognizes the God who has delivered the
"children" as a God, "their God" (ver. 28), and declares
his belief that "no oilier god can deliver after this sort"
(ver. 29). His monotheism shows itself — though not made
apparent in our version — when he sets up a single image,

44 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
and calls on the people to worship "his god " (ch. iii. 14),
when he recognizes Daniel's God as " a Lord of kings and
God of gods " (ch. ii. 47), and most conspicuously when
in his last proclamation he acknowledges " the high
God" H^V XPhXeldhd Hlldyd, ch. iv. 2), " the Most
Higb."T(ver- 34T),T"the King of heaven" (ver. 37), Him
that "liveth for ever" (ver. 34), and " doeth _ according
to His will in tlie army of heaven and among the inhabitants
of the earth," and " whose hand none can stay, nor can any
say unto Him, What doest thou ? " (ver. 35.) Either he
fluctuates between two beliefs, or else his polytheism is of
that modified kind which has been called " Kathenotheism," *
where the worshiper, on turning his regards to any par
ticular deity, " forgets for the time being that there is any
other, and addresses the object of his adoration in terms of
as absolute devotion as if he were the sole god whom he recog
nized, the one and only divine being in the entire universe."")"
Limiting ourselves, for the present, to these four charac
teristics of the great Babylonian monarch — his cruelty, his
boastful pride, his , religiousness, and the curious mixture of
two elements in his religion — let us inquire how far they are
confirmed or illustrated by his own inscriptions, or by the
accounts which profane writers have given of him.
And first, with respect to his cruelty. Here, it must be
confessed, there is little, if any, confirmation. The one brief
historical inscription of Nebuchadnezzar's time which we
possess contains no notice of any severities, nor is the point
touched in the few fragments concerning him which are all
that classical literature furnishes. Berosus mentions the
numerous captives whom he carried off to Babylonia in his
first campaign,} but does not seem to regard their fate as
exceptionally wretched. Josephus gives us in some detail
the various cruelties recorded of him in Scripture, and adds
others, as that he put to death a king of Egypt whom he
conquered ; § but Josephus is scarcely an unprejudiced wit
ness. Abydenus, who tells us more about him than any
other classical writer except Berosus, is bent on glorifying
him, and would not be likely to mention what was to his
discredit. If, however, we have no confirmation, we have
abundant illustrations of Nebuchadnezzar's cruelties in the
* Max Muller, " Chips from a German Workshop," vol. i., p. 28.
t See the author's " Religions of the Ancient World," American
Ed., p. 108. X Ap. Joseph., Ant. Jud., x. 11, § 1.
§ Ap. Joseph, Ant. Jud., x. 9, § 7.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 45
accounts given us of their own doings by the Assyrian mon
archs to whose empire Nebuchadnezzar had succeeded.
Assyrian monarchs transport entire nations to distant lands,
massacre prisoners by scores or hundreds, put captive kings
to death, or mutilate them, cut men to pieces,* and even
burnt them to death in furnaces, f The recorded cruelties
of Nebuchadnezzar pale before those which Asshur-bani-pal,
the son of Esar-haddon, who lived less than a eentury earlier,
mentions as commanded by himself, and executed under his
orders.} Nebuchadnezzar's pride and boastfulness were noted
by Abydenus, who spoke of him as superbia tumidus and
fastu elatus.% His own inscriptions not only accumulate
on him titles of honor and terms of praise, but seem alto
gether composed with the object of glorifying himself rather
than the deities whom they profess to eulogize. Among the
titles which he assumes are those of " glorious prince," "the
exalted," or " the exalted chief," " the possessor of intelli
gence," " he who is firm, and not to be overthrown," " the
valiant son of Nabopolassar," "the devout and pious," "the
lord of peace," " the noble king," and " the wise Mage." ||
Nebuchadnezzar declares that " the god Merodach deposited
his germ in his mother's womb," that " Nebo gave into his
hand the sceptre of righteousness," that Sin was " the
strengthener of his hands," that Shamas "perfected good in
his body," and Gula " beautified his person." IT He boasts
that he is " the eldest son of Merodach," who has made him
" the chosen of his heart ; " ** he, for his part, is " the rejoicer
of the heart of Merodach." ft "Merodach has made him a
surpassing prince ; " he "has extended Merodach's power ; "}}
owing his own exaltation to Merodach and Nebo, he has ex
alted them in turn ; and the impression left is that they
have had rather the better of the bargain. Other Babylo
nian kings are moderate in their self-praise compared with
Nebuchadnezzar, as may be seen by his inscriptions and
those of Neriglissar and Nabonidus.
The religiousness of Nebuchadnezzar is even more con-
* " Records of the Past," vol. ix., p. 57.
t Ibid., vol. i., p. 77; vol. ix., p. 56, etc.
i Ibid., vol. i., pp. 57-102.
§ " Fr. Hist. Grasc, vol. iv., p. 283, Fr. 8.
|| " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 113, 114; vol. vii , pp. 71, 75.
IT Ibid., vol. v., pp. 113, 114, 122, 123. ** Ibid., p. 125.
tt Ibid., p. 134. It Ibid., p. 134.

46 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
spicuous in his inscriptions than his pride. Not only was
he, as a modern writer expresses it, " faithful to the ortho
doxy of his day," * but a real devotion to his gods seems to
have animated him. His own name for himself is "the
heaven-adoring king." f he places some god, generally Mero
dach, in the forefront of every inscription ; acknowledges
that his life and success were the fruit of the divine favor ;
labors to show his gratitude by praises and invocations, by
the presentation of offerings, the building and repair of tem
ples, the adornment of shrines, the institution of processions
and the proclamation of each god by his proper titles.} He
speaks of Merodach " accepting the devotion of his heart ; "§
and there is no reason to doubt that he speaks sincerely.
He looks to his deities for blessings, beseeches them to sus
tain his life, to keep reverence for them in his heart, to give
him a long reign, a firm throne, abundant and vigorous off
spring, success in war, and a record of his good deeds in
their book. || He hopes that these good deeds are acceptable
to them, and are regarded with satisfaction : whether he ex
pects them to be rewarded in another life is not apparent.
The peculiar character of Nebuchadnezzar's religion —
at one time polytheistic, at another monotheistic — is also
evidenced by his inscriptions. The polytheism is seen in
the distinct and separate acknowledgment of at least thir
teen deities, to most of whom he builds temples, as well as
in his mention of " the great gods," IT and the expressions
" chief of the gods," king of gods," and " god of gods,"
which are of frequent occurrence. The monotheism, or at
least the " kathenotheism," discloses itself in the attitude
assumed toward Merodach, who is " the great Lord," " the
God his maker," " the Lord of all beings," " the Prince of
the lofty house,", " the chief, the honorable, the Prince of
the gods, the great Merodach," " the Divine Prince, the
Deity of heaven and earth, the Lord God," " the King of
gods and Lord of lords," " the chief of the gods," " the
Lord of the gods," " the God of gods," and " the King of
heaven and earth." Nebuchadnezzar assigns to Merodach a
pre-eminence which places him on a pedestal apart from and
* G. Smith, " History of Babylonia, p. 167.
t " Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 78.
X " Ibid., v., pp.113, 114, etc. § Ibid., p. 114.
II Ibid., vol. vii., pp. 72-77.
1 "Records of the Past," vo.. v, p. 129; "Trans, of Bibl. Arch
Soc, vol. vii., p. 219.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 47
above all the other deities of his pantheon. He does not
worship him exclusively, but he worships . him mainly ;
and when engaged in the contemplation of his greatness,
scarcely takes into account the existence of any other deity.
No other Babylonian king is so markedly the votary of one
god as Nebuchadnezzar ; though, no doubt, something of
a similar spirit may be traced in the inscriptions of Kham-
murabi, of Neriglissar, and of Nabonidus.
Besides the main traits of character, of which we have
hitherto spoken, there are certain minor features in the
biblical portraiture which seem entitled to mention. Nebu
chadnezzar is brave and energetic. He leads his armies in
person (2 Kings xxiv. 1, 10 ; xxv. 1 ; Jer. xxi. 2 ; xxiv. 1 ;
xxxiv. 1, etc.), presses his enterprises vigorously, is not
easily discouraged or rebuffed, has the qualities of a good
general, is brave, " bold in design, and resolute in action." *
His own inscriptions so far agree, that they represent him
as making war upon Egypt, f as desiring " the conquest of
his enemies' land," } and as looking forward to the ac
cumulation at his great Babylonian temple of " the abundant
tribute of the kings of. nations and of all people." § Profane
historians go far beyond this ; they represent him as one of
the greatest of conquerors. Berosus ascribes to him the con
quest of Syria, Phoenicia, Egypt, and Arabia ! || Abydenus
says that he was " more valiant than Hercules," and not
only reduced Egyjjt, but subdued all Libya, as far as the
Straits of Gibraltar, and thence passing over into Spain,
conquered the Iberians, whom he took with him to Asia,
and settled in the country between Armenia and the
Caucasus ! IT Menander and Philostratus spoke of his thir-
teen-years-long siege of Tyre ; ** and Megasthenes put him
on a par with Sesostris and. Tirhakah.ff
The religion of Nebuchadnezzar was, as might have been
expected, tinged with superstition. We are told in Script
ure that on one occasion a " king of Babylon," who can be
no other than he, in one of his military expeditions, " stood
* G. Smith, "History of Babylonia," p. 166.
t " Transactions of Society of Bibl. Archeology," vol. vii., p. 220.
X " Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 77.
§ Ibid., vol. v., p. 135. ,
II "See the fragments of Berosus in the "Fr. Hist. Gr.," vol. ii.,
fr. 14 IT Ibid., vol. iv., p. 283, Fr. 9.
** Ap. Joseph., Ant. Jud., x. 11, § 1, subfln.
tt Ap. Strab., xv. 1, § 6.

48 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
at the parting of the way, at the head; of the two ways, to
use divination. He made his arrows bright (or rather, ' he
shook his arrows ') ; he consulted with images ; he looked
in the" liver. At his right hand was the divination for
Jerusalem " (Ezek. xxi, 21, 22). That is to say, having
come to a certain point on his march, where the road parted,
leading on the right hand towards Jerusalem, and on the
left towards Rabbath of Ammon, instead of deciding on his
course by military considerations, he employed divination,
and allowed his campaign to be determined by a use of lots
and a consultation of the entrails of victims. He showed an
equal superstitiousness when, as we read on the Borsippa
cylinder,* he could not allow himself to commence the work
of restoration, which the great temple of the Seven Spheres
so imperatively needed, until he had first waited for " a
fortunate month," and in that fortunate month found an
" auspicious day." Then, at length, " the bricks of its wall,
and the slabs that covered it, the finest of them, he collected,
and rebuilt the ruins firmly. Inscriptions written in his own
name he placed within it, in the finest apartments (?), arid
of completing the upper part he made an end." t It has
been said that all Babylonian kings were equally supersti
tious, and even that " the Babylonians never started on an
expedition, or commenced any work, without consulting
the omens," } but no proof has been given of this assertion,
and certainly neither Neriglissar nor Nabonidus relate that
they waited for " fortunate days " to commence their works
of restoration. No doubt there are points in the character of Nebuchad
nezzar with respect to which neither his own inscriptions
nor the remains of classical antiquity furnish any illustration.
His hasty and violent temper, quick to take offence, and
rushing at once to the most extreme measures (Dan. ii. 9,
12 ; iii. 13, 19), is known to us only from the Book of Daniel,
and the writers who follow that book in their account of
him ; e.g., Josephus. His readiness to relent, and his kindly
impulse to make amends (ch. ii. 46, 49 ; iii. 26-30), are also
traits unnoticed by profane authors, and unapparent in his
inscriptions. But no surprise ought to be felt at this. We
« couldonly expect to find evidence of such qualities in in
scriptions of a different character from those which have
* " Sir H. Rawlinson in the author's " Herodotus," vol. ii., p. 586.
t " Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 77. i Ibid.," vol. v , p. 58.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 49
come down to us. Should the annals of Nebuchadnezzar
ever be recovered, and should they be on the scale of those
left by Asshur-bani-pal, or even those of Sennacherib, Sargon,
and other earlier Assyrian kings, we might not improbably
meet with indications of the great king's moods and tempera
ment. The one historical inscription which we have is
insufficient for the purpose. As originally written, extended
only to thirty lines, and of these there is not one which is
not mutilated.* Nor are the remains of the profane histo
rians who treat of his time such as naturally to supply the
deficiency. Of the account which Berosus gave of him, we
possess but one considerable fragment ; of Abydenus, we
have two shorter ones ; the remaining writers furnish only
a few sentences or a few lines. It is unfortunate that this
should be so ; but so it is. Had the " Babylonian History"
of Berosus come down to us complete, or had kind fate
permitted .that Antimenides, the brother of Alcaeus, should
have written, and time have spared a record of his Babylonian
experiences, the slighter details and more delicate shades of
the monarch's character might have been laid open to us.
At present we have to content ourselves with treating the
broader features and more salient points of a character that
was not without many minor tones and some curious com
plications. * See " Transactions of Soc. of Bibl. Arch," vol. vii., pp. 218-222.

50 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER VI.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN DANIEL.
" The king spake, and said, Is not this great Babylon, that I have
built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for
the honor of my majesty ? " — Dan. iv. 30.
When we think of the enormous size of Babylon, ac
cording to the most trustworthy accounts, it seems a most
audacious boast on the part of any one man, that he had
built the whole of it. According to Herodotus,* who rep
resents himself as having visited the city about b. c. 450,
the walls formed a circuit of 480 stades, or fifty-five miles,
enclosing a square space, which was 120 stades, or nearly
fourteen miles each way. Strabo reduced the circuit to 385
stades, f Quintus Curtius to 368, } Clitarchus to 365, § and
Ctesias to 360. || If we accept the smallest of these estimates,
it will give us a square of above ten miles each way, and con
sequently an area of above a hundred square miles. This is
a space four times as great as that of Paris within the enceinte,
and fully double that of London within the bills of mor
tality. No doubt it is true that only a portion of this immense
area was covered by buildings. The district within the walls
represented a vast entrenched camp, more than what we now
mean by a city.H Aristotle remarks with respect to it : " It
is not walls by themselves that make a town. Otherwise
one would only have to surround the Peloponnese with a wall
[in order to constitute it a city]. The case is the same with
Babylon and all other towns, the walls of which enclose
rather a nation than a body of citizens." ** Large portions of
the space enclosed were occupied by gardens, orchards, and
palm groves ; some part of it was even devoted to the culti
vation of corn. It was calculated that, in case of a siege,
* Herod., i. 178. t Strab., xvi. 1, § 5.
i Tit. Alex. Magn., v. 1. § Ap. Diod. Sic, ii. 7, § 3. || Ibid
T Lenormant, "Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 226.
** Aristot. Pol, iii., 1, sub. Jin.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 51
the inhabitants might, by making the best use of all the
unoccupied ground, raise grain sufficient for their own con
sumption.* Still, the area devoted to buildings was very
large. The royal quarter, or palatial inclosure, as arranged
by Nebuchadnezzar, seems to have extended some miles, both
in length and breadth. Outside this was the city proper,
laid out on a regular plan, in streets cutting each other at
right angles,")" like Manheim and most American cities.
The extent ' of this can only be guessed, for " the ninety
stades " of Curtius is excessive as a diameter, insufficient as
a circumference. The height and massive character of the buildings was
as remarkable as the area that they covered. Even the
-ordinary houses of the inhabitants were, in many instances,
three or four stories high.} The solidity and strength of
the walls was most extraordinary. Herodotus estimates their
width at fifty, their height at two hundred cubits. § He adds
that the cubit of which he speaks is one of unusual length.
Diodorus Siculus, who follows Ctesias, agrees almost exactly
as to the height, which he makes fifty fathoms, || or three hun
dred ordinary feet. Pliny, IT and Solinus ** reduce the three
hundred feet of Diodorus to two hundred and thirty-five ;
while Strabo, who may be supposed to follow the historians of
Alexander, makes a further and still greater reduction,
estimating the height at no more than seventy-five feet.ft
Even this low figure implies a mass of brickwork amounting
to thirteen hundred and ninety millions (1,390,000,000) of
square feet, and would have required for its construction at
least three times that number of the largest bricks known to
the Babylonians. If we accept the estimate of height given
by Pliny and Solinus, we must multiply these amounts by
three ; if we prefer that of Diodorus, by four ; if that of
Herodotus, by four and a half. On the supposition that
Herodotus has correctly reported the dimensions of the wall
in his day, to build it would have required eighteen thousand
seven hundred and sixty-five millions (18,765,000,000) of the
largest Babylonian bricks known to us.
The royal quarter, or palatial enclosure, of Nebuchad
nezzar's time, comprised three, or according to some, }} four
* Q. Curt., 1. s. c. t Herod., i. 180.
X Herod., i. 180. § Ibid., i. 178. || Diod. Sic. ii. 7, § 3.
T II. JV.,vi. 26. ** "Polyhist,"§60. tt Strah, xvi. 1, § 5.
{ J: Op pert, "Expedition Scientifique en M^sopotamie," vol. i.,
Plan of Babylon.

52 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
principal buildings. These were the old palace, the new
palace, the hanging gardens, and (if we allow it to have been
a sort of adjunct to the palace) the great temple of Bel-
Merodach. It was also guarded by a wall, which Herodotus
declares to have been " very little inferior in strength " to
the outer wall of the city ; * and it contained further a vast
artificial reservoir.")" Some account must be given of these
various buildings and constructions before we can appreciate
fully Nebuchadnezzar's greatness as a builder.
The " old palace " seems to be represented by the modern
" mound of Amram." This is a huge mass of ruins, almost
triangular in its present shape, occupying the more Southern
portion of the ancient " royal city." It is about a thousand'
yards along its south-western or principal side, which faced
the river, and has perhaps been washed into its present re
ceding line by water action. The northern face of the mound
measures about seven hundred yards, and the eastern about
eight hundred, the triangle being thus scalene, with its
shortest side, facing northward.} The mound is deeply
furrowed with ravines, worn by the rains in the friable soil ;
its elevation above the level of the plain is nowhere very
considerable, but amounts in places to about fifty or sixty
feet.§ Excavators have driven galleries into it in various
directions, but have found little to reward their labors ; no
walls or distinct traces of buildings of any kind have pre-.
sented themselves. A few bricks, belonging to early kings
of Babylon, are all that it has yielded, — enough, perhaps,
to confirm the conjecture that it represents the site of the
" old palace," but otherwise uninteresting. The huge mass
seems to be, in reality, less a palace than a mound — the basis
or substratum on which once stood a royal edifice, which has
now wholly disappeared. It was no doubt purely artificial ;
but whether originally constructed of unbaked bricks, or
merely of the natural soil of the country, may be doubted.
At present it consists wholly of a soft and friable mould,
interspersed with a few fragments of bricks. The mound
covers a space of about thirty-seven acres. ||
If the " mound of Amram " represent the " old palace "
* Herod., i. 181.
t See the "Standard Inscription of Nebuchadnzzar " in the
author's " Herodotus," vol ii., p. 587.
% See the author's "Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., p. 179, 180.
§ Rich, "Memoir on the Ruins of Babylon," p. 61.
|| Oppert, "Expedition Scieritifique," vol. i., p. 157.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 53
of the Babylonian kings, the " new palace," which adjoined
"* it,* can scarcely fail to be correctly identified with the
"- great mound " which immediately succeeds the Amram
mound towards the north, and, according to some writers, is
connected with it by a broad causeway. f The name Kasr,
or " palace," still attaches to this mass of ruins. The " Kasr
mound " is an oblong square, about seven hundred yards
long by six hundred broad, with the sides facing the cardinal
points.} Like the Amram hill, it is wholly of artificial origin,
but is composed of somewhat better material, as loose bricks,
tiles, and fragments of stones. It contains at least one sub
terranean passage, which is seven feet high, floored and
walled with baked bricks, and roofed over with great blocks
of sandstone, which reach from side to side. This passage
may have been either a secret exit or a gigantic drain — more
probably the latter. On the summit of the mound (which
is seventy feet above the level of the plain), not very far
from the centre, are the remains ol the palace proper, from
which. the mound is named. This is a building of excellent
brick masonry, in a wonderful state of preservation, consist
ing of walls, piers, and buttresses, and in places ornamented
with pilasters, but of too fragmentary a character to furnish
the modern inquirer with any clue to the original plan of the
edifice. Probably it did not greatly differ from the palaces
of the Assyrian monarchs at Nimrud, Koyunjik, and Khor-
sabad, consisting, like them, of a series of courts, great halls,
galleries, and smaller apartments, ornamented throughout
with sculptured or painted figures, and with inscriptions in
~ places. Fragments of the ornamentation have been found.
One of these is a portion of a slab of stone, representing a
frieze, where the abacus was supported by a series of figures
•of gods, sculptured in low relief; with their names attached to
them.§ The remainder are, for the most part, fragments of
bricks, one side of which was painted in bright colors, and
covered with a thick enamel or glace. " The principal col
ors are a brilliant blue, red, a deep yellow, white, and black." ||
Portions of the figures of men and animals have been de
tected upon these fragments, which are so numerous as fully
_ * Berosus, ap. Joseph, " Ant. Jud." x. 11, § 1. f Rich, p. 62.
} " Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., p. 178.
§ "Ancient Monarchies," vol ii., p. 194.
II Layard, " Nineveh and. Babylon," p. 507.

54 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
to bear out the statement of Diodorus,* that the palace
walls were artistically adorned with colored representations
of war scenes and hunting scenes, wherein the kings, and
sometimes the queens, were depicted on horseback or on
foot, contending with leopards or with lions, and with spear
or javelin dealing them their death stroke. Such were the
" men portrayed upon the wall," which the Jewish captives
saw at Babylon, and on which they doted ; " the images of
the Chaldeans portrayed with vermillion, girded with girdles
upon their loins, exceeding in dyed attire upon their heads,
all of them princes to look to, after the manner of the Baby
lonians of Chaldea, the land of their nativity " (Ezek. xxiii.
14, 15). The palace is said to have been further ornamented
with statues ;t and the figure of a colossal lion, which stands
upon the mound, north-east of the Kasr building, may lend
a certain support to this statement.
The "hanging gardens" were regarded as one of the
seven wonders of the world.} They were said to have been
constructed for the delectation of a Median princess, who
disliked the flat monotony of the Babylonian plain, and longed
for something that might remind her of the irregularities of
nature in her own country.§ The construction is described
in terms which are somewhat difficult to understand ; but,
by comparing the several accounts, || we gather that the
structure was a square, 400 feet each way, elevated to the
height of at least 150 feet, and consisting of several tiers of
arches, superimposed one upon another, after the manner
employed by the Romans in the construction of their amphi
theatres. The building was divided into as many stories as
there were tiers of arches, the number of these being uncer
tain, and was supported by internal walls of great thickness.
In these stories were many palatial apartments, where visit
ors rested on their way to the upper terrace; and in the
uppermost story was a room containing hydraulic machinery,
whereby water was raised from the Euphrates to the level of
the garden itself. This was superimposed on the uppermost
tier of arches, and was a flat surface composed of four layers ;
first, one of reeds mixed with bitumen ; next, one of brick
work, then one of lead, and finally a thick layer of earth,
* Diod. Sic, ii. 8. f Ibid.
X Abydenus, Fr. 9. ad Jin. ; Strab., xvi. 1, § 5. § Berosus, Fr. 14.
II Those of Diod. Sic. (ii. 10), Strabo (xvi. 1, § 5), and Q. Curtius
(v. 1).

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 55
affording ample depth for the roots of the largest trees. The
garden was planted with trees and shrubs of various kinds,
and possibly with flowers, though they are not mentioned.
A spacious pleasure-ground was thus provided as an adjunct
to the palace, where royalty was secure from observation, and
where the delights of umbrageous foliage, flashing fountains,
gay flower-beds, and secluded walks could be obtained at the
cost of mounting a staircase somewhat longer than those of
our great London and Paris hotels.
The great temple of Bel-Merodach is probably identified
with the massive ruin which lies due north of the Kasr
mound, at the distance of about a mile. This is a vast pile
of brickwork, of an irregular quadrilateral shape, with pre
cipitous sides furrowed by ravines, and with a nearly flat
top.* Of the four faces of the ruin, the southern seems to
be the most perfect. It extends a distance of two hundred
yards, or almost exactly a stade, and runs nearly in a straight
line from east to west. At its eastern extremity it forms a
right angle with the east face, which runs nearly due north
for about one hundred and eighty yards, also almost in a
straight line. The other two faces are very much worn away,
but probably in their original condition corresponded to those
already described. The building was thus not an exact
square, but a parallelogram, with the shorter sides propor
tioned to the longer as nine to ten. The ruin rises towards
its centre, where it attains an elevation of nearly one hun
dred and forty feet. It shows signs of having been enclosed
within a precinct. Beyond a dojibt, it is the edifice which
Herodotus describes as follows : — " In the other division of
the town was the sacred precinct of Jupiter Belus, a square
enclosure two stades each way, with gates of solid brass ;
which was also remaining in my time. In the middle of the
precinct there was a tower of solid masonry, a stade both in
length and in breadth, upon which was raised a second tower,
and upon that a third, and so on up to eight. The ascent to
the top is on the outside, by a path which winds round all
the towers. When one is about half-way up, one finds a rest
ing-place and seats, where persons are wont to sit some time
on their way to the summit. On the topmost tower there is
a spacious temple, and inside the temple stands a couch of
unusual size, richly adorned, with a golden table by its side
* See " Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., pp. 177, 178.

56 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The temple contains no image." * Herodotus adds : " Below,
in the same precinct, there is a second temple, in which is a
sitting figure of Jupiter, all of gold. Before the figure stands
a large golden table ; and the throne whereon it sits, and the
base on which the throne is placed, are likewise of gold.
The Chaldeans told me that all tlie gold together was eight
hundred talents in weight. Outside this temple are two
altars, one of solid gold, on which it is only lawful to offer
sucklings ; the other a common altar, but of great size, on
which the full-grown animals are sacrificed." f The lower
temple has disappeared, as have the altars and the upper
stages of the Great Temple tower; but the massive basis
remains a solid piece of brickwork containing about four
millions of square feet, and requiring for its construction at
least twelve millions of the largest bricks made by the Baby
lonians. If the upper stages at all resembled those of the -
Great Temple of Borsippa, the bricks needed for the entire
building must have been three times as many.
The artificial reservoir attached to the new palace is
often mentioned in the inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar.}
It was called the Yapur-Shapu, and was probably of an
oblong square shape, with sides protected by a massive facing
of burnt brick. If we accept the identification of its site
suggested by Sir H. Rawlinson, § we must assign it a width
of about a hundred yards, and a length of nearly a mile.
Among the other marvels of Babylon, according to the
ancient writers, were a tunnel and a bridge. The tunnel
was carried under the bed of the Euphrates, and was an
arched passage, lined throughout with baked brick laid in
bitumen, the lining having a thickness of twenty bricks.
The width of the tunnel was fifteen feet, and its height, to
the spring of the arch, twelve feet.|| The length was about
a thousand yards, or considerably more than half a mile.
The bridge was a structure composed of wood, metal, and
stone. In the bed of the Euphrates were built a number of
strong stone piers, at the distance of twelve feet apart, which
presented to the current a sharp angle that passed "gradually
into a gentle curve. The stones were massive, and fastened
* TTerod., i. 181. t Ibid., i. 183.
t " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 125, 126, 130, etc.
§ See the author's " Herodotus," vol. hi., p. 580.
|| Diod. Sic, ii. 9.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 57
together by clamps of iron and lead.* From pier to pier was
stretched a platform of wood, composed of cedar and cypress
beams, together with the stems of palms, each platform being
thirty feet in width.f The length of the bridge, like that of
the tunnel, was a thousand yards.}
We have now to consider to what extent these various
constructions may be regarded as the work of Nebuchad
nezzar, and how far therefore he may be viewed as justified
in his famous boast. First, then, we have it distinctly stated
both by Berosus -§ and by himself, || that the new palace,
which adjoined the old, was completely and entirely built
by him. The same is declared, both by Berosus IT and Aby
denus, ** of the " hanging gardens." The former of these
statements is confirmed by the fact that the bricks of the
Kasr are, one and all of them, stamped with his name. The
old palace he did not build ; but, as he tells us, carefully re-
paired.ft The Yapur-Shapu, was also an ancient con
struction ; but he seems to have excavated it afresh, and to
'have executed the entire lining of its banks.}} With respect
to the great Temple of Bel-Merodach, if we may believe his
own account, it had gone completely to ruin before his day,
and required a restoration that was equivalent to a rebuild
ing^ § Here, again, we have the confirmation of actual fact,
since the inscribed bricks from the Babil mound bear in every
instance the name and titles of Nebuchadnezzar. Eight
other Babylonian temples are also declared in his inscriptions
to have been built or rebuilt by him. || || But his greatest work
was the reconstruction of the walls. We have seen their enor
mous length, breadth, and thickness, even according to the
lowest estimates. Nebuchadnezzar found them dismantled
and decayed — probably mere lines of the earthen rampart,
such as enclose great part of the ruins to-day. He gave
them the dimensions that they attained — dimensions that
made them one of the world's wonders. It is this which is
his great boast in his standard inscription : " Imgar-Bel
and Nimiti-Bel, the great double wall of Babylon, 1 built.
Butresses for the embankment of its ditch I completed. Two
* Herod., i. 186. t Diod., Sic, ii. 8. X Ibid.
§ Ap. Joseph., " Ant. Jud., x. 11, § 1.
II " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 130, 131.
IT Berosus, 1. s. c. ** Abydenus, Fr. 9, sub fin.
tt Sir H. Rawlinson in the author's "Herodotus," vol. ii., p. 588.
XX Ibid., p. 587.
, §§ "Records of the Past," vol. v., p. 119. |||| Ibid., pp. 122, 12&

58 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
long embankments with cement and brick I made, and with *
the embankment which my father had made I joined them.
I strengthened the city. Across the river, westward I built
the wall of Babylon with brick." * And again, " The walls
of the fortress of Babylon, its defence in war, I raised ; and
the circuit of the city of Babylon I have strengthened skil
fully." f
Nebuchadnezzar, it may be further remarked, did not
confine his constructive efforts to Babylon. Abydenus tells
us, that, besides his great works at the capital, he excavated
two large canals, tho Nahr-Agane and the Nahr-Malcha ; }
the latter' of which is known from later writers to have been
a broad and deep channel connecting the Tigris with the
Euphrates. He also, according' to Abydenus, dug a huge
reservoir near Sippara which was one hundred and forty
miles in circumference, and one hundred and eighty feet
deep, furnishing it with flood-gates, through which the water
could be drawn off for purposes of irrigation. Abydenus
adds, that he built quays and break-waters along the shores
of the Persian Gulf, and at the same time founded the city,
of Teredon, on the sea coast, as a defence against the incur
sion of the Arabs.
The inscribed bricks of this great monarch shows a still
niore inexhaustible activity. They indicate him as the com-
plete restorer of the temple of Nebo at Borsippa, § the mighti
est of all the ruins in Mesopotamia, by some identified with
the biblical " tower of Babel." They are widely spread
over the entire country, occurring at Sippara, at Cutha, at
Kal-wadha (Chilmad ?> :n the vicinity of Baghdad, and at
scores of other sites. It is a calculation of Sir Henry Rawlin-
son's, that nine-tenths of the bricks brought from Mesopo
tamia are inscribed with the name of Nebuchadnezzar, the
son of Nabopolassar. " At least a hundred sites," says the
same writer, " in the tract immediately about Babylon, give
evidence, by bricks bearing his legend, of the marvelous
activity and energy of this king." ||
His inscriptions add, that, besides the great temple of
* Ibid., p. 125. Compare the author's "Herodotus," vol. ii., p. 5S7.
t " Records of the Past." vol. v., pp. 133, 134.
X Abydenus, 1. s. c
t Compare his inscription, " Records of the Past," vol. vii., pp.
75-78. II " Commentary on the Inscriptions of Babylonia and Assyria,"
p. 76.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 59
Nebo, or of the Seven Spheres, at Borsippa, he built there
at least five others,* together with a temple to the Moon-
god at Beth-Ziba,f and one to the Sun-god at Larsa, or Sen-
kareh.} Altogether there is reason to believe that he was
one of the most indefatigable of all the builders that have
left their mark upon the world in which we live. He
covered Babylonia with great works. He was the Augustus
of Babylon. He found it a perishing city of unbaked clay ;
he left it one of durable burnt brick, unless it had been for
human violence, capable of continuing, as the fragment of
the Kasr has continued, to the present day.
* " Records of the Past," vol. v., p. 123.
t Ibid., p. 124. 1 Ibid., vol. vii., pp. 71, 72.

60 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER VII.
NOTICES OF BABYLON IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL.
The Books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel contain numerous
allusions, some prophetic, others historic, to the wars in
which Nebuchadezzar was engaged, or was to be engaged.
A certain number of these notices refer to wars, which arc also
mentioned in Chronicles or Kings, and which have conse
quently already engaged our attention.* But others touch
ujjon campaigns which Kings and Chronicles ignore, either
on account of their lying outside the geographic range of the
writer's vision, or from their being subsequent in point of
time to the event which they view as constituting the close
of their narratives. The campaigns in question are especi
ally those against Tyre and Egypt, which are touched by
both writers, but most emphatically dwelt upon by Ezekiel.
I. The war against Tyre. Ezekiel's description of this
war is as follows : —
" Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebu
chadrezzar, king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north with
horses and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and
much people. He shall slay with tbe sword thy daughters in the field ;
and he shall make a fort against thee, and cast a mount against thee,
and lift up the buckler against thee. And he shall set engines of war
against thy walls, and with his axes he shall break down thy towers.
By reason of the abundance of his horses, their dust shall cover thee;
thy walls shall shake at the noise of the horsemen, and of the wheels,
and of the chariots, when he shall enter into thy gates, as men enter
into a city wherein is made a breach. With the hoofs of his horses
shall he tread down all thy streets : he shall slay thy people by the
sword, and thy strong garrisons shall go down to the ground. And
they shall make a spoil of thy riches and make a prey of thy merchan
dise ; and they shall break down thy walls, and destroy thy pleasure
houses ; and they shall lay thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the
midst of the water. And I will cause the noise of thy songs to cease ;
and the sound of thy harp shall be no more heard. And I wiU make
*S_e above, ch. iii.

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 61
thee like the top of a rock ; thou shalt be a place to spread nets
upon ; thou shalt be built no more, for I, the Lord, have spoken it,
saith the Lord God."— Ezek. xxvi. 7-14.
It is evident, from the entire character of the descrir>
tion, that the city attacked is — mainly, at any rate — not the
island Tyre, but the ancient upon the continent, Palaetyrus,
as the Greeks called it, which occupied a position directly
opposite to the island, upon the sea-shore. Nebuchadrezzar,
as he is* correctly named,* fully established in his empire,
not merely a " king of Babylon," but a " king of kings,"
comes with such an army as Polyhistor described him as
bringing against Judaea,} to attack the Phoenician town. He
brings " horses and chariots, and horsemen and companies,
and much people." Polyhistor gives him, on the former
occasion, ten thousand chariots, one hundred and twenty
thousand horsemen, and one hundred and eighty thousand
footmen. He proceeds to invest the city after the fashion
commonly adopted by the Assyrian monarchs, and inherited
from them by the Babylonians. Having constructed a mov
able fort or tower, such as we see in the Assyrian bas-reliefs,}
he brings it against the walls, while at the same time he
" raises a mount " against them, from which to work his
engines and shoot his arrows with the better effect. § His
men " lift up the buckler," as the Assyrians do while they
mine the walls or fire the gates ; while his " engines " ply
their strokes, and his bravest soldiers, " with axes," or rather
" swords" — often used by the Assyrians for the purpose || —
seek to "break down the towers." His efforts are successful,
and a breach is made ; the horsemen and chariots, as well as
the footmen, enter the town ; there is the usual carnage and
plundering that accompany the storming of a stronghold ;
and, finally, there is a destruction or dismantling of the place,
more or less complete.
It is remarkable that the siege and capture of the island
city obtain no distinct mention. Some have supposed that
it was not taken ; but this is scarcely compatible with the
words of the " Lament for Tyre," or with the " isles shak
ing at the sound of her fall " (Ezek. xxvi. 15, 18). Probably
the two cities were so bound together that the conquest of
* Nebuchadrezzar exactly corresponds to the Nabu-kudurri-uzur
of the inscriptions.
t Alex. Polyhist., Fr. 34 i "Ancient Monarchies," vol. i. p. 274.
§ Ibid., p. 275. II Ibid.

62 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
the one involved the surrender of the other, and Nebuchad,
nezzar, master of the Old Tyre, experienced no resistance
from the New.
The annalists of Tyre, though little disposed to dwell
upon a passpge of history so painful to patriotic men, were
forced to admit the fact of the siege by Nebuchadnezzar, and
even to give some account of it. They stated that it took
place in the reign of a certain Ithobalus (Eth-Baal), and that
the Tyrians offered a resistance almost without a parallel.
They were besieged continuously for thirteen years. * The
brief extracts from their works, which are all that we possess
of them, do not say whether the siege was successful or the
contrary ; but it is scarcely conceivable that the great
monarch would have allowed his efforts to be baffled, and it
is certain that he carried a large number of Phoenician
captives to Babylonia, whom he settled in various parts of
the country, f
The fact of Nebuchadnezzar's siege of Tyre having lasted
thirteen years, throws considerable light on another passage
of Ezekiel. In the twenty-seventh year of the captivity of
Jehoiachin (b. c. 573), the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel,
saying:— " Son of man, Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon, caused his army
to serve a great service against Tyrus ; every head was made bald,
and every shoulder was peeled ; yet had he no wages, nor his army,
for Tyrus, for the service he had served against it. Therefore thus
saith the Lord God : Behold, I will give the land of Egypt unto
Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon ; and he shall take her multitude,
and take her spoil, and take her prey; and it shall be the wages for
his army. I have given him the land of Egypt for his labor where
with he served against it, because they wrought for Me, saith the
Lord God."— Ezek. xxix. 18-20.
The extraordinary length of the siege, in which men grew
old and wore themselves out, explains the phrase, — "Every
head was made bald, and every shoulder was peeled ; " and
at the same time accounts for the fact that Nebuchadnezzar
was considered to have received no wages, i.e., no sufficient
wages, for his service, which had been very inadequately
repaid by the plunder found in the exhausted city.
* Menand. Ephes. ap. Joseph. Contr. Ap. i. 21 ; Philostrat. ap
Joseph. Ant. Jud., x. 11. § 1.
t Berosus. ap. Joseph., Ant. Jud., 1. s. c.

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 63
II. A great campaign in- Egypt. In the year of the
destruction of Jerusalem, Jeremiah prophesied as follows : — •
" Then came the Word of the Lord unto Jeremiah in Tahpanhes,
saying, Take great stones in thine hand, and hide them in the clay in
the brick-kiln, which is at the entry of Pharaoh' s house in Tahpanhes,
in the sight of the men of Judah; and say unto them, Thus saith the
Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold, I will send and take Nebu
chadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and will set his throne
upon these stones that I have hid, and he shall spread his royal pavil
ion over-them. And when he cometh, he shall smite the land of
Egypt, and deliver such as are for death to death; and such as are for
captivity to captivity; and such as are for the sword to the sword.
And I will kindle a fire in the houses of the gods of Egypt, and he
shall burn them, and carry them away captives : and he shall array
himself with the land of Egypt, as a shepherd putteth on his garment;
and he shall go forth from thence in peace. He shall break also the
images of Beth-shemesh, that is in the land of Egypt; and the houses
of the gods of the Egyptians shall he burn with fire." — Jer. xliii. 8-13.
Some time afterwards he delivered another prophecy
(xlvi. 13-26) equally explicit, in which Migdol, Noph
(Memphis), Tahpanhes (Daphna?), and No-Ammon (Thebes)
were threatened ; and the delivery of the entire country and
people into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon,
and into the hand of his servants, was foretold.
Ezekiel delivered seven prophecies against Egypt, all of
them having more or less reference to Babylon as the power
which was to bring ruin upon the country, and two of them
mentioning Nebuchadrezzar by name, as the monarch who
was to inflict the chastisement (Ezek. xxix. 18, 19; xxx. 10).
These prophecies are too long to quote in full. They are
Chiefly remarkable 'as declaring the complete desolation of
Egypt, and as fixing a term of years during which her
degradation should continue. In chap. xxx. we find among
the places which are to suffer, Sin or Pelusium, Zoan or
Tanis, On or Heliopolis, Noph or Memphis, Tahpanhes or
Daphnae, Pibeseth or Bubastis, and No-Ammon or Thebes.
In chap. xxix. an even wider area is included. There we
are told that the land of Egypt was to be " utterly waste
and desolate from Migdol to Syene, * even unto the border
of Ethiopia " (ver. 10). The time of Egypt's affliction is fixed
at "forty years" (vers. 11-13), after which it is to recover,
* There is no doubt that this is the proper rendering. " From the
tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia " would have no
meaning, since Syene bordered on Ethiopia.

64 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
but to be a '' base kingdom, " " the basest of the kingdoms "
(ver. 15), no more " exalted above the nations," no more a
ruler over nations external to itself.
By the date of one of Ezekiel's prophecies (chap. xxix.
17-20), which is b. c. 573, it is evident that the great invasion
prophesied had not then taken place, but was still impending.
Nebuchadnezzar's attack must consequently be looked for
towards the latter part of his long reign, which terminated
in b. c 562, according to the Canon of Ptolemy.
Until recently it would have been impossible to adduce
any historical confirmation, or indeed illustration, of these
prophecies. They were quoted by sceptical writers as proph
ecies that had been unfulfilled. Herodotus, it was remarked,
knew nothing of any invasion of Egypt by the Asiatics dur
ing the reigns of either Apries or Amasis, with whom Nebu
chadnezzar was contemporary, much less of any complete
devastation of the entire territory by them. It was true that
Josephus, anxious to save the reputation of his sacred books,
spoke of an invasion'of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar later than
the destruction of Jerusalem, and even made him kill one
king and set up another. * But he placed these events- in
the fifth year after the fall of Jerusalem, that is in b. c. 581,.
whereas Ezekiel's date, in his twenty-ninth chapter, showed
that they had not happened by b. c. 573. Moreover, he con
tradicted Egyptian history, which gave no change of sove
reign till ten years after the time mentioned, or b. c. 571.
It was difficult to meet these objectors formerly. Within
the last few years, however, light has been thrown on the
subject from two inscriptions — one Egyptian, which had
been long known, but not rightly understood ; the other
Babylonian, which was not discovered till 1878. The Egyp
tian inscription is on a statue in the Louvre, which was
originally set up at Elephantine by a certain Nes-Hor, an
official of high rank whom Apries, the Egyptian monarch
called in Scripture " Pharaoh-Hophra," had made " Governor
off the south." This officer, according to the latest and
best interpretation of his inscription, t writes as follows :—
" I have caused to be made ready my statue ; my name will
be perpetuated by means of it; it will not perish in this
temple, inasmuch as I took care of the house, when it was
* " Ant. Jud." x. 9, § 7.
t See Dr. Wiedemann's paper in the "Zeitschrift fiir ^Egypt.
Sprache " for 1878, p. 4. *"

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 65
injured by the foreign hordes of the Syrians,, the people of
the north, the Asiatics, and the profane [who intended evil]
in their heart ; for it lay in their heart to rise up, to bring
into subjection the upper country. But the fear of thy
majesty was upon them ; they gave up what their heart had
planned. I did not let them advance to Konosso, but I let
them approach the place where the majesty was. Then thy
majesty made an [expedition] against them."
It results from this inscription, that, while Apries was
still upon the throne, there was an invasion of Egypt from
the north. A host of Asiatics, whom the writer calls amu,
i.e. Syrians, or, at any rate, Semites from the direction of
Syria, poured into the country, and, carrying all before them,
advanced up the valley of the Nile, threatening the subjection
of the " upper country." Memphis and Thebes must have
fallen, since the invaders reached Elephantine. Apparently
they were bent on subduing, not only Egypt, but Ethiopia.
But Nes-Hor checked their advance, he prevented them from
proceeding further, he even forced them to fall back towards
the north, and brought them into contact with an army
which Apries had collected against them. The result of the
contact is not mentioned ; but the invaders must have re
tired, since Nes-Hor is able to embellish and repair the great
temple of Kneph, which they have injured, and to set up
his statue in it.
The other inscription is, unfortunately, very fragmentary.
The tablet on which it was written was of small size, and
allowed space for only thirty — not very long — lines. All
the lines are more or less mutilated. Of the first and sec
ond oije word only remains ; of the twenty-fifth and twenty-
eighth, only one letter. The twenty-ninth is wholly obliter
ated. The termination alone remains of the last seven. Some
lacunae occur in all the others. Still, the general purport is
plain. Nebuchadnezzar addresses Merodach, and says, —
"My enemies thou usedst to destroy; thou causedst my
heart to rejoice ... in those days thou madest my hands to
capture ; thou gavest me rest ; . . . thou causedst me to con
struct; my kingdom thou madest to increase. . . . Over them
kings thou exaltedst; his warriors, his princes, his paths,
like ... he made ... to his army he trusted ... he hastened
before the great gods. [In the] thirty-seventh year of
Nebuchadnezzar king of the country [of Babylon, Nebuchad
nezzar] to Egypt to make war went. [His army Ama]sis,

66 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
king of Egypt, collected, and . . . [his soldiers] went, they ,
spread abroad. As for me (?).... a remote district, which
is in the middle of the sea .... many . . . from the midst of
the country of Egypt .... soldiers, horses, and chariots (?)
... for his help he assembled and ... he looked before him
.... to his [army] he trusted and . . . fixed a command." *
Nebuchadnezzar, evidently, in this inscription, speaks of
an expedition which he personally conducted into Egypt, as
late as his thirty-seventh year, which was b. c. 568, five years
later than the date of Ezekiel's dated prophecy. The king,
however, against whom he made war, was not Apries, whose
name in Egyptian was Ua-ap-ra, but apparently Amasis, his
successor, since it ended in -su, probably in -asM.f This may
seem to be an objection against ref erring the two inscriptions
to the same events, since Apries was still king when that of
Nes-Hor was set up. But a reference to Egyptian history
removes this difficulty. Amasis, it appears, ascended the
throne in b.c. 571; but Apries did not die until b. c. 565.
For six years the two monarchs inhabited the same palace
at Sais,} and both bore the royal title. An Egyptian monu
ment distinctly recognizes the double reign ; § the expedi
tion of Nebuchadnezzar, being in b. c. 568, exactly falls into
this interval. It was natural that Nebuchadnezzar should
mention the active young king, who had the real power, and
was his actual antagonist ; it was equally natural that Nes-
Hor, an old employS under Apries, should ignore the upstart,
and seek to do honor to his old master.
Other wars of Nebuchadnezzar are thought to be glanced
at in Scripture, as one with Elam, || to which there may be
allusion in Jer. xlix. 35-38, and Ezek. xxxii. 24 ; one with
the Moabites, perhaps in Ezek. xxv. 8-11 ; and one with
Ammon, touched upon in Ezek. xxi. 20, 28-32, and xxv. 4-7.
Josephus relates it as a historical fact, that he reduced both
the Moabites and the Ammonites to subjection ; IT and there
are some grounds for* thinking that he also made himself
master of Elam ; but it cannot be said that these events are
either confirmed or illustrated by profane writers, who make
* " Transactions of Soc. of Bibl. Arch., vol. vii., pp. 218-222.
t See the inscription in the " Transactions of Bibl. Arch. Soc,"
vol. vii. , p. 220, reverse, line 1.
X Herod., ii. 169.
§ Champollion, " Monuments de l'Egypte," vol. iv., p. 443, No. 1.
|| G. Smith, "History of Babylonia," pp. 157, 158.
1 Joseph., " Ant. Jud.," x. 9, § 7.

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 67
no distinct mention of any of his wars, except those with the
Jews, the Phoenicians, and the Egyptians.
It was, however, widely recognized in antiquity that
Nebuchadnezzar was a great general. His exploits were
enormously exaggerated, since he was believed by some * to
have conquered all North Africa and Spain, as well as the
country between Armenia and the Caspian. But there was
a basis of truth underlying the exaggerations. Nebuchad
nezzar, at a comparatively early age, defeated Pharaoh-
Necho at the great battle of Carchemish, conquered Coele-
syria, and reduced Judaea to vassalage. Somewhat later he
engaged in the difficult enterprise of capturing Tyre, and ex
hibited a rare spirit of persistence and perseverance in his
long siege of that town. His capture of Jerusalem, after a
siege of eighteen months (2 Kings xxv. 1-4), was creditable
to him, since Samaria, a place of far less strength, was not
taken by the Assyrians until it had been besieged for three
years (2 Kings xvii. 5). The reduction of Elam, if we may
ascribe it to him, redounds still more to his honor, since the
Elamites were a numerous and powerful nation, which had
contended on almost even terms with the Assyrians from the
time of Sargon to the close of the empire. The judgment
of a good general was shown in the subjugation of Moab and
Ammon, for it is essential to the security of Syria and Pales
tine that the tribes occupying the skirt of the great eastern
desert shall be controled and their ravages prevented. In
Egypt Nebuchadnezzar probably met his most powerful ad
versary, since under the rule of the Psammetichi Egypt had
recovered almost her pristine vigor. Thus in this quarter
the struggle for supremacy was severe and greatly prolonged.
He contended with three successive Egyptian kings — Necho,
Apries or Hophra, and Amasis. From Necho he took the
whole tract between Carchemish and -the Egyptian frontier.
Apries feared to meet him, and, after a futile demonstration,
gave up the interference which he had meditated (Jer.
xxxvii. 7). Amasis, who had perhaps provoked him by his
expedition against Cyprus,} which Nebuchadnezzar would
naturally regard as his, he signally punished by ravaging his
whole territory, injuring the temples, destroying or carrying
off the images of the gods, and making prisoners of many of
the inhabitants. It is possible that he did more than this. N
* As Megasthenes and Abydenus. t Herod, ii. 182.

68 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Egypt's degradation was to last for a long term of years.*
It is not unlikely that Amasis became the vassal of Nebu
chadnezzar, and his peaceful reign, and the material pros
perity of his country,} were the result of a compact by which
he acknowledged the suzerainty of Babylon, and bowed his
head to a foreign yoke.
*" Forty years" (Ezek. xxix. 11-13); but "forty years," in pro
phetic language, is not to be taken literally.
t Herod., ii., 177.

NOTICES IN EZEKIEL. 69

CHAPTER VIII.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN EZEKIEL.
" A land of traffick ... a city of merchants." — Ezek. xvii. 4.
This allusion to the commercial character of Babylon
does not stand alone and unsupported in Scripture. Isaiah
speaks of the Babylonian " merchants " (Isa. xlvii. 15). and
describes the Chaldaeans as persons " whose cry is in their
ships " (chap, xliii. 14). Ezekiel mentions Canneh (Calneh),
arid Chilmad, Babylonian towns, among the places that
carried on commercial dealings with Tyre (Ezek. xxvii. 23.
In the Revelation of St. John the Divine, Babylon is made
the type of a city, which is represented as eminently com
mercial, as dealing in the " merchandise of gold, and silver,
and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple,
and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner
vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious
wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble, and cinnamon, and
odors, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil,
and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses,
and chariots, and slaves, and the souls of men " (Rev. xviii.
12, 13).
The object of the present chapter will be to show that
the notices of Babylon in profane writers and in the in
scriptions fully bear out the character thus assigned to her,
showing that she was the centre of an enormous land and
sea commerce, which must have given occupation to thou
sands of merchants, and have necessitated the employment
of numerous ships.
Nothing is more evident in the Babylonian inscriptions,
and also in those of Assyria which treat of Babylonian af
fairs, than the large amount of curious woods, and the quan
tity of alabaster and other stone, which was employed in
the great constructions of the Babylonians, and which must
necessarily have been imported from foreign countries.

70 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Babylonia being entirely alluvial is wholly destitute of stone
and the only trees of any size that it produces are the cypress
and the palm .* We find the Babylonian monarchs employ
ing in their temples and palaces abundant pine and cedar
trees, together with many other kinds of wood, which it is
impossible to identify. Mention is made of " BabH-wood,"
" umritgana-wood," "ummakana-wood" " ri-wood," " ikki-
wood,'* " surman-wood" " aswAw-wood," " musritkanna-
wood," and " mesukan-wood." } Modern exploration has
shown that among the building materials employed was
teak,} but whether any one of these obscure names desig
nates that species of timber is uncertain. What seems plain
is that all these woods must have been imported. The teak
must have come either from India, or possibly from one
vi the islands in the Persian Gulf ; § there is evidence that
the cedars and pines, together with the Babil-wood, were
imported from Syria, being furnished by the forests that
clothed the sides of Mounts Libanus and Amanus ; || there
is no evidence with respect to the remainder, but they may
have been derived from either Armenia, Assyria, or Susi-
ana. Among the kinds of stone commonly used in building
which must necessarily have been imported, were " alabaster
blocks," " zamat stone," " durmina-turda and kamina-turda
stone, zamat-hati .stone, and lapis lazuli." IT Xenophon
speaks of the importation of " millstones " in his own day ; **
and, as Babylonia could not furnish them, they must always
have come in from without. Sandstone and basalt, which
are found in some of the ruins, could have been obtained from
the adjacent parts of Arabia; but the alabaster, which has
been also found, and the lapis lazuli, which was especially
affected for adornment, must have been brought from a
greater distance.
Stones of the rarer and more precious kinds were also
largely imported, to serve either as seals or as ornaments
* See the author's " Ancient Monarchies," vol. iii., pp. 220-221.
t " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 117-133; vol. vii., p. 75.
X " Journal of the R. Asiat. Society," vol. xv. , p. 264.
§ As Heeren thinks, on the strength of a passage of Theophrastus
("As. Nat.," vol. ii.. pp. 258, 259).
|| " Records of the Past," vol. v., p. 119; vol. ix., p. 16; "Trans
actions of Bibl Arch. Society," vol. vii., p. 154.
IT " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 121, 125-127 ; vol. vii., p. 76, eta
**Xen., "Anab.," i. 5, §5.

NOTICES IN EZEKIEL. 71
of the person. Herodotus tells us that " every Babylonian
carried a seal ; " * and the remains tend to confirm his testi
mony, since Babylonian seals, either in the shape of signet
rings or of cylinders, exist by thousands in European mu
seums, and are still found in large numbers by explorers.
They are chiefly made of onyx, jasper, serpentine, meteoric
stone, lapis lazuli, and chalcedony, all substances that must
have been introduced from abroad, since no one of them is
produced by Babylonia.
Babylonia must also have imported or else carried off
from foreign countries, the whole of its metals. Neither
-,-, gold, nor silver, nor copper, nor tin, nor lead, nor iron are
among the gifts which Nature has vouchsafed to the south
ern Mesopotamian region. No doubt her military successes
enabled her to obtain from foreign lands, not by exchange
but by plunder, considerable supplies of these commodities ;
but besides this accidental and irregular mode of acquisition,
there ,must have been some normal and unceasing source of
supply, to prevent disastrous fluctuations, and secure a due
provision for the constant needs of the country. Every im
plement used in agriculture or in the mechanical trades had
to be made of bronze, f the materials of which came from
afar ; copper perhaps from Armenia, which still produces it
largely, tin from Further India, or from Cornwall, through
the medium of the Phoenicians.} Every weapon of war had
to be supplied similarly ; all the gold and silver lavished on
the doors and walls of temples, § on images of the gods or
the dresses in which the images were clothed, || on temple
tables, altars, or couches, IT on palace walls and roofs, ** on
thrones, sceptres, parasols, chariots, and the like, ft or on
bracelets, armlets, and other articles of personal adornment,
had to be procured from some foreign land and to be con
veyed hundred or thousands of miles before the Babylonians
could make use of them.
Another whole class of commodities which the Babylo
nians are believed to have obtained from foreign countries
* Herod., i. 195.
t Iron was not absolutely unknown in ancient Babylonia; but al
most all the weapons and implements found are of bronze.
X Heroh.. iii. 115.
$ "Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 117-120; vol. vii., p. 75.
t Ibid., vol. vii.. pp. 5, 6. II Herod., i. 181, 183; Diod. Sic. ii. 9.
** " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 131, 133.
tt Ibid., vol. ix., p. 15.

72 EGYPT AND' BABYLON.
comprises the raw materials for their clothes, and for the
greater part of their fabrics.* Babylonia was not a country
suitable for the rearing of sheep, and, if it produced wool at
all, produced it only in small quantities ; yet the Babylonian
wore ordinarily two woolen garments,} and some of their
most famous fabrics were of the same material. Their other
clothes were either linen or cotton ; but, so far as is known,
neither flax nor the cotton plant was cultivated by them.
Spices constituted another class of imports. In then
religious ceremonies the Babylonians consumed frankincense}
on an enormous scale ; and they employed it likewise in
purifications^ They also used aromatic reeds in their sacri
fices, || as did the Jews who were brought into contact with
them.1T Whether they imported cinnamon from Ceylon or
India,** may perhaps be doubted ; but the spices of Arabia
were certainly in request, and formed the material of a
regular traffic. ft
All the wine consumed in Babylonia was imported from
abroad. Babylonia was too hot, and probably also too moist,
for the vine, which was not cultivated in any part of the
country.}} A sort of spirit was distilled from dates, which
the Greeks called " palm-wine,"§§ and this was drunk by the
common people. But the wealthier classes could be content
with nothing less than the juice of the grape ; || || and hence
there was a continuous importation of real wine into the
country, HIT where there prevailed a general luxuriousness of
living. The trade must consequently have been considerable,
and is not likely to have been confined to a single channel.
There were several vine-growing countries not very remote
from Babylon ; and a brisk commerce was in all probability
carried on with most of them.
Among other probable imports may be mentioned ivory
and ebony, for the construction of rich furniture, pearls for
personal adornment, rare woods for walking-sticks, dyes,
Indian shawls, musical instruments, Phoenician asses, Indian
dogs, and Persian greyhounds.
Ivory and ebony which were brought to Solomon as
* Heeren, " Asiatic Nations," vol. ii., p. 199. t Herod., i. 195.
X Herod., i. 183. § Ibid., i. 198.
|| " Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 140. f Jer. vi. 20, .
** As Heeren supposes ("As. Nat.," vol. ii., p. 240).
tt Strabo, xvi. 1110. 11 Herod., i. 193. §§ Ibid
|| || Dan. i. 5 ; v. 1. It Ilerod.,-i. 194.

NOTICES IN BABYLON. 73
early as b. c. 1000 (1 Kings x. 22), and which Tyre im
ported from Dedan, on the Persian Gulf, in the time of
Ezekiel (Ezek. xxvii. 15), can scarcely have been unknown
to the Babylonians, through whose territory the Phoenician
trade with Dedan must have passed. Pearls, which were
worn by the Assyrians,* and supplied to Western Asia
generally from the famous fisheries of Bahrien and Karrak,
in the Persian Gulf,} were doubtless as much appreciated by
the Babylonians as by other Asiatics ; and the pearl mer
chants can scarcely have been permitted to carry their pre
cious wares into the interior without leaving a fair share of
them to the country whereto they must have brought them
first of all. Rare wood for walking-sticks is mentioned as
grown in Tylos,} another island in the Gulf, and would
naturally be transported to the neighboring country, where
walking-sticks were in universal use.§ The dyes which gave
to Babylonian fabrics their brilliant hues came probably from
India or Kashmir, an<J were furnished by the Indian lava or
the cochineal insect. || With their dyes the Indians would
probably send their shawls, an early product of Hindoo in
dustry, and one from time immemorial highly valued in the
East.lf The importation of musical instruments may be
regarded as proved, if we allow any of the names used in
Daniel to. be derived from the Greek, since the Greek name
could only reach Babylon together with the instrument where
to it belonged. Phoenician asses are expressly mentioned,
as sold by one Babylonian to another, on one of the black
contract stones found at Babylon,** as are "greyhounds from
the East," which were most probably Persian. A large dog,
most likely an Indian hound, is represented on a tablet
brought by Sir H. Rawlinson from the same site,}} and the
representation is a fairly good proof of the importation of
the animal portrayed.
It is impossible for a country to import largely unless it
also exports largely, either its own products or those of other
regions. In the long run exports and imports must balance
each other. Babylonia seems to have exported chiefly its
own manufactures. Large weaving establishments existed
* "Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., p. 322
t Heeren, "As. Nat.," vol. ii., pp. 235-237.
' } Theophrast, " Hist. Plant.," v. 6. § Herod., i. 195.
|| See Heeren, p. 200.
f See Heeren, p. 209. ** " Records of the Past," vol. ix., p. 105.
tt See the author's " Herodotus," vol. i. p. 314. *

74 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
in various parts of the country ;* and fabrics issued from the
Babylonian looms which were highly esteemed by foreign
nations. The texture was exquisite ; the dyes were of re
markable brilliancy; and the workmanship was superior.
The " Babylonish garment " found among the spoils of Jericho
when the Israelites entered the Holy Land, and coveted by
Achan,} is an evidence at once of the high esteem in which
such fabrics were held, and of the distance to which, even
thus early, they had been exported. Fringed and striped
robes of seemingly delicate material appear on Babylonian
cylinders } as early as the Proto-Chaldaean period, or before
b. c. 2000. We cannot fix their material ; but perhaps they •
were of the class called " sindones," which appear to have
been muslins of extreme fineness, and of brilliant hues, and
which in later times were set apart for royal use.§
The carpets of Babylon acquired a peculiar reputation.!
Carpets are one of the principal objects of luxury in the
East, where not only are the floors of the reception-rooms in
all houses of a superior class covered with them, but they
even form the coverlets of beds, couches, divans, and sofas,
and are thus the main decoration of apartments. The car
pets of Babylon were made of fine wool, skilfully woven,
exquisite in their colors, . and boasting patterns that gave
them a character of piquancy and originality. They bore
representations of griffins and other fabulous animals,1T which
excited the wonder and admiration of foreigners, who did
not know whether they beheld mere freaks of fancy or
portraits of the wonderful beasts of Lower Asia.
Besides their dresses, carpets, and other textile fabrics,
it may be suspected that Babylonia exported rich furniture.
Whem. the Assyrian monarchs invaded a foreign territory,
and obtained any considerable success, they almost universally
carried off, on their return to their own land, great part of the
furniture of any royal palace that fell into their hands, as the
most valued portion of their booty. In their Babylonian
expeditions alone, however, do they particularize the several
objects. There we find mention of " the golden throne, the
golden parasol, the golden sceptre, the silverchariot," ** and
other articles that cannot be identified. There, too, we find
*Strah, xvi., p. 1074.
t Josh. vii. 21. 1 " Ancient Monarchies," vol. i. p. 62.
§ Theophrast., "Hist. Plant.," iv. 9. '
II Arrian, "Exp. Alex., vi. 29. f Athen. Deipn., v., p. 197.
**" Records of the Past," vol. ix., p. 15.

NOTICES IN EZEKIEL. 75
that when a foreign prince needed persuading in order to
make him render assistance, and a " propitiatory offering "
had to be sent to him, " a throne in silver, a parasol in silver,
apastir in silver, and anirmaktu in silver" were the objects
sent.* It would only have been going a short step further to
offer articles so highly appreciated to foreign customers
generally. It is uncertain whether the Babylonians exported grain,
or dates, or any of the other produce of the palm.} Enormous
quantities of wheat, barley, millet, and sesame were raised in
their country,} while the date palm grew so thickly in the
lower parts of the territory as to form almost a continuous
forest. § The natural wealth of the country consisted mainly
in the abundance of these products, and it is scarcely pos
sible that use was not made of the overplus beyond the
wants of the inhabitants to maintain the balance of trade,
which in so luxurious an empire must always have tended to
declare itself against such great consumers. But ancient
writers are rarely interested in such matters as trade and
commerce, while the problems of political economy are
wholly unknown to them. Hence they unfortunately leave
us in the dark on numerous points which to us seem of
primary importance, and force us to attempt to grope our
way by reasonable conjecture.
We shall pass now from the consideration of the prob
able objects of traffic between Babylonia and other countries
to that of the nature of the traffic, and the probable or
certain direction of its various lines. Now the traffic was,
beyond all doubt, carried on in part by land and in part by
sea, the Babylonians not only having dealings with their
continental neighbors, but also carrying on a commerce with
islands and countries which were reached in ships.
The land traffic itself was of two kinds. Caravans com
posed of large bodies of merchants, with their attendants
and followers, proceeded from Babylon in various directions
across the continent, carrying with them, on the backs of
camels or asses, the native commodities which they desired
to sell, and returning after a time with such foreign produo-
tidns as were needed or desired by the Babylonians. Regular
* " Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 45.
t The palm Pas was said to furnish the Babylonians with bread,
wine, vinegar, honey, groats, string and ropes of all kinds, and a mash
for cattle (Strab., xvi. 1, § 14).
X Herod., i. 193. § Amm. Marc, xxiv. 3.

76 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
routes were established which these traveling companies
pursued ; and it is not unlikely that stations, or caravansarais,
were provided for their accommodation at intervals.* The
mass of the persons composing the caravans would travel on
foot : but the richer traders would be mounted on camels,
or even sometimes on horses. It would be necessary to be
well armed in order to resist the attacks of predatory tribes,
or organized bands of robbers ; } and the caravans would re
quire to be numerous for the same reason. There would be
no great difference between these ancient companies and
the caravans of the present day, except to some extent inthe
commodities conveyed, and in the absence of any other than
a commercial motive.}
Other traders preferred to convey their goods along the
courses of the great rivers, which, intercepting Mesopotamia
either as main streams or tributaries, from natural channels
of commercial intercourse with the neighboring countries, at
any rate, for a considerable distance. Boats and rafts readily
descended the Tigris, the Euphrates, and their affluents,§
and transported almost without effort the produce of Com-
magene, Armenia, and Media to the lower Mesopotamian
territory. It was possible by the use of sails and by track
ing to mount the rivers in certain seasons ; and this we know
to have been done on the Euphrates as high as Thapsa,cus.||
Water-carriage was especially convenient for the conveyance,
of heavy goods, such as stone for building or for statuaryy
obelisks, and the like, Both the monuments and profane
writers indicate that it was employed for these purposes.1T
The prmcipal lines of land traffic seem to have been five.
One, which may be called the Western, was along the course
of the Euphrates to about lat. 34° 3', when it struck across
due west to Tadmor, or Palmyra, and thence proceeded by
way of Damascus to Tyre and Sidon. Traces of the em
ployment of this route are found in Ezekiel (chap, xxvii. 18,
23, 24). Along it would be conveyed the whole of the Phoe
nician trade, including the important imports of tin, Tyrian
purple, musical instruments, asses of superior quality, and
* See Herod., v. 52, who, however, speaks of Persian times.
t See Ezra. viii. 22.
X The religious motive of pilgrimage to certain shrines swells the
size of modern caravans.
§ Herod., i. 194. || Strah, xvi. S, § 18.
f "Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., p. 209; Diod. Sic, ii. 11.

NOTICES IN EZEKIEL. 77
possibly wine of Hebron, together with the exports of rich
stuffs, dresses, and embroidery.
Another kept to the line of the Euphrates throughout,
and may be called the North-Western route. It connected
Babylon with Upper Mesopotamia and Armenia. Along
this was conveyed wine, and probably copper ; perhaps also
other metals. It was a route used by Armenian merchants,
who descended the stream in round boats, made of wicker-
work covered with skins, and, having sold their wares, broke
up the boats, and returned on foot to their own country. *
It was used also by the Babylonian colonists of the Persian
Gulf, who mounted the stream as far as Thapsacus, and
. thence carried their goods by land in various directions.}
The third route was towards the North. It connected
Babylon with Assyria, and probably followed mainly the line
of the Tigris, which it may have struck in the vicinity of the
great mart of Opis. The trade between the two countries
of Babylonia and Assyria was, in the flourishing times of the
latter country, highly valued ; and we find frequent provision
made for it's restoration or continuance in the treaties which
from time to time were concluded between the two powers.}
The alabaster blocks which the Babylonians sometimes em
ployed in their buildings came probably by this line, and the
two countries no doubt interchanged various manufactured
products. A fourth line of land trade, and one of great importance,
was that toward the North-east, which may be called the
Medo-Bactrian. This line, after crossing Mount Zagros by
the way of Holwan and Behistun, was directed upon the
Median-capital of Ecbatana, whence it was prolonged, by way
of Rhages and the Caspian Gates, to Balkh, Herat, and
Cabul. § The lapis lazuli, which the Babylonians employed
extensively, can only have come from Bactrim, || arid probably
arrived by this route, along which may also have traveled
much of the gold imported into Babylon, many of the gems,
the fine wool, the shawls, the Indian dyes, and the Indian
dogs. The fifth line was toward the East and South-east. At
first it ran nearly due east to Susa, but thence it was de-
* Herod., i. 194. t Strab., 1. 2. c.
} Records of the Past," vol. iii-, pp. 34, 35; vol. v., p. 9.
§ Heeren, " Asiatic Nations," vol. ii., pp. 203, 209-211.
|| Ibid., p. 206.

78 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
fleeted, and continued on to the south-east, through Perse
polis, to Kerman (Carmania). Wool was probably imported
in large quantities, by this route, together with onyxes from
the Choaspes,* cotton, and the " greyhounds of the East."}
The sea trade of the Babylonians was primarily with the
Persian Gulf. Here they had an important settlement on
the southern coast, called Gerrha, which had a large land
traffic with the interior of Arabia, and carried its merchan
dise to Babylon in ships.} The " ships of Ur " are often
mentioned in the early inscriptions, § and the latter ones show
that numerous vessels were always to be found in the ports
at the head of the gulf, and that the Babylonians readily
crossed the gulf when occasion required. || It is uncertain
whether they adventured themselves beyond its mouth into
the Indian Ocean ; but there is reason to believe that by
some means or other they obtained Indian commodities
which would have come most readily by this route. The teak
found in their buildings, the ivory and ebony which they
almost certainly used, the cinnamon and the cotton, in the
large quantities in which they needed it, can only have come
from the peninsula of Hindustan, and cannot be supposed to
have traveled by the circuitous road of Cabul and Bactria.
Arabian spices were conveyed by the Gerrhaeans in their
ships to Babylon itself, and the rest of the trade of the Gulf
Was probably chiefly in their hands. Perfumes of all kinds,
pearls, wood for ship-building and walking-sticks, cotton,
gems, gold, Indian fabrics, flowed into the Chaldasan capital
from the sea, and were mostly brought to it in ships up the
Euphrates, and deposited on the quays at the merchants'
doors. ./Eschylus calls the Babylonians who served in the
army of Xerxes " navigators of ships."1T Commercial deal
ings among the dwellers in the city on a most extensive
scale are disclosed by the Egibi tablets ; ** " spice mer
chants " appear among the witnesses to deeds.}} Their own
records and the accounts of the Greeks are thus in the com-
pletest agreement with the Prophets when he describes
Babylon as " a land of traffick ... a city of merchants."
* Dionys. Perieg., 11. 1073-1077. t See above, p. 100.
X Strab. xvi. 4, § 18; Agathemer, " De Mar. Erythr.," § 87.
§ Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., p. 12; note 51.
|| Records of the Past," vol. i., pp. 40, 43, 73; vol. vii., p. 63; vol.
ix-, p. 60. 1 " ^Eschyl Pers., 11, 52-55.
** Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology," vol. vii.,
pp. 1-78. tt " Records of the Past," vol. vi., p. 94.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 79

CHAPTER IX.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN DANIEL.
" Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords,
and drank wine before the thousand. Belshazzar, whiles he tasted
the wine, commanded to bring the gold and silver vessels which his
father, Nebuchadnezzar, had taken out of the temple which was in
Jerusalem ; that the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concu-
bihes, might drink therein. Then they brought the golden vessels
that were taken out of the temple of the house of God that was at
Jerusalem; and the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concu
bines, drank in them. They drank wine, and praised the gods of
gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone."— 'Dan.
v. 1-4. The main difficulties connected with the Book of Daniel
open upon us with the commencement of chapter v. A new
king makes his appearance — a king unknown to profane
historians, and declared by some critics to be a purely ficti
tious personage.* We have to consider at the outset who
this Belshazzar can be. Does he represent any king known
to us under any other name in profane history ? Can we
find a trace of him in the inscriptions ? Or is he altogether an
obscure and mysterious personage,of whose very existence we
have no trace outside Daniel, and who must therefore always
constitute an historical difficulty of no small magnitude ?
Now, in the first place, he is represented as the son of
Nebuchadnezzar (vers. 2, 11, 13, 18, 22). The only son of
Nebuchadnezzar of whom we have any mention in profane
history is Evil-Merodach,} who succeeded his father in b. c.
562, and reigned somewhat less than two years, ascending
the throne in Tisri of b. c. 562, and ceasing to reign in Ab
of b. c. 560.} It has been suggested that the Belshazzar of
Daniel is this monarch. §
* See De Wette, "Einleitung in das Alt. Test., p. 255 a.
t Mentioned by Berosus, Fr. 14; Polyhistor (ap. Euseb., "Chron.
Can." i. 5), and Abydenus (ap. Euseb. i. 10). He appears in the
Babylonian dated tablets as Avil-Marduk.
X " Transactions of Bibl. Arch. Soc," vol. vi., pp. 25-26.
§ So Hupfeld and Havernick.

80 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The following are the chief objections to this theory : —
(a) There is no reason to suppose that Evil-Merodach ever
bore any other name, or was known to the Jews under one
designation, to the Babylonians under another. He ap
pears in the Book of Kings under his rightful name of Evil-
Merodach (2 Kings xxv. 27), and again in the Book of
Jeremiah (Jer. Iii. 31). Unless we have distinct evidence
of a monarch having borne two names, it is to the last degree
uncritical to presume it. (b) The third year of Belshazzar.
is mentioned in Daniel (ch. viii. 1). Evil-Merodach is
assigned two years only by Ptolemy, Berosus, and Aby
denus ; § the latest date upon his tablets is his second year ;
he actually reigned no more than a year and ten months, (c)
Evil-Merodach was put to death by his brother-in-law, Nerig
lissar, in b. c. 560. Babylon was at this time under no peril
from the Medes and Persians, to whom the death of Belshaz
zar appears to be attributed (vers. 31). (d) The identification
of Belshazzar with Evil-Merodach involves that of " Darius
the Median" ver. 31) with Neriglissar, who was not aMede,
and had a name as remote as possible from that of Darius.
If Belshazzar be not Evil-Merodach, can he be Neriglis
sar ? Here the name is not so great a difficulty. For, in
the first place, the two words have two words have two ele
ments in common. Neriglissar is in the Babylonian, Ner-
galsar-uzur, while Belshazzar is Bel-sar-uzur. Moreover, it
was not an unknown thing in Babylonia and Assyria to
substitute in a royal designation the name of one god for
another.} But, per contra (a) Nergal was a god so distinct
from Bel, that we can scarcely imagine such a substitution
as Bel for Nergal having been allowable, (b) Neriglissar
was the son-in-law, not the son, of Nebuchadnezzar, (c)
He appears to have died peaceably, and to have been suc
ceeded by his son, Labasi-Merodach (Labossoracus),} instead
of being " slain " suddenly, and succeeded by a Darius. It
seems therefore impossible that the Belshazzar of Daniel can
be Neriglissar. Is he, then, as Josephus supposed, Nabonidus ? § Na-
bonidus, according to Ptolemy and Berosus, was the last na
tive king. The Medes and Persians destroyed his kingdom,
and made him prisoner ; after which, in a little time, he
* Ptol., " Mag. Syntax.," v. 14; Beros., 1. s. c, Abyden., 1. s. c.
t " Transactions of Bib. Arch. Soc," vol. vi., p. 28.
} Berosus, 1. s. c. § Joseph., " Ant. Jud., x. 11, § 2.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 81
died. On his capture the Medo-Persian rule was established,
and continued thenceforth uninterruptedly except for one
or two revolts. ¦ Here, again, (a) the name is an insuperable
difficulty: nothing can well be more unlike Belshazzar than
Nabunahid. But, further, (b) Nabu-nahid is distinctly said
to have been in no way related to Nebuchadnezzar.* (c)
Also his mother died in the ninth year of his reign,} eight
years before his own capture and decease; but it is the
mpther of Belshazzar probably who comes into the banquet
house at the time of his feast.} (d) Nabonidus, again, did
not die on the night that his kingdom passed to the Medes
and Persians, as Belshazzar did (ver. 30). On the contrary,
he survived eight months.§ Thus the hypothesis that
Belshazzar is Nabonidus, though embraced by many, || is as
untenable as the others ; and we have still to seek an answer
to. the question, Who was the Belshazzar of Daniel ?
A discovery made by Sir. H. Rawlinson in the year 1854
gave the first clue to what we incline to regard as the true
answer. On cylinders placed by Nabonidus at the corners
of the great temple of Ur, he mentioned by name " his eldest
' son, Bel-sar-uzur," and prayed the moon-god to take him
under his protection, " that his glory might endure." On
reading this the learned decipherer at once declared it to be
his opinion that Bel-sar-uzur had been associated in the
government by his father, and possessed the kingly power.
If this were so, it could scarcely be disputed that he was
Daniel's Belshazzar. Sir. H. Rawlinson's inference from the
inscription has, however, been denied. Mr. Fox Talbot has
maintained that the inscription does not furnish " the slight
est evidence " that Bel-sar-uzur was ever regarded as co-
regent with his father. " He may," he says, " have been a
mere child when it was written." If The controversy turns
upon the question, What was Oriental practice in this mat
ter ? Sir. H, Rawlinson holds that Oriental monarchs
generally, and the Assyrian and Babylonian kings in par-
* Abydenus, 1. s. c.
t See the " Nabonidus Tablet," in the " Transactions of the Bib.
Arch Soc," vol. vii.,. p. 158.
} See "Speaker's Commentary" on Dan. v. 10 ; and compare
Pusey's " Daniel," p. 449.
§ This is proved by the " Nabonidus Tablet" ("Transactions,.
etc.," vol. vii., pp. 165-7).
II As Josephus, Heeren, Clinton, Winer, and others.
i " Records of the Past," vol. v., p. 144.

82 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
ticular, were so jealous of possible rivals in their own family,
that they did not name even their sons upon public docu
ments unless they had associated them. Kudurmabuk men
tions his son Rim-agu ; * but he has made him King of
Larsa. Sennacherib mentions Asshur-nadin-sum,} but on the
occasion of his elevation to the throne of Babylon. Apart
from these instances, and that of Bel-sar-uzur, there doesnot
seem to be any mention made of their sons by name by the
monarchs of either country.
The supposition that Bel-sar-uzur may have been " a
mere child " when the inscription on which his name occurs
was set up, is completely negatived by the newly-discovered
tablet of Nabonidus, which shows him to have had a son — and
Bel-sar-uzur was his' " eldest son "—who held the command
of his main army from his seventh year, b. c. 549, to his
eleventh, b. c. 545.} It is a reasonable supposition that the
prince mentioned upon this tablet was Bel-sar-uzur. He
is called emphatically " the king's son," and is mentioned
five times. While Cyrus is threatening Babylon both on the
north and on the south, Nabonidus is shown to have re
mained sluggish and inert within the walls of the capital.
the true kingly power being exercised by " the king's son,
who is with the army and the officers in Akkad, or northern
Babylonia, watching Cyrus and protecting Babylon. When
the advance of the army of Cyrus is finally made, what " the
king's son" did is not told us. Nabonidus must have roused
himself from his lethargy and joined his troops ; but as soon
as he found himself in danger, he fled. Pursuit was made,
and he was captured — possibly in Borsippa, as Berosus re
lated^ The victorious Persians took him with them into
Babylon. If at this time " the king's son " was still alive,
any further resistance that was made must, almost certainly,
have been made by him. Now such resistance was made.
A body of "rebels," as they are called, threw themselves
into Bit-Saggatu, or the fortified enclosure within which
stood the Great Temple of Bel-Merodach and the Royal
Palace, and shutting to the gates, defied the enemy. It is
true our record says no preparations had been made previ
ously for the defence of the place, and there was no store of
weapons within it. But the soldiers would have their own
* " Records of the Past," Vol. iii., p. 20. t Ibid., vol. i., p. 40.
X " Transactions," vol. vii., pp. 156-161. § Berosus, Fr. 14.

NOTICES IN DANIEL: 83
weapons : the temple and the palace wouldprobably be well
supplied with wine and provisions ; the defence would be
strong ; and the feeling of the defenders may well have been
such as Herodotus ascribes to the mass of the Babylonians
when they shut themselves within the walls of the town.*
Bel-sar-uzur and his lords may have felt so secure that they
could indulge in feasting and revelry. They may have
maintained their position for months. It is at any rate
most remarkable that the writer of the tablet, having
launched his shafts of contempt against the foolish " rebels,"
interposes a break of more than four months between this
and the next paragraph. It was at the end of Tammuz that
the " rebels " closed the gates of Bit-Saggatu ; it was not
till the 3d day of Marchesvan that " Cyrus to Babylon de
scended," and established peace there. It may have been on
the night of his arrival with strong reinforcements that the
final attack was made, and that Belshazzar, having provoked
God by a wanton act of impiety, "was slain" (ver. 31).
Nearly five months later, on the 27th of Adar, " the king
(Nabonidus ) died."
It is objected to the view, that the Belshazzar of
Daniel is Bel-sar-uzur, the eldest son of Nabonidus : — ¦
1. That Belshazzar is called repeatedly the son of Neb
uchadnezzar,* while we have no evidence that Bel-sar-
ttzur was in any way related to that monarch. 2. That
" the Book of Daniel gives not the least hint- of Bel-shazzar
as having a father still alive and on the throne."} The
first of these objections has been often answered.! In
Scripture, it has been observed, "father" stands for any
male ancestor, " son " for any male descendant. Jehosha-
phat is called " the son of Nimshi," though really his grand
son ; Jesus of Nazareth is "the son of David," who is "the
son of Abraham " (Matt. i. 1) ; Ezra is " the son of Seraiah "
(Ezra vii. 1), the " chief priest " of the captivity (2 Kings
xxv. 18), who died b. c. 586 (ver. 21), of whom Ezra there
fore (b. c. 460-440) must have been really the grandson or
great-grandson. Conversely, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are
the " fathers " of the Israelites after they have been four
hundred years in Egypt (Exod. iii. 15, 16) ; Jonadab the
* Herod,. I. 190. Tt-J
t Fox Talbot, in " Records of the past," vol. v., p. 144. 1 Ibid.
§ See the author's " Bumpton Lectures," Lecture N, pp. 134,
135, and note.

84 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
son of Rechab, the friend of Jehu (2 Kings x. 15), is the
" father " of the Rechabites, contemporary with Jeremiah
(Jer. xxxv. 6) ; and Jehoram, king of Judah, is the father of
Uzziah (Matt. i. 8), his fourth descendant. The rationale of
the matter is as follows : Neither in Hebrew nor in Chaldee
is there any word for " grandfather " or " grandson." To
express the relationship it would be necessary to say, " fath- ,
er's father " and " son's son." But " father's father " and
" son's son " are, by an idiom of the language, used with
an idea of remoteness — to express distant ancestors or de
scendants. Consequently they are rendered by usage unapt
to express the near relationship of grandfather and grand
son ; and the result is that they are very rarely so used. As
Dr. Pusey has well observed,* "A single grandfather, or
forefather, is never called ' father's father,' always ' father '
only." This is so alike in early and in late Hebrew ; and
the Chaldee follows the idiom. Jacob says, " The God of
my father, the God of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac "
(Gen. xxxi. 42). God says to Aaron, " The tribe of Levi,
the tribe of thy father" (Num. xviii. 2). The confession to
be made at the offering of the first-fruits began, " a Syrian,
ready to perish, was my father " (Deut. xxvi. 5) ; and in the
same sense, probably, Moses says, " the God of my father "
(Exod. xviii. 4). David said to Mephibosheth, "I will
surely show the kindness for Jonathan thy father's sake, and
will restore to thee all the land of Saul thy father " (2 Sam.
ix. 7). And Asa is said to have " removed Maachah, his
mother, from being queen," though it is said in the same
chapter that she was the mother of Abijam, his father (1
Kings xv. 2, 13). Maachah herself, who is called " daughter
of Absalom " (1 Kings xv. 2), was really his grand-daughter,
he having left only one daughter, Tamar (2 Sam. xiv. 27),
and her own father being Uriel (2 Chron. xiii. 2). Again
it is said, " Asa did right in the eyes of the Lord, as did
David his father" (1 Kings xv. 11), and in like way of
Hezekiah (2 Kings xviii. 3). Contrariwise, it is said that
" Ahaz did not right like David his father " (xvi. 2) ; that
" Amaziah did right, yet not like David his father ; he did
according to all things as Joash his father did" (xiv. 3). '
Here, in one verse, the actual father and the remote grand
father are alike called " his father ; " as before the father and
grandfather of Mephibosheth were called, in the same verse,
* See his " Lectures on Daniel," Lecture VII., pp. 405, 406.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 85
"his father." "Josiah," it is said, "walked in the way
of David his father ; he began to seek the God of David his
father " (2 Chron. xxxiv. 2, 3). In Isaiah there occur " Jacob
thy father " (Isa lviii. 14) ; "thy first father " (xliii. 27)— i. e,
Adam ; and to Hezekiah he said, " Thus saith the Lord, the
God of David thy father " (xxxviii. 51 . So, on the other
hand, there is no Hebrew or Chaldee word to express
" grandson." In laws,, if the relation has to be expressed,
the idiom is " thy son's daughter " (Lev. xviii. 10), or thy
"daughter's daughter " (Ibid.) ; or it is said, "Thou shalt
tell it to thy son's son " (Exod. x. 2) ; " Rule thou over us,
thou, and thy son, and thy son's son " (Judg. viii.
22). The relation can be expressed in this way in the
abstract, but there is no way in Hebrew or Chaldee to mark
that one person was the grandson of another, except in the
way of genealogy — " Jehu, the son of Jehoshaphiat, the son
of Nimshi." And so the name " son " stands for the " grand
son," and a person is at times called the son of the more re
markable grandfather, the link of the father's name being
omitted. Thus Jacob asked for " Laban, the son of Nahor "
(Gen. xxix. 5), omitting the immediate father, Bethuel ;
Jehu is called " the son of Nimshi " (1 Kings xix. 16 ; 2
Kings ix. 20), omitting his own father, Jehoshaphat. The
prophet Zechariah is called " the son of Iddo " (Ezra v. 1 ;
vi. 14), his own father being Berachiah (Zech. i. 1). Hence
the Rechabites said, as a matter of course, " Jonadab, the
son of Rechab, our father, commanded us ; we have obeyed
in all things the voice of Jonadab, the son of Rechab, our
father " (Jer. xxxv. 6, 8) ; although Jonadab lived some one
hundred and eighty years before (2 Kings x. 15). And re
ciprocally God says, " The words of Jonadab, the son of
Rechab, that he commanded his sons, are performed " (ver.
14) ; and " Because ye have obeyed the commandments of
Jonadab your father, and kept all his precepts " (ver. 16).
But, it is objected, all this may be true ; yet it proves
nothing. Nabonidus was not in any way related to Nebu
chadnezzar — he was "merely a Babylonian nobleman."*
How, then, should his son be even Nebuchadnezzar's grand
son ? This, too, has been answered,} and it is curious that
the answer should be ignored. Belshazzar, it has been ob-
* Fox Talbot, in " Records of the Past," vol. v. p. 144.
t See the author's " Brompton Lectures," Lecture V., note 21.

86 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
served, may have been the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar on
the mother's side. His father, Nebonicus, may have married
one of Nebuchadnezzar's daughters.
It must be granted that we have no proof that he did.
We have, however, some indications from which we should
naturally have drawn the conclusion independently of the „
Book of Daniel. Two pretenders to the throne of Babylon
started up during the reign of Darius Hystaspis, both of,
whom called themselves " Nebuchadnezzar, son of Naboni
dus." * It is certain from this that Nabonidus must have
had a son so called, for no pretender would assume the name
of a person who never existed. How, then, are we to ac
count for Nabonidus having given this name to one of his
sons ? Usurpers, as a rule, desire not to recall the memory
of the family which they have dispossessed. The Sargonidae
discarded all the names in use among their predecessors. So
did the Egyptian monarchs of the eighteenth and nineteenth
dynasties. So, again, did those of the twenty-first, and the
Psammetichi. Nabonidus must have intended to claim a
family connection with the preceding Babylonian monarchs
when he thus named a son. And if he was indeed " no way
related to Nebuchadnezzar," the connection could only have
been by marriage. ' The probability, therefore, is that the
principal wife of Nabonidus, the queen (or queen-mother) of
Dan. v. 10, was a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, and that
through her Belshazzar was Nebuchadnezzar's grand-son.
But further : it is objected that " the Book of Daniel
giyes not the slightest hint of Belshazzar having a father
alive, and still upon the throne." } In reply it may be said,
in the first place, that; were it so, no surprise need, be felt ;
since, if the circumstances were as above supposed, if Nabo
nidus after a shameful flight was a prisoner in the hands of
the enemy, and Belshazzar was conducting the defence alone,
any distinct allusion to the captured king would be improb
able. But, secondly, it is not true that there is " no hint."
Belshazzar makes proclamation that, if any one can read and
interpret the writing miraculously inscribed upon the wall,
" he shall be clothed with scarlet, and have a chain of gold
about his neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom"
(v. 7) ; and when Daniel has read and interpreted the words,
* See the " Behistun Inscription," in the author's "Herodotus,"
vol. ii., pp. 596, 606.
t Fox Talbot, in "Records of the Past," 1. s. c.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 87
the acts promised are performed — " they clothed Daniel with
scarlet, and put a chain of gold about his neck, and made a
proclamation concerning him, that he should be the third
ruler in the kingdom " (ver. 29). It has been suggested that
to be the " third ruler " was to be one of the three presidents
who were subsequently set over the satraps (vi. 2) ; but
neither is this the plain force of the words, nor was the or
ganization of chap. vi. 1, 2 as yet existing. To be " the third
ruler in the kingdom " is to hold a position one degree lower
than that of "second from the king," which was conferred
upon Joseph (Gen. xli. 40-44), and upon Mordecai (Esth. x.
3) ; it is to hold a position in the kingdom inferior to two
persons, and to two persons only. That the proclamation
Tan in this form is a " hint," and more than a hint, that the
first and second places were occupied, that there were two
kings upon the throne, and that therefore the highest position
that could, under the circumstances, be granted to a subject
was the third place, the place next to two sovereigns. If we
compare the two nearly parallel cases of Joseph and Morde
cai — subjects whom their despotic master "delighted to
honor" — with that of Daniel at this time, we shall find it
scarcely possible to assign any other reason for his being
promoted to the third place in the kingdom than the fact
that the first and second places were already occupied by the
son and father, Belshazzar and Nabonidus.

88 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER X.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN DANIEL.
" Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and
two years old. It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred
and twenty princes, which should,' be over the whole kingdom." —
Dan. v. 31 ; vi. 1.
The reign of " Darius the Median " over Babylon is the
second great historical difficulty which the Book of Daniel
presents to the modern inquirer. According to Herodotus,*
Berosus,} and the Canon of Ptolemy, the immediate successor
of Nabonidus (Labynetus) was Cyrus — no king intervened
between them. The Babylonian reords are in accord. Two
contemporary documents } declare that Cyrus defeated Nabo
nidus, captured him, and took the direction of affairs into his
own hands. One of them contains a proclamation, issued by
Cyrus, as it would seem, immediately after his conquest, §
in which he assumes the recognized titles of Babylonian
sovereignty, calling himself " the great king, the powerful
king, the king of Babylon, the king of Sumir and Akkad, the
king of the four regions." Who, then, it has to be asked, is
this "Darius the Median," who "took the kingdom," and
made arrangements for its government, immediately after
the fall of the native Babylonian power, and its suppression
by that of the Medes and Persians ?
All that Scripture tells us of "Darius the Median,"
besides the points already mentioned, is that he was the son
of Ahasuerus, that he was an actual Mede by descent (" of
the seed of the Medes," Dan. ix. 1), that he advanced Daniel
to a high dignity (ch. vi. 2), and that afterwards he cast
* Herod., i. 188, 191. t Berosus, Fr. 14.
X See the " Cylinder Inscription of Cyrus," published in the
" Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society," vol. xii., pp. 85-9 ; and
" Transactions of Bibl. Archseol. Society," vol. vii., pp. 153-169.
§ " As. Soc. Journ., vol. xii., p. 87.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 89
Daniel into the den of lions and released him. The first and
second of these facts seem conclusive against a theory which
has been of late years strongly advocated — viz., that he is
really " Darius the son of Hystaspis," * the great Darius, the
only Darius mentioned in Scripture, except Codomannus,
whose name occurs in one place (Neh. xii. 22). We know
not only the father, but the entire descent of Darius Hys
taspis, up to Achaemenes, the founder of the Persian royal
family ; } and we find no " Ahasuerus " — the Hebrew form
of the Persian Khshayarsha, the Greek Xerxes — in the list.
There is the strongest evidence that he was of pure Persian
race, and not an atom of evidence that he had any Median
blood in his veins. It is among his proudest boasts that he
is " an Aryan, of Aryan descent, a Persian, the son of a
Persian." } He was a member of the Persian royal family,
closely akin to Cyrus. The Medes revolted against him, and
fought desperately to throw off his authority and place them
selves under a real Mede, Frawartish, who claimed to be " of
the race of Cyaxares." § Cyrus might with better reason be
called a Mede than Darius, for some high authorities , gave
Cyrus a Median mother ; || but there is no such tradition with
respect to Darius, the son of Hystaspis.
Another extraordinary theory, recently broached, identi
fies " Darius the Mede " with Cyrus. IT Darius, it is said.
may be in Daniel, not a name, but a title. Etymologically,
the name would mean " holder," or " firm holder," and
it may therefore have been a synonym for king or ruler.
Baryavesh Mddaya (in Dan. v. 31) may mean, not " Darius
the Mede," but only " the king or ruler of the Medes, a fit
title for Cyrus " !
But how does this conjectural explanation suit the other
passages of Daniel where the name of Darius occurs? We
read in ch. vi. 28, " So this Daniel prospered in the reign of
Darius, and in the reign of Gyrus the Persian." _ Does this
mean, he prospered " in the reign of Cyrus, and in the reign
of Cyrus " ? Again, we read, in ch. ix 1, of " Darius, the
son of Ahasuerus." How can this apply to Cyrus, who was
* Particularly by Mr. Bosanquet ("Transactions," etc., vol. vi.,
pp. 84, 100, 130.
t See the Author's " Herodotus," vol. iv., 254-5.
1 See the Author's " Herodotus," vol. iv., p. 250.
§ Ibid., vol. ii., pp. 598-602.
|| Herod., i. 108; Xen. " Cyrop.," i. 2, § 1.
1 "Transactions," etc., vol. vi., p. 29.

90 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
the son of Cambyses ? Further, how are we to understand
the expression " King Darius," which occurs in ch. vi. 6, 9,
25 ? Does it mean " king, king " ? We will not insult our
readers' intellects by continuing. We will only add one less
obvious argument, an argument which may further our quest
and give us perhaps some help in determining, not only who
" Darius the Median " was not, but who he was.
It is said in ch. v. 31, that " Darius the Median took the
kingdom," and in ch. ix. 1, that he " was made king over
the realm of the Chaldeans." Neither of these two expres
sions is suitable to Cyrus. The word translated " took "
means " received," " took from the hands of another ; " and
the other passage is yet more unmistakable. " Was made
king " exactly expresses the original, which uses the Hophal
of the verb, the Hiphel of which occurs when David makes
Solomon king over Israel (1 Chron. xxix. 20). No one would
say of Alexander the Great, when he conquered Darius
Codomannus, that he " was made king over Persia." The
expression implies the reception of a kingly position by one
man from the hands of another. Now Babylon, while under
the Assyrians, had been almost always governed by viceroys,
who received their crowns from the Assyrian monarchs.*
It was not unnatural that Cyrus should follow the same
system. He had necessarily to appoint a governor, and the
" Nabonidus Tablet " tells us that he did so almost imme
diately after taking possession of the city. The first gover
nor appointed was a certain Gobryas, } whose nationality is
doubtful ; but he appears to have been shortly aferwards
sent to some other locality.} A different arrangement must
have been then made. That Cyrus should have appointed
a Mede, and allowed him to take the title of " king," is in no
way improbable. He was fond of appointing Medes to high
office, as we learn from Herodotus. § He was earnestly de
sirous of conciliating the Babylonians, as we find from his
cylinder. || It was not many years before he gave his son,
Cambyses, the full royal power at Babylon, relinquishing it
himself, as appears from a dated tablet.1T The position of
* "Ancient Monarchies," vol. iii., p, 42.
t So at least I understand the passage ("Transactions," etc., vol
vii., p. 166, 1. 20). '
1 Ibid., p. 167. 1. 22. The reading is uncertain.
§ Herod., i. 156. 162.
|| '• Journal of Royal Asiatic Society," vol. xii., pp. 87-9.
IT " Transactions, etc., vol. vi., p. 489.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 91
" Darius the Median " in Daniel is compatible with all that
we know with any certainty from other sources. We have
only to suppose that Cyrus, in the interval between the brief
governorship of Gobryas and the sovereignty of Cambyses,
placed Babylon under a Median noble named Darius, and
allowed him a position intermediate between that of a mere
ordinary " governor " and the full royal authority.
The position of Darius the Median, as a subject king set
up by Cyrus, has been widely accepted, but critics have not
been content to rest at this point. Attempts have been made
to identify him further with some person celebrated in his
tory ; and it has been suggested that he was either Astyages,
the last Median monarch,* or his supposed son Cyaxares.f
Neither identification can be substantiated. The very exist
ence of a second Cyaxares, the son of Astyages, is more than
questionable.} The names are, in both cases, unsuitable.
The age of Darius when, he " took the kingdom " falls short
of the probable age of Astyages. It seems best to acquiesce
in the view of those who hold that " Darius the Mede is an
historic character," but one " whose name has not yet been
found except. in Scripture."§
It is in no way surprising that, on being set over the
realm of the Chaldees, Darius should have occupied himself
in giving it a new organization. We are scarcely entitled to
assume, from the expression used in Dan. vi. 1, that he called
his new officers " satraps ; " but still it is quite possible that
he used the word, which had not yet received a technical
sense, and only meant etymqlogically " supporters of the
crown." The number, one hundred and twenty, is more
than we should have expected, and can receive no support
from the hundred and twenty-seven provinces of Ahasuerus
(Esth. i. 1), who ruled from Ethiopia to India, whereas
Darius reigned only over the realm of the Chaldees ; we
must view it either as resulting from Oriental ostentation,
or as an anticipation of the maxim, Bivide et impera. Each
"satrap " must have ruled over a comparatively small dis
trict. They may have been the head men of tribes, and if
so, it is pertinent to remark that the tribes of the Euphrates
* So Syncellus, Jackson, Marsham, and Winer.
t So Josephus; Prideaux, Hales, Hengstenberg, Von Lengerke,
and others.
1 Herodotus declares that Astyages had no male offspring (i., 190).
§ "Speaker's Commentary" on Dan. v. 31.

92 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
valley were exceedingly numerous. Twenty-four tribes of
Lower Babylonia collected on one occasion to assist Susub ;*
in the middle region Tiglath-Pileser II. claims to have, re
duced thirty-four tribes ; } the upper regions had at least as
many. An ancient geographical list seems to divide Baby
lonia proper into seventy-three districts.} If Cyrus intrusted
to Darius the Euphrates valley up to Carchemish, and the
regions of Coelesyria and Phoenicia, we can quite understand
the number of the " princes " (i.e., satraps) being a hundred
and twenty.
" Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it
be not changed according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which
altereth not." — Dan. vi. 8.
" Know, O king, that the law of the Medes and Persians is,
That no degree nor statute which the king establisheth may be
changed." — Ver. 15.
The inviolability of Medo-Persian law, and the moral
impossibility that the king, having signed a decree, or in any
way pledged his word to a matter, could afterwards retract,
or alter it, which are so strongly asserted in these passages,
and again so markedly implied in the Book of Esther, receive
illustration from two narratives which have come down
to us on the authority of Herodotus. " Cambyses," he tells
us,* " the son of Cyrus, was anxious to marry one of his
sisters ; but, as he knew that it was an uncommon thing,
and not the custom of the Persians previously he summoned
a meeting of the royal judges, and put the question to them,
whether there was any law which allowed a brother, if he
wished it, to marry his sister ? Now the royal judges," he
remarks, " are certain picked men among the Persians, who
hold their office for life, or until they are found guilty
of some misconduct. By them justice is administered in
Persia, and they are the interpreters of the old laws, all dis
puted cases of law being referred to their decision. When
Cambyses, therefore, put his question to these judges, they
gave him an answer which was at once true and safe — 'they
did not find any law,' they said, ' allowing a brother to take
his sister to wife ; but they found a law that the king of the
Persians might do whatever he pleased.' And so they
* " Records of the Past," vol. i., p. 47
t Ibid., vol. v., p. 101. i Ibid., vol. v., pp. 105-7.
§ Herod., iii. 31.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 93
neither warped the law through fear of Cambyses, nor ruined
them selves by over-stiffly maintaining the law ; but they
brought another quite distinct law to the king's help, which
allowed him to have his wish. Cambyses, therefore, married
the object of his love ; and no long time afterwards he took
to wife also another sister." Still more closely illustrative
of the perplexity of Darius, and his inability to escape from
the entanglement in which he found hinself, is the following
anecdote concerning Xerxes, one of the most selfwilled and
despotic of all the Persian monarchs : " Amestris, the wife of
Xerxes, having a cause of quarrel, as she thought, against the
wife of a Persian prince named Masistes, determined to com
pass her death. She waited, therefore, till her husband gave
the great royal banquet — a feast which took place once every
year — in celebration of the king's birthday, and then made
request of Xerxes that he would please to give her, as her
present, the wife of Masistes. But he at first refused ; for
it seemed to him shocking and monstrous to give into the
power of another a woman who was not only his brother's
wife, but was likewise wholly guiltless in the matter which
had enraged Amestris ; and he was the more unwilling inas
much as he well knew the intention with which his wife
had preferred her request. After a time, however, he was
wearied by her importunity, and, feeling constrained by the
law of the feast, which required that no one who asked a
boon that day at the king's board should be denied his
request, he yielded, but with a very ill will, and gave the
woman into her power." * Amestris, as he had expected,
caused the woman to be put to death, first mutilating her in
a most barbarous manner.
It is indicative of the complete knowledge that the writer
has of the change which Babylon underwent when she passed
from the uncontroled despotism of the old native kings
to the comparatively limited monarchy of Persia that he
exhibits to us Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar as wholly
unrestrained by those about them, or admitting, at the most,
domestic counsels, while he represents Darius as trammeled
by Medo-Persian law, a passive instrument in the hands of
his councilors, forced to do an act against which his soul
revolted, and only venturing upon a vindication of his own
authority when he had been the witness of a stupendous
miracle (ch. vi. 14-24). * Herod., ix. 110, 111.

94 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
" The king spake and said unto Daniel, O Daniel, servant of the
living God, is thy God, whom thou servest continually, able to deliver
thee from the lions ? "—Dan. vi. 20.
" Then King Darius wrote unto all people, nations, and languages,
that dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied unto you. I make a
decree, That in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear
before the God of Daniel : for He is the living God, and steadfast for
ever, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed, and His
dominion shall be even unto the end, He delivereth and rescueth,
and He worketh signs and wonders in heaven, and earth, who hath
delivered Daniel from the power of the lions." — Dan. vi. 25-27.
As the Medo-Persic kings introduced some novelty into
the political situation when they became the rulers Of Baby
lon, so they further introduced a more considerable religious
change. The ordinary Babylonian system is sufficiently in
dicated in the account of Belshazzar's feast. It was grossly
polytheistic and idolatrous. It recognized a hierarchy of '
gods as ruling in the heavenly sphere,* and it worshiped
them under the form of images } in gold, and silver, and
brass, and iron, and wood, and stone (ch. vi. 4, 23). The
religion of the Medo-Persians was very different. It ad
mitted of no use of images.} It did not absolutely reject
the employment of the word god in the plural ; § but it ac
knowledged one god as infinitely superior to all others, and
viewed him as alone truly " living," as alone the fount and
origin of all life, whether earthly or spiritual. The Ahura-
Mazda of the Medes and Persians was a god of a very
spiritual and exalted character. He had made the celestial
bodies, earth, water, and trees, all good creatures, and all
good, true things. He was good, holy, pure, true, the holy
god, the holiest, the essence of truth, the father of all truth,
the best being of all, the master of purity. He was su
premely happy, possessing every blessing — health, wealth,
virtue, wisdom, immortality. ||
These facts, which are known to us especially through
the Zendavesta, the sacred book of the ancient Medes and
Persians, throw considerable light on the picture drawn of
the rehgion of the Babylonian court under Darius the Mede,
compared with that of the same court almost immediately
before, under Belshazzar. Belshazzar allowed that "the
spirit of the holy gods " might be in Daniel, and that there,
* " Ancient Monarchies." vol. i. pp. 70-92; vol. ii., pp. 224-230.
t Ibid., vol ii., p. 226. l Herod., i. 131.
§ See Pusey's " Lectures on Daniel," pp. 529-539.
|| "Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., pp. 46-7.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 95
fore his words might be deserving of attention. He praised
" the gods," and recognized the duty of worshiping them
as embodied in their images of wood and stone and metal.
In the account given of Darius the Mede, idolatry has, on
the other hand, no place. Polytheism of a kind just makes
its appearance in the expression, " Whosoever shall ask a
petition of any god" (ch. vi. 7. 12) ; but monotheism is pre
dominant. Darius, before knowing if a miracle has been
performed or no, recognizes Daniel as a <' servant of the liv
ing God" (ver. 20) ; and afterwards, when assured of Daniel's
deliverance, praises and exalts " the living God " as one " who
is steadfast forever and ever," whose " kingdom shall not be
destroyed," but shall continue " even unto the end ; " " who .
delivereth and rescueth," and " worketh signs and wonders
in heaven and earth " (vers. 26, 27). These words, which
would seem strange in the mouth of most heathens, are
natural enough in those of a Zoroastrian, who, while allow
ing a certain qualified worship of the sun, and of the gods
presiding over his own family,* would recognize as infinitely
above these, placed in a category apart and by himself, the
great giver of life, Ahura-Mazda the true " living God," the
Creator, the Preserver, the Deliverer from evil, the Supreme
Spirit, to whom all others were subordinate, the one and only
ruler of heaven and earth.
It does not interfere with this view that Cyrus, and as
his vice-gerent, Darius, tolerated — nay, even patronized to
some extent; — the Babylonian religion.} This they did as
politic rulers over subjects likely to be disaffected. But in
their courts, among their privy-councilors, they would act
differently. There they would show their true feelings.
Even in a proclamation addressed to all their subjects, as
that of Darius was (ver. 25), they would not scruple to show
their own feelings — as Darius Hystaspis and his successors
did in all their rock-inscriptions — so long as they abstained
from any direct disparagement of their subjects' gods, and
merely required the acknowledgment of an additional deity-
besides those of the popular Pantheons.
*"Behist. Inscript," col. iv., par. 12, 13; Pusey's "Daniel," p.
531, note 8.
t " Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society," vol. xii., pp. 88-9.

EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER XI.
NOTICES OF BABYLON IN DANIEL, ISAIAH, JEREMIAH, AND
EZEKIEL.
It is proposed in the present chapter to bring together
the scattered notices in Scripture bearing upon the general
condition of Babylon, the character of its government, and
the manners and customs of its people ; and to inquire how
far profane history confirms or illustrates what Scripture
tells us on these matters. A certain number of the points
have necessarily been touched in some of the earlier chapters
of the present volume, and thus it will be impossible to avoid
a certain amount of repetition ; but the endeavor will be
made to pass lightly over such topics as have been already
put before the reader, and thus to reduce the repetition to a
minimum. We have noticed indirectly, in connection with its com
merce, the great wealth of Babylon. Isaiah calls it emphat
ically " the golden city " (Isa. xiv. 4), or " the exactress of
gold," as the passage may be rendered literally. • Jeremiah
compares Babylon to " a golden cup in the hand of the Lord "
(Jer. li. 7), and calls her " abundant in treasures " (ib. ver.
13), declaring moreover that, at her fall, all those who par
took of her spoil should be " satisfied " (ib. 1. 10). In Daniel
the Babylonian kingdom is typified by the " head of gold "
( Dan. ii. 38), and the opulence of the monarch is shown by
the enormous size of the image, or rather pillar, of gold
which he set up, a pillar ninety feet high by nine feet
wide (ib. iii. 1 ). The inscriptions are in accordance. Nebu
chadnezzar tells us that he brought into the treasury of
Merodach at Babylon " wares, and ornaments for the women,
silver, molten gold, precious stones, metal, umritgana and
cedar wood, a splendid abundance, riches and sources of

NOTICES IN DANIEL, ISAlAH, ETC. 97
joy." * The temple of Merodach he " made conspicuous
with fine linen, and covered its seats with splendid gold, with
lapis lazuli, and blocks of alabaster."} Its portico '*with
brilliant gold he caused men to cover ; the lower threshold,
the cedar awnings with gold and precious stones he embell
ished."} And the rest of his sacred buildings were adorned
similarly. §
The primary source of the wealth of Babylon was its
agriculture'. Herodotus tells us that the yield of grain was
commonly two hundred-fold, and in some instances three
hundred-fold. || Pliny asserts that the wheat-crop was
reaped twice, and afterwards afforded good keep for beasts.1T
When Babylonia became a province of the Persian EmP"'e,
it paid a tribute of a thousand talents of silver,** and at
the same time, furnished the entire provision of the court
during one third of the year.}} Notwithstanding these calls
upon them, its satraps became enormously wealthy.}} To
the wealth obtained by agriculture is to be added that de
rived from commerce, and from conquest. Both of these
points have already engaged our attention, and we have
seen reason to believe that the gains made were in each case
very great. Scripture makes allusion to the agricultural
wealth of the country, when it enumerates among the chief
calamities of the final invasion the " cutting off of the sower,
and of him that handled the sickle in the time of harvest "
(Jer, 1. 16) ; and again when it makes special mention of the
" opening of the granaries " as a feature in the sack of the
city (ib. ver. 26). The commercial wealth is implied in the
description of Babylon as " a city of merchants " (Ezek. xvii.
4), and of Babylonia as " a land of traffick " (ib) . The wealth
derived from conquest receives notice in the statement of
Habakkuk, " Because thou hast spoiled many nations, all the
reinnant of the people shall spoil thee" (Hab. ii. 8), and is
illustrated by the narrative of Kings (2 Kings, xxv. 13-17).
Nebuchadnezzar alludes to it when he says, " A palace for
my royalty in the midst of the city of Babylon I built . . . tall
cedars for its porticoes I fitted . . . with silver, gold, and
precious stones I overlaid its gates . . . I valiantly collected
spoils ; as an adornment of the house were they arranged
* " Records of the Past," vol. v., pp. 116-7. t Ibid., p. 117.
1 Ibid., pp. 119-20. § Ibid., vol. vii., pp. 72, 75-6.
|| Herod., i. 193. IT Plin. H.N., xviii. 17. ** Herod., iii. 92.
tt Herod., i. 192. }} Ibid.

98 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
and collected within it ; trophies, abundance,. royal treasures,
I accumulated and gathered together ; " * and again, " Gath
erings from great lands J made; and, like the hills, I up
raised its head." }
Among the spoil which was regarded as of especial value
were scented woods, more particularly cedars, and perhaps
pines, from Lebanon and Amanus. Isaiah, in describing
the general rejoicing at the fall of the Babylonian Empire,
remarks, " The whole earth is at rest and is quiet ; they break
forth into singing : yea, the fir-trees rejoice at thee, and the
cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no
feller is come up against us " (Isa. xiv. 7, 8). The cuneiform
inscriptions show that the practice of cutting timber in the
Syrian mountains and conveying it to Mesopotamia, which
had been begun by the Assyrian monarchs (2 Kings xix. 23),
was continued by the Babylonians. Nebuchadnezzar ex
pressly states that " the best of his pine-trees from Lebanon,
with tall babil-wood, he brought ; " } and Nabonidus tells us
that, in his third year, he went to " Amananu, a mountainous
country, where tall pines grew, and brought a part of them
to the midst of Babylon." §
The great size of Babylon, and the immense height and
thickness of its walls, have been dwelt upon at some length
in a former chapter. || Jeremiah is particularly clear upon
these points, though, naturally, he enters into no details.
"Though Babylon should mount up to heaven," he says,
"and though she should fortify the height of her strength,
yet from me shall spoilers come unto her, saith the Lord "
(Jer. li. 53) ; and again, " The broad walls of Babylon shall
be utterly broken, and her high gates shall be burned with
fire " (ib. ver. 58) ; and, with respect to the size of the city,
" One post shall run to meet another, and one messenger to
meet another, to show the king of Babylon that his city is
taken at one end " (ib. ver. 31).
The government of Babylon by a despotic monarch, the
sole source of all power and authority, and the absolute
master of the lives and liberties of his subjects, which the
Babylonian notices in Scripture set before us consistently,
and which appears most markedly in Daniel (ch. ii. 12, 48,
* " Records of the Past." vol. v., p. 131.
t Ibid., p. 133. X Ibid., vol. v., p. 119.
§ " Transactions of the Bibl. Archseolog. Society," vol. vii., p. 154.
|| See above, ch. vi.

NOTICES IN DANIEL, ISAIAH, ETC. v 99
49; iii.. 6, 15, 29), is in complete accordance with all that pro
fane history teaches on the subject. Nebuchadnezzar claims
in his inscriptions to rule by Divine right. The sceptre of
i righteousness is delivered into his hand that therewith he
may sustain men.* From him alone commands issue ; by
him alone all works are accomplished. No subject obtains
any mention as even helping him. The inscriptions of Neri
glissar and Nabonidus are of nearly the same character.
And the classical accounts agree. It is clear that in Semitic
Babylon, prior to the Medo-Persic conquest, there was no
noble class possessing independent power, or any right of
controling the king.
There was, however, a learned class, which possessed
a certain distinction, which furnished priests to the chief
temples, and claimed to interpret dreams and omens, and to
foretell the future by means of astrology. Herodotus } and
Diodorus } give this class the name of " Chaldaeans," a nom
enclature with which the Book of Daniel may be said
to agree, if we accept the identification of " Chaldaeans " '
with Casdim. At any rate, the book testifies to the exist
ence of the class, and to the functions which belonged to it,
as also does Isaiah, when he says of Babylon, "Let now
the astrologers, the star-gazers, the monthly prognosticators,
stand up and save thee from these things which shall come
upon thee " (Isa. xlvii. 13). The title Rab-Mag, which may
be suspected to have belonged to the chief of the Chaldaean
order, is found both in Scripture (Jer. xxxix. 3, 13) and in
the inscriptions. It has been translated " Chief of the
Magi ; " } but there seems to be no reason to believe that
Magianism was in any way recognized by the Babylonians
of the independent empire.
There was also in Babylonia a numerous class of officials
— a " bureaucracy," as it has been called — whereby the
government of the country was actually carried on. In some
places, the native sovereigns were indeed allowed to retain
their authority for a time (2 Kings xxiv. 1, 17), and the Baby
lonian monarch could thus be called with propriety a " king
of kings " (Dan. ii. 37 ; Ezek. xxvi. 7 ) ; but the general
system was to replace kings by " governors " (2 Kings xxv.
22, 23 ; Berosus, Fr. 14) or " princes " (Dan. ii. 2), and to
* " Records of the Past," vol. v., p. 114.
t Herod., i. 181, 183. 1 Diod., Sic, ii. 29.
§ Speaker's Commentary on Jeremiah, xxxix. S.

100 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
employ under these last a great variety of subordinates
The Babylonian contract tablets show at least eight or ten
names of officers under government, of different ranks and
gradations,* correspondent (in a general way) to the " princes,
governors, captains, judges, treasurers, counselors, sheriffs,
and rulers of provinces " of the Book of Daniel, and thus in
dicate sufficiently the bureaucratic character of the govern
ment. The general character of the Babylonian court, as depicted
in Daniel, and its agreement with what we know from other
sources, has been already noticed. But the following illus
trations may be added to those already given. The high
position of the queen-mother at the court of Belshazzar re
ceives illustration from the mention of " the mother of the
king " in the tablet of Nabonidus, and from the fact that at
her death there was a court mourning of three days' dura
tion.} The polygamy of the monarchs (Dan. v. 2, 3) accords
with what we hear of the " concubines " of Saul-Mugina.}
The employment of eunuchs (2 Kings xx. 10 ; Dan. i. 3)
agrees with Herod, iii. 92; that of music (Isa. xiv. 11 ; Dan.
iii. 5, 7) with passages in the Assyrian inscriptions, which
speak of musicians and musical instruments as in vogue at
the courts of other neighboring kings ;§ that of " sweet
odors " in the way of religious service (Dan. ii. 46) with
what Herodotus relates of the burning of frankincense on
sacrificial occasions. || The long detention in prison of of
fenders against the dignity of the crown, of which Isaiah
speaks, when he says of the Babylonian monarch that he
" opened not the door of his prisoners" (Isa. xiv. 17), and
which is exemplified by the confinement of Jehoiachin
by Nebuchadnezzar for the extraordinary term of thirty-
seven years (2 Kings xxv. 27), receives illustration from the
story of Parsondas, as told by Nicholas of Damascus. Par-
sondas was a Mede, who desired to become king of Babylon
under Artaeus, and obtained from him a promise of the king
dom. Nannarus, the actual monarch, hearing of it, got Par
sondas into his power, and kept him a prisoner at his court
for seven years, even then releasing him, not of his own free
will, but on the application of Artaeus, and under the appre-
* "Records of the Past," vol. ix., pp. 91-108; vol. xi.,'pp. 91-8.
t " Transactions of the Bib. Archseolog. Society," vol. vii., pp.
158-9. } " Records of the Past," vol. i., p. 77.
|| 'Ibid., vol. ix., pp. 54, 55. § Herod., i. 183.

NOTICES IN DANIEL, ISAIAH, ETC. 101
tension 'that, if he refused, Artaeus would make war upon
him, and deprive him of his sovereignty.*
One of the most surprising points in the representation of
Babylonian customs which the Scriptural account of the
people brings before us is the severity and abnormal charac
ter of the punishments which were in use among them. To
burn men to death in a furnace of fire, as Nebuchadnezzar
proposed to do with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego
(Dan. iii. 15-23), is so extraordinary a proceeding as to
seem, at first sight, well-nigh incredible. To have men
"cut to pieces," which was the threat held out by the same
monarch on two occasions (Dan. ii. 5 ; iii. 29), is almost as
remarkable a mode of executing them. It might mitigate,
perhaps, the feeling of incredulity with which the ordinary
^European hears of such terrible punishments to call atten
tion to the punitive systems of other Oriental kingdoms.
Take, for instance, the practice of the Persians : —
" We may notice as a blot upon the Persian system and character"
(I have elsewhere observed) "the cruelty and barbarity which was
exhibited in the regular and legal punishments which were assigned
to crim s and offences. The criminal code was exceedingly severe.
The modes of execution were also, for the most part, unnecessarily
cruel. Prisoners were punished by having their heads placed upon a
broad stone, and then having their faces crushed, and their brains
beaten out, by repeated blows with another stone. Ravishers and
rebels were put to death by crucifixion. The horrible punishment of
'the boat' seems to have been no individual tyrant's conception, but
a recognized and legal form of execution. The same may be said also
of burying alive. And the Persian secondary punishments were also,
for the most part, exceedingly barbarous." t
But, besides this, there is direct evidence that the actual
punishments mentioned as in use among the Babylonians of
Nebuchadnezzar's time were known to the Mesopotamian s
of the period, and were upon occasions applied to criminals.
Asshur-bani-pal, the son of Esar-haddon, declares, with re
spect to Saul-Mugina, his own brother, whom he had made
king of Babylon, but who had revolted against him — " Saul-
Mugina, my rebellious brother, who made war with me, pi
the fierce, burning fire thei/ threw him, and destroyed his
life." } Of another rebel, Dunanu, chief of the Gambnlu, he
also states — " Dunanu in Nineveh, over a furnace they placed
him, and consumed him entirely."^ Nay, so natural does
he consider it that rebels should, when taken, suffer death
* Nic. Dam., Fr. 11. t " Ancient Monarchies." vol. ii.. p. 364.
} " Records of the Past," vol. i., p. '."?. § Ibid., vol. ix., p. 56.

102 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
in this way, that, when he has to notice the escape of a cer
tain number of Saul-Mugina's adherents, who had betaken
themselves to flight, he expresses himself thus — " The people,
whom Saul-Mugina, my rebellious brother, had caused to
join him, and who, for their evil deeds, deserved death ...
they did not burn in the fire with Saul-Mugina their lord " *
— -implying that, if they had been caught, this would have
been the mode of their execution. Again, of other rebels,
kept apparently in some stone-quarries from the time of
Sennacherib, his grandfather, Asshur-bani-pal tells us, "I
threw those men again into that pit ; I cut off their limbs,
and caused them to be eaten by dogs, bears, eagles, vultures,
birds of heaven, and fishes of the deep." }
The liberty and publicity allowed to_ women in Baby
lonia, so contrary to usual Oriental custom, which appears
in the Book of Daniel (ch. v. 2, 3, 10), is illustrated by the
traditions concerning Semiramis and Nitocris, and also by
the account, which Herodotus gives, of certain Babylonian
customs of a very unusual character. " Once a year,"
Herodotus tells us, " the marriageable maidens of every vil
lage in the country were required to assemble together into
one place, while all the men stood round them in a circle.
Then a herald (cf. Dan. iii. 4) called up the damsels one by
one and offered them for sale . . . All who liked might
come even from distant villages and bid for the women." }
Again he says, " The Babylonians have one most shameful
custom. Every woman born in the country must, once in
her life, go and sit down in the precinct of Venus and there
consort with a stranger. Many of the wealthier sort, who
are too proud to mix with the others, drive in covered car
riages to the precinct, followed by a goodly train of atten
dants, and there take their station. Where they sit there is
always a great crowd, some coming and others going. Lines
of cord mark out paths in all directions ; and the strangers
pass along them to make their choice. . . . Some women
have, remained three or four years in the precinct." § The
statements of Herodotus on these points are confirmed by
other writers, and there is ample reason to believe that the
seclusion of the sex, so general in other parts of the East,
was abhorrent to Babylonian ideas. ||
* " Records of the Past, vol. i., 1. s. c. t Ibid p. 78
t Herod., i . 19\ § Ibid.j'i. 199.
II See the author's "Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., p. 223.

NOTICES IN DANIEL, ISAIAH, ETC. 103
The free use of wine in Babylonia, not only at royal
banquets (Dan. v. 1-4), but in the ordinary diet of the upper
classes (ib. 1. 5-16), is what we should scarcely have ex
pected in so hot a region, and one wholly unsuited for the
cultivation of the vine. Yet it is quite certain from profane
sources that the fact was as represented in Scripture.
Herodotus tells us of a regular trade between Armenia and
Babylon down the course of the Euphrates, in which the
boats used were sometimes of as much as five thousand
talents burden.* He declares that the staple of the trade
was wine, which, not being produced in the country, was
regulasly imported from abroad year after year. In the
story of Parsondas we find Nannarus abundantly supplied
with wine, and liberal in its use.} The Chaldaean account of
the Deluge represents Hasisadra as collecting it " in recept
acles, like the waters of a river," ior the benefit of those
who were about to enter the ark,} and as pouring " seven
jugs" of it in libation, when, on the subsidence of the waters,
he quitted his shelter. § Quintus Curtius relates that the
Babolonians of Alexander's time were fond of drinking wine
to excess ; their banquets were magnificent, and generally
ended in drunkenness. ||
The employment of war-chariots by the Babylonians,
which is asserted by Jeremiah (Jer. iv. IS; 1. 37), in marked
contrast with his descriptions of the Nedo-Persians, who
are represented as " riders upon horses " (ib. ver. 42 ; com
pare ch. li. 27), receives confirmation from the Assyrian in
scriptions, which repeatedly mention the chariot force as an
important part of the Babylonian army, IT and is also noticed
by Polyhistor, ** Their skill with the bow, also noted by the
same prophet (ch. iv. 29 ; v. 16 ; vi. 23 ; li. 3), has the sup
port of ^Eschylus,}} and is in accordance with the monu
ments, which show us the bow as the favorite weapon of the
monarchs. }}
The pronounced idolatry prevalent in Babylon under the
later kings, which Scripture sets forth in such strong terms
* Herod., i. 194. t See Nic Dam., Fr. 11.
} "Records of the Past," vol. vii., p. 137.
§ Ibid., p. 140. II Q. Curt, v. 1.
1" Records of the Past," vol. i., p. 22; vol. vii., p. 59; vol. xi.,p.
55. ** See the " Fragm, Hist. Graec." of C. Muller, vol. ii.
tt iEscliyl ".Pers.," 1,55.
}} See " Ancient Monarchies," vol. ii., p. 199; vol. ii., p. 214.

104 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
(Jer. 1. 2, 38 ; li. 17, 47, 52 ; Dan. v. 4), scarcely requires the
confirmation which is lent to it by the inscriptions and by
profane writers. Idolatrous systems had possession of all
Western Asia at the time, and the Babylonian idolatry was
not of a much grosser type than the Assyrian, the Syrian,
or the Phoenician. But it is perhaps worthy of remark that
the particular phase of the religion, which the great Hebrew
prophets set forth, is exactly that found by the remains to
have characterized the later empire. In the works of these
writers three Babylonian gods only are particularized by
name — Bel, Nebo, Merodach — and in the monuments of the
period these three deities are exactly those which obtain the
most frequent mention and hold the most prominent place.
The kings of the later empire, with a single exception, had
names which placed them under the protection of one or
other of these three ; and their inscriptions show that to these
three they paid, at any rate, especial honor. Merodach
holds the first place in the memorials of their reigns left by
Nebuchadnezzar and Neriglissar ; Bel and Nebo bear off the
palm in the inscriptions of Nabonidus. While " the great
gods " obtain occasional but scanty notice, as " the holy
gods " do in the Book of Daniel (Dan. iv. 8, 9), Bel, Nebo,
and Merodach alone occur frequently, alone seem to be
viewed, not as local, but as great national deities, alone en
gage the thoughts and receive the adoration of the nation.

NOTICES IN ISAIAH AND JEREMIAH. 105

CHAPTER XII.
FURTHER NOTICES OF BABYLON IN ISAIAH AND JEREMIAH.
The complete destruction of Babylon, and her desola
tion through long ages, is prophesied in Scripture repeatedly,
and with a distinctness and minuteness that are very re
markable. The most striking of the prophecies are the fol
lowing : — •
" Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' ex
cellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom "and Gomorrah. It
shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation
to generation ; neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there, neither shall
the shepherds make their fold there. But wild beasts of the desert
shall lie there ; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and
owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there. And the wild
beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in
their pleasant palaces ; and her time is near to come; and her days
shall not be prolonged." — Isa. xiii. 19-22.
" I will rise up against them, saith the Lord of hosts, and cut off
from Babylon the name, and remnant, and son, and nephew, saith the
Lord. I will also make it a possession for the bittern, and pools oj
water ; and I will sweep it with the besom of destruction, saith the
Lord of hosts."— Isa. xiv. 22, 23.
" Chaldea shall be a spoil; all that spoil her shall be satisfied, saith
the Lord. Because ye were glad, because ye rejoiced, O ye destroyers
of My heritage ; because ye are grown fat, as the heifer at grass, and
bellow as bulls; your mother shall be sore confounded; she that bare
you shall.be ashamed; behold, the hindermost of the nations shall be a
wilderness, a dry land, and a desert. Because of the wrath of the
Lord it shall not be inhabited, but it shall be wholly desolate ; every
one that goeth by Babylon shall be astonished, and hiss at all her
plagues. Put yourselves in array against Babylon round about ; all
ye that bend the bow, shoot at her, spare no arrows ; for she hath sin
ned against the Lord. Shout against her round about ; she hath given
her hand; her foundations are fallen, her walls are thrown down; for
it is the vengeance of the Lord; take vengeance upon her: as she hath
done, do unto her."— Jeb. 1. 10-15.
" A drought is upon her wafers ; and they shall be driedup ; for it
is the land of graven images, and they are mad upon their idols. There-
fore the wildbeasts of the desert, with the wild beasts of the islands,
shall dwell there, and tlie owls shall dwell therein ; and it shall be no

106 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
mqre inhabited forever; neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to
generation. As God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah and the neigh
bor cities thereof, saith the Lord, so shall no man abide there, neither
shall any son of man dwell therein." — Vers. 38-40.
"Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I will plead thy cause, and take
vengeance for thee; and / will dry up her sea, and make her springs
dry. And Babylon shall become heaps, a dwelling-place for dragons,
an astonishment and a hissing, without an inhabitant. They shall
roar together like lions ; they shall yell as lions' whelps. In their heat
I will make their feasts, and 1 will make them drunken, that they may
rejoice, and sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake, saith the Lord. I
will bring them down like lambs to the slaughter, like rams with he-
goats. How is Sheshach taken ! And how is the praise of the whole
earth surprised ! How is Babylon become an astonishment among the
nations ! The sea is come up upon Babylon ; she is covered with the
multitude of the waves thereof. Her cities are a desolation, a dry
land, and a wilderness, a land wherein no man dwelleth, neither doth '
any son of man pass thereby." — Jer. li. 36-43.
The general accuracy of these descriptions has been fre
quently noticed, scarcely a traveler from the time of Pietro
della Valle to the present day having failed to be struck by
it. But it seems worth while to consider, somewhat in detail,
the principal points on which the prophetical writers insist,
and to adduce upon each of them the testimony of modern
observers. First, then, the foundations of Babylon were to fall, her
lofty and broad walls were to be, thrown down (Jer. 1. 15),
and she was not to present the appearance of a ruined city
at all, but simply to " become heaps " (ch. li. 37). It is the.
constant remark of travelers that what are called the ruins
of Babylon are simply a succession of unsightly mounds,
some smaller, some larger — " shapeless heaps of rubbish," *
" immense tumuli," } elevations that might easily be mis
taken for natural hills, and that only after careful examina
tion convince the beholder that they are human construe-"
tions. } The complete disappearance of the walls is parti
cularly noticed ; § and the visitor, || who has alone attempted
to conjecture the position which they occupied, can mark no
* Layard, "Nineveh and Babylon," p. 491.
t Ker Porter, " Travels," vol. ii., p. 294.
t Ker Porter speaks of the ruins as " ancient foundations, more
resembling natural hills in appearance, than mounds covering the re
mains of former great and splendid edifices " ("Travels," vol. ii.,
p. 297). § Layard, "Nineveh and Babylon," pp. 493, 494.
II Oppert, " Expedition Scientifique en Me"sopbtamie," vol. i., pp.
220-234. i . .Ft-

NOTICES IN ISAIAH AND JEREMIAH. 107
more than some half-dozen mounds along the line which he
ventures to assign to them. One main portion of the ruins
is known to the Arabs as the Mujellibe, or " the Overturned,"
¦from the utter confusion that reigns among the broken walls
and blocked passages and deranged bricks .of its interior.
Only a single fragment of a building still erects itself above
the mass of rubbish whereof the mounds are chiefly com
posed,* to show that human habitations really once stood
where all is now ruin, decay, and desolation.
When Babylon was standing in all its glory, with its
greatrampart walls from two hundred to three hundred feet
high, with its lofty palaces and temple-towers, with its "hang
ing gardens," reckoned one of the world's wonders, and even
its ordinary houses from three to four stories high, } it was
a bold prophecy that the whole would one day disappear —
that the edifices would all crumble into ruin, and the decom
posed material cover up and conceal the massive towers and
walls, presenting nothing to the eye but rounded hillocks,
huge unsightly " heaps." It may be that such a fate had
already befallen the great cities of Assyria, which had been
destroyed nearly a century earlier, and which, from the
nature of their materials, must have gone rapidly to decay.
But the lessons of the past do not readily impress them
selves on men ; and it must have required a deep conviction
of God's absolute foreknowledge on the part of the Hebrew
prophets to publish it abroad, on the strength of a spiritual
communication, that such a fate would overtake the greatest
* city of their day — "the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the
Chaldees' excellency "(Isa. xiii. 19) — the city "given to pleas
ure " that dwelt carelessly, that said in her heart, I am, and
none else besides me ; I shall not sit as a widow, neither
shall I know the loss of children " (ch. xlvii. 8).
The second point specially to be noted in the prophecies
concerning Babylon is the prediction of absolute loss of
inhabitants. The positions of important cities are usually so
well chosen, so rich in natural advantages, that population
clings to them ; dwindle and decay as they may, decline as
they may from ' their high estate, some town, some village,
some collection of human dwellings still occupies a portion of
the original site ; their ruins echo to the sound of the human
voice; they are not absolute solitudes. Clusters of Arab
* Layard, "Nineveh and Babylon," p. 484; Rich, " First Memoir,"
p.£5. t Herod., i. 180.

108 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
huts cling about the pillars of the great temples at Luxoi
and Karnak ; the village of Nebbi Yunus crowns the hill
formed by the ruins of Sennacherib's palace at Nineveh ;
Memphis hears the hum of the great city of Cairo ; Tanis,
the capital of Rameses II. and his successor, the Pharaoh of
the Exodus, lives on in the mud hovels of San ; Damascus,
Athens, Rome, Antioch, Byzantium, Alexandria, have re
mained continuously from the time of their foundation towns
of consequence. But Babylon soon became, and has for ages
been, an absolute desert. Strabo, writing in the reign of
Augustus, could say of it that " the great city had become a
great solitude." * Jerome tells us that the Persian kings
had made it into one of their " paradises," or hunting parks.}
Seleucia, Ctesiphon, Bagdad, successively took its place, and
¦were built out of its ruins. There was " no healing of its
bruise." When European travelers began to make their
way to the far East, the report which they brought home was
as follows : — " Babylon is in the grete desertes of Arab'ye,
upon the way as men gone towards the kyngdome of Caldee.
But it is fulle longe sithe ony man neyhe to the towne ;
for it is alle deserte, and fulle of dragons and grete ser-
pentes." } The accounts of modern explorers are similar.
They tell us that " the site of Babylon is a naked and hideous
waste."§ "All around," says one of the latest, "is a blank
waste, recalling the words of Jeremiah — ' Her cities are a
desolation, a dry land, and a wilderness, a land wherein no
no man dwelleth, neither doth any son of man pass there
by.' "|| No village crowns any of the great mounds which
mark the situations of the principal buildings ; no huts nestle
among the lower eminences. A single modern building
shows itself on the summit of the largest tumulus ; it is a
tomb, empty and silent.
Isaiah intensifies his description of the solitude by the
statement, "Neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there, nei
ther shall the shepherds make their fold there " (ch. xiii. 20).
If the entire space contained within the circuit of the ancient
walls be viewed as " Babylon," the words of the prophet
will not be literally true. The black tents of the Zobeide
* Strab., xvi. 1, § 5: — CH fieyah) 7r6r.tr peyaXi) 'ariv ipr/fiia
t " Comment, in Esaiam," vol. v., p. 25, C.
X Maundeville's Travels (1322), quoted by Ker Porter, vol. ii., p
§ Layard, 1. s.c. || Loftus, " Chaldsea and Susiana," p. 20.

¦if .t ,1 .
1 ! <

NOTICES IN ISAIAH AND JEREMIAH. 109
Arabs are often seen dotting the plain — green in spring, yel
low in autumn — which encircles the great mounds, stretch
ing from their base to the far horizon. Much of this space was
no doubt included within the walls of the ancient city ; and
this is traversed by the Arabian from time to time — flocks
are pastured there, and tents pitched there. But if the
term " Babylon " be restricted to the mass of ruins to which
the name still attaches, and which must have constituted
the heart of the ancient town, then Isaiah's words will be
strictly true in their most literal sense. On the actual ruins
of Babylon the Arabian neither pitches his tent nor pastures
his flocks — in the first place, because the nitrous soil pro
duces no pasture to tempt him ; and secondly, because an
evil reputation attaches to the entire site, which is thought
to be the haunt of evil spirits. '
A curious feature in the prophecies, and one worthy of
notice, is the apparent contradiction that exists between two
sets of statements contained in them, one of which attrib
utes the desolation of Babylon to the action of water, while
the other represents the waters as " dried up," and the site
as cursed with drought and barrenness. To the former class
belong the statements of Isaiah, " I will also make it a pos
session for the bittern, and pools of water " (ch. xiv. 23) ;
and " The cormorant (pelican?) and the bittern shall possess
it" (ch. xxxiv. 11) ; together with the following passage of
Jeremiah, " The sea is come up upon Babylon ; she is cov
ered with the multitude of the waves thereof" (ch. li. 42) ;
to the latter such declarations as the subjoined, "A drought
is upon her waters, and they shall be dried up " (Jer. 1. 38) ;
"I will dry up her sea " (ch. li. 36) ; "Her cities are a des
olation, a- dry land, and a wilderness " (ver. 43) ; " the hin-
dermost of the nations shall be a wilderness, a dry land, and
a desert, " (ch. 1. 12) ; " Come down and sit in the dust, O
virgin daughter of Babylon " (Isa. xlvii. 1).
But this antithesis, this paradox, is exactly in accordance
with the condition of things which travelers note as to this
day attaching to the site. The dry, arid aspect of the ruins,
of the vast mounds which cover the greater buildings, and
even the lesser elevations which spread far into the plain at
* "All the people of the country," says Mr. Rich, "assert that it
is extremely dangerous to approach this mound (the Kasr) after
nightfall, on account of the multitude of evil spirits by which it is
haunted " (" First Memoir," p. 27). Compare Ker Porter's " Travels,"
vol. ii., p. 371.

110 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
their base, receives continual notice. "The whole surface
of the mounds appears to the eye," says Ker Porter, " noth
ing but vast irregular hills of earth, mixed with fragments
of brick, pottery vitrifications, mortar, bitumen, etc., while
the foot at every step sinks into the loose dust and rubbish."*
And again " Every spot of ground in sight was totally barren,
and on several tracts appeared the common marks of former
building. It is an old adage that ' where a curse has fallen
grass will never grow.' In like manner the decomposing
materials of a Babylonian structure doom the earth on which
they perish to an everlasting sterility." } On all sides," says
Sir Austen Layard, " fragments of glass, marble, pottery,
and inscribed brick are mingled with that peculiar nitrous
and blanched soil which, bred from the remains of ancient
habitations, checks or destroys vegetation, and renders the
site of Babylon a naked and hideous waste." }
On the other hand, the neglect of the embankments and
canals which anciently controled the waters of the Eu
phrates, and made them a defence to the city and not a danger,
has Consigned great part of what was anciently Babylon to
the continual invasion of floods, which, stagnating in the
lower grounds, have converted large tracts once included
within the walls of the city into lakes, pools, and marshes.
"The country to the westward of Babylon," writes Ker
Porter, " seemed very low and swampy. . . . On turning to
the north, similar morasses and ponds tracked the land in
various parts. Indeed, for a long time after the annual over
flowing of the Euphrates, not only great part of the plain is
little better than a swamp, but large deposits of the waters
are left stagnant in the hollows between the ruins." § " From
the summit of the Birs Nimroud," observes Layard, " I gazed
over a vast marsh, for Babylon is made ' a possession for the
bittern, and pools of water.' " || Of the space immediately
about the chief ruins, Ker Porter notes, " This spot contains
some cultivation, but more water, which sapping element may
well account for the abrupt disappearance of the two parallel
ridges at its most swampy point."1T
Even some of the minor features of the picture, which
* Ker Porter. " Travels," vol. ii , p. 372. t Ibid., vol. ii., p- 391,
X Layard, "Nineveh and Babylon," p. 484.
§ Ker Porter, "Travels," vol. ii., p. 389.
|| " Nineveh and Babylon," p. 300.
1 Ker Porter, " Travels," vol. ii., p. 351.

NOTICES IN ISAIAH AND JEREMIAH. HI
one might naturally have regarded as the mere artistic
filling up of the scene of desolation, which he had to de
pict, by the imagination of the prophet, are found to be in
strict and literal accordance with the actual fact. " The
daughters of the owl shall dwell there, " says Isaiah (ch. xiii.
21), and Jeremiah, " The owls shall dwell therein " (ch. 1.
39). " In most of the cavities of the Babil mound," remarks
Mr. Rich, " there are numbers of bats and owls." * Sir
Austen Layard goes further into particulars. " A large gray
owl," he tells us, " is found in great numbers — frequently
in flocks of nearly a hundred — in the low shrubs among the
ruins of Babylon."} The " owl" of the prophets is thus not
a mere flourish of rhetoric, but a historical reality — an actual
feature of the scene, as it presents itself to the traveler at
the present day.
" Wild beasts of the desert shall lie there " (Isa. xiii.
21) ; " the wild beasts of the desert, with the wild beasts
of the islands, shall dwell there" (Jer. 1 . 39). So it was
prophesied, and so it is. Speaking of the Babil mound. Mr-
Rich observes, " There are many dens of wild beasxs in
various parts, in one of which I found the bones of sheep
and other animals, and perceived a strong smell, like that
of a lion," } " There are several deep excavations into the
sides of the mound," remarks Ker Porter. " These souter-
rains are now the refuge of jackals and other savage animals.
The mouths of their entrances are strewn with the bones of"
sheep and goats ; and the loathsome smell that issues from
niost of them is sufficient warning not to proceed into the
den." § On a visit to the Birs Nimroud, the same traveler
observed through his glass several lions on the summit of
the' great mound, and afterwards found their foot-prints in
the soft soil of the desert at its base. || This feature of the
prophecies also is therefore literally fulfilled. The solitude
deserted by men, is sought the more on that account by the
wild beasts of the country ; and the lion, the jackal, and
probably the leopard, have their lairs in the substruction of
the temple of Belus, and the palace of Nebuchadnezzar.
No doubt there are also features of the prophetic an
nouncements which have not at present been authenticated.
It is impossible to say what exactly was intended by the
* Rich, " First Memoir," p. 30.
t Layard, " Nineveh and Babylon," p. 484, note.
X Rich, " First Memoir," pp. 29, 30.
§ Ker Porter, "Travels," vol. ii., p. 342. || Ibid., pp. 387-8.

112 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
" doleful creatures " and the " satyrs " of Isaiah, which were
to haunt the ruins and to have their habitation among them.
Literally, the " satyrs " are " hairy ones," * — a descriptive
epithet, which is applicable to beasts of the field generally.
The " dragons " of Isaiah (ch. xiii. 22) and Jeremiah (ch. li.
37) should be serpent, which have not been noted recently
as lurking among the " heaps." Sir J. Maundeville.} how
ever, tells us that in his day — the early part of the fourteenth
century — the site of Babylon was "' fulle of dragons and
grete serpentes, " as well as of " dyverse other veneymouse
bestes alle abouten." It is possible that the breed of ser
pents has died out in Lower Mesopotamia ; it is equally
possible that it exists, but has been hitherto overlooked by
travelers. }
On the whole, it is submitted to the reader's judgment x
whether the prophetic announcements of Holy Scripture,
as to what was to befall Babylon, are not almost as import
ant evidence of the truth of the Scripture record as the
histojical descriptions. The historical descriptions have to
be compared with the statements of profane writers, which
may or may not be true statements. The prophetical declara
tions can be placed side by side with actual tangible facts
¦ — facts which it is impossible to gainsay, facts whereto each
fresh observer who penetrates into Lower Mesopotamia is an
additional witness. Travelers to the site of Babylon, even
when in no respect religious men, are, if they have the most.
moderate acquaintance with Scripture, penetrated with a
deep feeling of astonishment at the exactness of the agree
ment between the announcements made two thousand five
hundred years ago and the actual state of things which they
see with their eyes. The fate denounced against Babylon
has been accomplished, not only in all essential points, but
even in various minute particulars. The facts cannot be
disputed — there they are. While historical evidence loses
force the further we are removed from the events recorded,
the evidence of fulfilled prophecy continually gains in strength
as the ages roll on in their unceasing course ; and the modern
searcher after truth possesses proofs of the trustworthiness
of the Word of God which were denied to those who lived
at an earlier period.
* DH,J?jJ> from yytH, "hairy, rough."
t Quoted' by Ker Porter ("Travels," vol. ii., p. 336).
X If the true interpretation of the word used be (as some think)
" jackals," the statement made would be one of those fulfilled most
clearly.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 113

CHAPTER XIII,
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN GENESIS.
"The sons of Ham : Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan "
(Gen. x. 6). "And Mizraim begat Ludim, andAnanim, and Lehabim,
-and Naphtuhim, and Pathrusim, and Casluhim (out of whom came
Philistim), and Caphtorim." — Vers 13, 14.
These are the first notices of Egypt which occur in Holy
Scripture. The word Mizraim, which is here simply trans
literated from the Hebrew (QHVP), is elsewhere, except in
1 Chron. i. 8, uniformly translated by " Egypt," or " the
Egyptians." It undoubtedly designates the country still
known to us as Egypt ; but the origin of the name is obscure.
There is no term corresponding to it in the hieroglyphical
inscriptions, where Egypt is called " Kam," or "Khem,"
" the Black (land)," or " Ta Mera," " the inundation country."
The Assyrians, however, are found to have denominated the
region "Muzur," or "Musr," and the Persians "Mudr," or
"Mudraya," a manifest corruption. The present Arabic
name is " Misr " ; and it is quite possible that these various
forms represent some ancient Egyptian word, which was in
use among the people, though not found in the hieroglyphics.
The Hebrew " Mizraim " is a dual word, and signifies " the
twoMizrs," or "the two Egypts," an expression readily in
telligible . from the physical conformation of the country,
which naturally divides itself into " Upper " and " Lower
Egypt," the long narrow valley of the Nile, and the broad
tract, known as the Delta, on the Mediterranean.
We learn from the former of the two passages quoted
above that the Egyptian people was closely allied to three
others, viz., the Cushite or Ethiopian race, the people known
to the Hebrews as " Phut," and the primitive inhabitants Of
Canaan. The ethnic connection of ancient races is a matter
rarely touched on by profane writers ; but the connection of
the Egyptians with the Canaanites was asserted by Eupole-

J14 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
mus,* and a large body of classical tradition tends to unite
them with the Ethiopians. The readiness with which Ethio
pia received Egyptian civilization } lends support to the
theory of a primitive identity of race ; and linguistic research,
so far as it has been pursued hitherto, is in harmony with the
supposed close connection.
From the other passage (Gen. x. 13, 14) we learn that
the Egyptians themselves were ethnically separated into a
number of distinct tribes, or subordinate races, of whom the
writer enumerates no fewer than seven. The names point to
a geographic separation of the races, since they have their
representatives in different portions of the Egyptian territory.
Now this separation accords with, and explains, the strongly
marked division of Egypt into "nomes," having conflicting
usages and competing religious systems. It suggests the
idea that the " nome " was the original territory of a tribe,
and that the Egyptian monarchy grew up by an aggregation
of nomes, which were not originally divisions of a kingdom,
like counties, but distinct states, like the kingdoms of the
Heptarchy. This is a view taken by many of the historians
of ancient Egypt, derived from the facts as they existed in
later times. It receives confirmation and explanation from
the enumeration of Egyptian races — not a complete one,
probably — -which is made in this passage.
" Abraham went down into Egypt, to sojourn there . . . And
it came to pass that, when Abram was come into Egypt, the Egyp
tians beheld the woman (Sarai) that she was very fair. The
princess a'so of Pharaoh saw her and commended her before Pharaoh ;'
and the woman was taken into Pharaoh's house. And he entreated
Abram well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and he-asses,
and men-servants, and maid-servants, and she-asses, and camels. And
the Lonn plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues, because
of Sarai, Abram's wife. And Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What
is this that thou hast done unto me ? Why dtfst thou not tell me that
she was thy wife ? Why saidst thou, She is my Fister ? So I might
have taken her to me to wife ; now therefore behold thy wife, take her,
and go thy way. And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him;
and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he. had."—
Gbn. xii. 10-20.
The early date of this notice makes it peculiarly interest- .
ing. Whether we take the date of Abraham's visit as circ.
B.C. 1920, with Usher, or, with others,} as a hundred and
* See a fragment of Eupolemus quoted by Polyhistor in C. Miiller'a
" Fr. Hist. Graec," vol. iii., p. 212, Fr. 3. t Herod, ii. 30.
t As Mr. Stuart Poole (" Diet, of the Bible," vol. 1., p. 508).

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 115
sixty years earlier, it seems almost certain that it must have
fallen into the time of that "old Egyptian Empire" which
preceded the great Hyksos invasion," and developed at that
remote date the original Egyptian civilization. Does then
the portraiture of the Egypt of this period resemble that of
the ancient empire, as revealed to us by the monuments ? No
doubt the portraiture is exceedingly slight, the main object
of the writer, apparently, being to record an incident in the
life of Abraham wherein he fell into sin. Still certain points
are sufficiently marked, as the following: — 1. Egypt is a
settled monarchy under a Pharaoh, who has princes (sarim)
under him, at a time when the neighboring countries are oc
cupied mainly by nomadic tribes under petty chiefs. 2.
Reports are brought to Pharaoh by his princes with respect
to foreigners who enter his country. 3. Egypt is already
known as a land of plenty, where there will be corn and
forage when famine has fallen upon Syria. 4. Domesticated
animals are abundant there, and include sheep, oxen, asses,
and camels, but (apparently) no horses. What has profane
history to say on these four points ?
First, then, profane history lays it down that a settled
government was established in Egypt, and monarchical in
stitutions set up, at an earlier date than in any other country.
On this point Herodotus, Diodorus, and the Greek writers
generally, are agreed, while the existing remains, assisted by
the interpretation of Eanetho, point to the same result. It
is not now questioned by any historian of repute but that the
Egyptian monarchy dates from a time anterior to b. c 2000,
while there are writers who carry it back to b. c 5004.* The
title of the monarch, from a very remote antiquity,} was
"Per-ao," or " the Great House,"} which the Hebrews would
naturally represent by Phar-aoh (tl}T\Q)- He was, from the
earliest times to which the monuments go back, supported
by powerful nobles, or "princes," who were hereditary
landed proprietors of great wealth. §
Secondly, a scene in a tomb at Beni Hassan clearly
shows that, under the Old Empire, foreigners on their arrival
in the country, especially if they came with a train of at-
* So Lenormant, following Mariette ("Manuel d'Histoire Anci-
enne,"vol. i., p. 321).
¦„~ t See Canon Cook in the "Speaker's Commentary," vol. i. p. 478.
X Compare the phrase "The Ottoman Porte."
§ Birch, " Egypt from the Earliest Times," pp. 44, 64, etc.

116 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
tendants, as Abraham would (Gen. xiv. 14), were received
at the frontier by the governor of the province, whose secre
tary took down in writing their number, and probably
their description, doubtless for the -purpose of forwarding a
" report " to the court. Reports of this character, belong
ing to later times, have been found, and are among the most
interesting of the ancient documents. It was regarded as
especially important to apprise the monarch of all that hap
pened upon his north-eastern frontier, where Egypt abutted
upon tribes of some considerable strength, whose proceed
ings had to be watched with care.
Thirdly, there is abundant evidence that, under the Old
Empire, Egypt was largely productive, and kept in its
granaries a great store of corn, which was available either
for home consumption, or for the relief of foreigners on ocr
casions of scarcity. In the time of the twelfth dynasty state-
granaries existed, which were under the control of over
seers appointed by the crown, who were officials of a high
dignity, and had many scribes, or clerks, employed in carry
ing out the details of their business.* Even private- per
sons laid up large quantities of grain, and were able in bad
seasons to prevent any severe distress, either by gratuitous
distributions, or by selling their accumulations at a moderate
price.} Fourthly, the domesticated animals in the early times
include all those mentioned as given to Abraham by the
Pharaoh with whom he came into contact, except the camel,
while they do not include the horse. It was once denied }
that the Egypt of Abraham's time possessed asses ; but the
tombs of Ghizeh have shown that they were the ordinary
beast of burden during the pyramid period, and that some
times an individual possessed as many as seven or eight
hundred. No trace has been found of camels in the Egyptian
monuments, and it is quite possible that they were only em
ployed upon the north-eastern frontier ; but the traffic be
tween Egypt and the Sinaitic peninsula, which was certainly
carried on by the Pharaohs of the fourth, fifth, sixth, arid
twelfth dynasties, can scarcely have been conducted in any
other way.§ For Abraham, a temporary sojourner in the
* Birch, " Egypt from the Earliest Times," p. 63.
t " Records of the Past," vol. xii., pp. 63, 64.
} By Von Bohlen in his " Die Genesis erlautert."
§ Compare Gen. xxxvii. 25.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 117
land, about to return through the desert into Palestine,
camels would be a most appropriate present, and thus their
inclusion in the list of animals given is open to no reasonable
objection, though certainly without confirmation from the
remains hitherto discovered in Egypt. The omission from
the list of the horse is, on the contrary, a most significant
fact, since horses, so abundant in Egypt at the date of the
Exodus (Exod. ix. 3 ; xiv. 1. 23 ; xv. 1, 21), were unknown
under the early monarchy,* having been first introduced by
the Hyksos, and first largely used by the kings of the- eigh
teenth dynasty.
"They lifted up their eyes, and looked, and, behold, a company of
Ishmaelites came from Gilead, with their camels, bearing spicery, and
balm, and myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt . . and they sold
Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver : and they
brought Joseph into Egypt . . . and sold him intp Egypt unto Poti-
phar, an officer of Pharaoh's, and captain of the guard." — Gen.
xxxvii. 25-36.
" The first thing here especially noticeable is that Egypt
requires for its consumption large quantities of spices, and
is supplied with them, not by direct commerce with Arabia
across the Red Sea, as we might have expected, but by
caravans of merchants, who reach Egypt through Gilead and
Southern Palestine. Now the large consumption of spices
by the Egyptians is witnessed by Herodotus, who tells
us that, in the best method of embalming, which was em
ployed by all the wealthier classes of the Egyptians, a large
quantity of aromatics, especially myrrh and cassia, was
necessary, the abdomen being not only washed out with an
infusion of them, but afterwards filled up with the bruised
spices themselves.} The Egyptian monuments show that
aromatics were also required for the worship of the gods, es
pecially Ammon. Not only do we continually see the priests
with censers in their hands, in which incense is being, burnt,
but we read of an expedition made tq the land of Punt for
the .express purpose of bringing frankincense and frankin
cense trees " for the majesty of the god Ammon," to " honor
him with resin from the incense-trees, and by vases full of
fresh incense."} It is observable, however, on this partic
ular occasion,- the spicery imported came from Arabia, and
* Birch, pp. 42, 82; Chabas, " Etudes sur l'Antiquite" Historique,"
p. 421. t Herod, ii. 86. i " Records of the Past," vol. x., pp. 18, 19.

118 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
reached Egypt by sea, which may seem at first sight to be
an objection to the existence of a caravan spice trade. But a
consideration of the dates deprives this objection of all force.
The expedition to Punt, which is spoken of as the first that
ever took place, was sent by Queen Hatasu, and belongs
to the eighteenth dynasty — the first of the New Empire.
Joseph was sold into Egypt under the Middle Empire, and
according to tradition,* was prime minister of Apepi, the
" shepherd " king. The sea-trade with Punt for spices not
being at that time open, the spices of Arabia could only be
obtained by land traffic.
The passage further implies the existence in Egypt at
this time of a traffic in slaves, who were foreigners, and
valued at no very high rate. The monuments prove slaves
to have been exceedingly numerous under the Ancient Em
pire. The king had a vast number ; the estates of the nobles
were cultivated by them ; and a large body of hieroduli, or
" sacred slaves," was attached to most of the temples. For
eign slaves seem to have been preferred to native ones, and
wars were sometimes undertaken less with the object of con
quest or subjugation than with that of obtaining a profit by
selling those who were taken prisoners in the slave market.}
We have no direct information as to the value of slaves at
this period from Egyptian sources, but from their abundance
they were likely to be low-priced, and " twenty shekels "
is very much the rate at which, judging from analogy, we
should have been inclined to estimate them.
" The Lord was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man ; and
he was in the house of his master, the Egyptian. And his master
saw that the Lord was with him, and that the Lord made all that he did
to prosper in his hand. And Joseph found grace in his sight, and he
served him ; and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he
had he put into his hand. And it came to pass from the time that he
had made him overseer in his house, and over all that he had, that
the Lord blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake ; and the bless
ing of the Lord was upon all that he had in the house, and in the
field. And he left all that he had in Joseph's hand, and he knew not
aught he had, save the bread which he did eat. And Joseph was a
goodly person and well-favored. And it came to pass after these
things that his master's wife casther eyes upon Joseph; and she said,
Lie with me. But he refused, and said unto his master's wife. Be
hold, my master wotteth not what is with me in the house, and he
hath committed all that he hath to my hand ; -there is none greater in
* Syncellus, " Chronograph," p. 62, B.
t Brugsch, " Hist, of Egypt," vol. i. p. 161.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 119
this house tharil; neither hath he kept back anything .from me but
thee, because thou art his wife; how then can I do this great wicked
ness, and sin against God ? And it came to pass, as she spake to
Joseph day by day, that he hearkened not to her, to lie by her, or to
be with her. And it came to pass about this trine that Joseph went
into the house to do his business, and there was none of the men of
the house there within. And she caught him by his garment,-saying,
Lie with me;^and he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got
him out. And it came to pass when she saw that he had left his gar
ment in her hand, and was fled forth, that she called unto the men of
her house, and spake unto them saying, See he hath brought in an
Hebrew unto us to mock us; he came in unto me to lie with me, and
I cried with a loud voice ; and it came to pass, when he heard that I
lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment with me, and
fled, and got him out. And she laid up his garment by her until his
lord came home. And she spoke unto him according to these words,
saying, The Hebrew servant which thou hast brought unto us came
in unto me to mock me ; and it came to pass, as 1 lifted up my voice
and cried, that he left his garment with me and fled out. And it came
to pass, when his master heard the words of his wife, which she spake
unto him, saying. After this manner did thy servant to me, that his
wrath was kindled. And Joseph's master took him and put him into
the prison." — Gen. xxxix. 2-20.
It has often been observed that this picture is in remark
able harmony with the general tone of Egyptian manners and
customs. The licentiousness of the women provoked the
strictures of the Greek historians, Herodotus and Diodorus.*
The liberty which they enjoyed of intermixing and convers
ing with men, so contrary to the general Oriental practice,
is fully borne out, by the tales of the Egyptian novelists, and
by the scenes represented upon the monuments. The life of
an Egyptian noble, at once a royal official and a landed pro
prietor, with much to manage " in the field " (ver. 5) as well
as in his house, is graphically sketched. The one garment
of the slave is casually indicated by the expression, so often
repeated, " he left his garment in her hand." The extra
ordinary dependence1 placed upon " overseers," or stewards,
who had the entire management of the household, the ac
counts, and the farm or estate— a very peculiar feature of
Egyptian Ufe — is set forth with great force._ But, besides
these isolated points, the whole narrative receives most curi.
ous illustrations from one of the tales most popular among
the Egyptians, which has fortunately descended to our day.
In the story of " The Two Brothers," written by the illus
trious scribe Anna, or Enna, for the delectation of Seti IL,
* Herod, ii. Ill ; Diod. Sic. i. 59.

120 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
when heir-apparent to the throne, we have a narrative which
contains a passage so nearly parallel to this portion of
Joseph's history, that it seems worth while quoting it in
extenso. " There were two brothers," said the writer, " children
of one mother and one father — the name of the elder was
Anepu, the name of the younger Bata. Anepu had a house
and a wife ; and his younger brother was like a son to him.
He it was who provided Anepu with clothes, he it was who
attended upon his cattle, he who managed the ploughing, he
who did all the labors of the fields ; indeed, his younger
brother was so good a laborer, that there was not his equal
in the whole land.
" And when the days had multiplied after this, it was
the wont of the younger brother to be with the cattle day by
day, and to take them home to the house every evening ; he
came laden with all the herbs of the field. The elder brother
sat with his wife, and ate and drank, while the younger was.
in the stable with the cattle. The younger, when the day
dawned, rose before his elder brother, took bread to the field
and called the laborers together to eat bread in the field.
Then he followed after his cattle, and they told him where
all the best grasses grew, for he understood all that they said ;
and he took them to the place where was the goodly herb
age which they desired. And the cattle which he followed
after became exceedingly beautiful. And they multiplied
exceedingly. " Now when the time for ploughing came, his elder
brother said to him, ' Let us take our teams for ploughing,
because the land has now made its appearance [i.e, the inun
dation has subsided], and the time is excellent for plough
ing it. Come thou then with the seed, and we shall accom
plish the ploughing.' Thus he spake. And the younger
brother proceeded to do all that his elder brother told him ;~
and when the day dawned they went to the field with their
[teams ?], and worked at their tillage, and enjoyed them
selves exceedingly at their work.
"But when the days were multiplied after this, they
were in the field together, and the elder brother sent the
younger, saying, ' Go and fetch seed for us from the village.'
And the younger brother found the wife of the elder one sit
ting at her toilet ; and he said to her, ' Arise, and give me
seed, that I may'go back with it to the field, because my elder

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 121
brother wishes me to return without any. delay.' And she
said to him, 'Go, open the bin, and take, thyself, as much as
thou wilt, since my hair would fall by the way.' So the
youth entered the stable, and took a large vessel, for he"
wished to take back a great deal of seed ; and he loaded
himself with grain, and went out with it. And she said to
him, ' How much have you [on your arm] ? ' And he an
swered, 'Two measures of barley, and three measures of
wheat — in all, I have five measures on my arm.' Then she
spake to him saying, ' What great strength is there in thee !
Indeed, I notice thy vigor every day' . . . Then she seized
upon him, and said to him, ' Come and let us lie down for
an instant' . . . The youth became as a panther with fury,
on account of the shameful words which she had addressed
to him. And she herself was alarmed exceedingly. He
spake to her, saying, ' Verily, I have looked upon thee in
-the light of a mother, and on thy husband in the light of a
father. What great abomination is this which thou hast
mentioned to me ! Do not repeat it again, and I will not
speak of it to any one. Verily, I will not permit a word of
it to escape my mouth to any man.'
" He took up his load, and went forth to the field. He
rejoined his elder brother, and they accomplished the task
of their labor. And when the time of evening arrived, the
elder brother returned to his house. His younger brother
[tarried] behind his cattle, laden with all the things of the
field. He drove his cattle before him, that they might lie
down in their stable.
" Behold, the wife of the elder brother was alarmed at
the discourse which she had held. She made herself as one
who had suffered violence from a man ; for she designed to
say to her husband, ' It is thy younger brother who has done
me violence.'
" Her husband returned home at evening, according to
his daily wont. He came to his house, and he found his
wife lying as if murdered by a ruffian. She did not pour
water on his hands, according to her wont ; she did not light
the lamp before him ; his house was in darkness. She was
lying there, all uncovered. Her husband said to her, ' Who
is it that has been conversing with thee?' She replied,
' No one has been conversing with me except thy younger
-brother. When he came to fetch seed for thee he found me
sitting alone, and he said to me, " Come and let us lie down

122 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
for an instant." That is what he said to me. But I did not
listen to him. " Behold, am I not thy mother ; and thy
elder brother, is he not as a father to thee ? " — that is what
I said to him. Then he became alarmed, and did me violence,
that I might not be able to report the matter to thee. But
if thou lettest him live, I shall kill myself.' . . . Then the
elder brother became like a panther ; he made his dagger
sharp, and took it in his hand. And he put himself behind
the door of his stable, in order to kill his younger brother,
when he returned at even to bring the cattle to their
stalls." *
It is unnecessary to pursue the story further. Anepu is
bent on killing his brother, but is prevented. Potiphar,
with a moderation which seems to argue some distrust of
his wife's story, is content to imprison Joseph. Innocence
in both cases suffers, and then triumph in the Egyptian
tale is effected by repeated metempsychosis, and therefore
diverges altogether from the Mosaic history. Still, it is
conceivable that the Egyptian novel, written several cen
turies after Joseph's death, was based upon some traditional
knowledge of the ordeal through which he had passed un
scathed, and the ultimate glory to which he had attained as
ruler of Egypt. }
* See "Records of the Past/' vol. ii., pp. 139-142.
t Bata, after his many transmigrations, is finally reborn as the
child of an Egyptian princess, and rules Egypt for thirty years (Ibid.,
p. 151).

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 123

CHAPTER XIV.
FURTHER NOTICES OF EGYPT IN GENESIS.
The history of Joseph in Egypt after he was thrown into
prison by Potiphar, which occupies the last eleven chapters
of Genesis, is delivered to us at too great length to be con
veniently made the subject of illustration by means of com
ment on a series of passages. We propose therefore to view
it in the mass, as a picture of Egypt at a certain period of
its history, to be determined by chronological considerations,
and then to inquire how far the portraiture given corre
sponds to what is known to us of the Egypt of that time from
profane sources.
The time of Joseph's visit to Egypt is variously given by
chronologers. Archbishop Usher, whose dates are followed
in the margin of the English Bible, as published by authority,
regards him as having resided in the country from b. c.
1729 to b. c. 1635. Most other chronologers place his so
journ earlier: Stuart Poole* from b. c. 1867; Clinton}
from b. c. 1862 to b. c. 1770 ; Hales } from b. c. 1886 to
b. c. 1792. Even the latest of these dates would make his
arrival anterior to the commencement of the New Empire,
which was certainly not earlier than b. c. 1700. If we add
to this the statement of George the Syncellus,§ that all
writers agreed in making hiin the prime minister of one of
the shepherd kings, we seem to have sufficient grounds for
the belief that the Egypt of his time was that of the Middle
Empire or Hyks6s, an Asiatic people who held Egypt in
subjection for some centuries before the great rising under
Aahmes, which re-established a native dynasty upon the old
throne of the Pharaohs.
* "Dictionary of the Bible," vol. i., p. 508.
t " Fasti Hellenici," vol. i., pp. 300, 320.
X "Ancient Chronology," vol. i., p. 104, et seq.
§ " Chronographia," p. 62, B.

124 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Does then the Egypt of the later chapters of Genesis
correspond to this time? It has been argued that it does,
not, because, on the whole, it is so like the Egypt of other
times. We have the king depicted in all his state, with
his signet ring upon his finger (Gen. xli. 42), with chariots
to ride in (ib. 43), and gold chains to give away, possessed
of a " chief butler" and a "chief baker" (ch. xl. 9, 16), able
to imprison and execute whom he will (ib. 3, 22), with
"magicians" and "wise men" for counselors (ch. xli. 8),
rich in flocks and herds (ch. xlvii. 6), despotic over the
people (ch. xli. 34 ; xlvii. 21), with no fear or regard for any
class of his subjects but the priests (ch. xlvii. 22, 26). We
have the priests as a distinctly privileged class, supported
by the monarch in a time of famine, possessed of lands, and
not compelled to cede to the king any right over their lands.
We have mention of the " priest of On," or Heliopolis, as a
magnate of the first class, with whom Joseph did not disdain
to ally himself after he had become grand vizier, and was the
next person in the kingdom to the king (ch. xli. 45, 50).
We have the Egyptian contempt for foreigners noted in the
statement that " the Egyptians might not eat bread with the
Hebrews " (ch. xliii. 32), and their special aversion to herds
men touched on in the observation that " every shepherd is
an abomination unto the Egyptians " (ch. xlvi. 34). We see -
agriculture the main occupation of the people, yet pasturing
of cattle carried on upon a large scale in the Delta (ch. xlvii.
1-6). We find embalming practised, and a special class of
embalmers (ch. 1. 2) ; and it appears that embalmed bodies
are placed within coffins (ib. 26). Chariots and horses are
tolerably common, for when Joseph goes from Egypt to
Canaan to bury his father, there goes up with him " a very
great company, both chariots and horsemen" (ib. 9), while
" horses," no less than cattle and asses, are among, the do
mesticated animals exchanged by the Egyptians generally for
corn (ch. xlvii. 17). But, though horses are in use among
the people, especially the official classes and the rich, asses
are still the main beasts of burden, and are alone employed
in the conveyance of commodities between Egypt and
Canaan (ch. xiv. 23). Wheeled vehicles are known," and are
used for the conveyance of women and children (ib. 19-21).
Such are the leading features of the Egypt depicted by the
writer of Genesis in these chapters. The description is said
to be too thoroughly Egyptian to be a true representation

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 125
of a time when a foreign dynasty was in possession, and the
nation was groaning under the yoke of a conqueror. *
The general answer to this objection seems to be that,"
as so often happens when a race of superior is overpowered
by one of inferior civilization, the conquerors rapidly as
similated themselves in most respects to the conquered,
affected their customs, and even to some extent adopted
their prejudices. M. Chabas remarks that the Hyksos, or
shepherd kings, after a time became " Egyptianized." } " The
science and the usages of Egypt introduced themselves
among them. They surrounded themselves with learned
men, built temples, encouraged statuary, while at the same
time they inscribed their own names on the statues of the
Old Empire, which were still standing, in the place of those
of the Pharaohs who had erected them. It is this period of
civilization which alone has left us the sphinxes, the statues,
and the inscriptions which recall the art of Egypt ; the man
ners of the foreign conquerors had by this time been sensibly
softened." } And again, " Apepi, the last shepherd king,
was an enlightened prince, who maintained a college of men
skilled in sacred lore, after the example of the Pharaohs of
every age, and submitted all matters of importance to them
for examination before he formed any decision." § The
Pharaoh of Joseph, according to the Syncellus, || was this
very Apepi, the last shepherd king, the predecessor of the
Aahmes, who, after a long and severe struggle, expelled the
Hyks6s, and re-established in Egypt the rule of a native
dynasty. Thus, it was to have been expected that, if Joseph lived
under Apepi, or indeed under any one of the later shepherd
kings, a description of the Egypt of his day would greatly
resemble any true description of that country either in earlier
or later times, and possess but few distinctive features. Still
some such distinctive features might have been expected to
show themselves, and it must be our object now to inquire,
first, what they would be ; and secondly, how far, if at all,
they appear in the narrative.
First, then, what distinctive features would there be sep
arating and marking off the Second Empire from the First,
* Canon Cook in the "Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 449.
t " Les Pasteurs en Egypte," p. 30. X Ibid., p. 3a
§ Ibid., p. 31. Brugsch and Lenormant take the same view.
|| " Chronographia," p. 62, B.

126 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
the Hyks6s rule from that of the old Pharaohs who built the
Pyramids, set up the first obelisks, and accomplished the
great works in the Fayoum ? In the first place, their resi
dence would be different. The pyramid kings lived at Mem
phis, above the apex of the Delta, in the (comparatively speak
ing) narrow valley of the Nile, before the river enters on
the broad tract which it must have gradually formed by its
own deposits. The great monarchs of the obelisk and
Fayoum period — those assigned by Manetho to his eleventh,
twelfth, and thirteenth dynasties — lived at Thebes, more
than three hundred miles further up the course of the Nile,
in a region from which the Delta could only be reached by
a lengthy and toilsome journey along the river bank, or by a
voyage down its channel. The Hyksos monarchs, on the
other hand, fixed their residence in the Delta itself; tbey
selected Tanis — an ancient Egyptian town of considerable
importance — for the main seat of their court.* While
maintaining a great fortified camp at Avaris, on their eastern
frontier, where they lived sometimes, they still more favored
the quiet Egyptian city on the Tanitic branch of the Nile,
where they could pass their time away from the sound of
arms, amid ancient temples and sanctuaries dedicated to
various Egyptian gods, which they allowed to stand, if they
did not even use them for their own worship. The Delta
had never previously been the residence of Egyptian kings,
and it did not again become their residence until the time of
the nineteenth dynastjr, shortly before the Exodus.
A second peculiarity of the Hyksos period, belonging
especially to its later portion, is to be found in the religious
views professed, proclaimed, and enjoined upon subject
princes. Apepi, according to the MS. known as " the first
Sallier papyrus," made a great movement in Lower Egypt
in favor of monotheism. Whereas previously the shepherd
kings had allowed among their subjects, if they had not even
practised themselves, the worship of a multitude of gods,
Apepi " took to himself " a single god " for lord, refusing to '
serve any other god in the whole land." } According to the
Egyptian writer of the MS., the name under which he wor
shiped his god was " Sutech " ; and some critics have sup
posed that he chose this god out of the existing Egyptian
* Brugsch, " History of Egypt," vol. i., pp. 236-7, 1st edition.
t See " Records of the Past," vol. viii., p. 3.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 127
Pantheon, because he was the god of the North, where his
own dominion especially lay.* But Sutech, though undoubt
edly he had a place in the Egyptian Pantheon from very
ancient times,} seems to have been essentially an Asiatic god,
the special deity of the Hittite nation,} with which there is
reason to believe that the shepherd kings were closely con
nected. Apepi, moved by a monotheistic impulse, selected
Sutech, we should suppose, rather out of his own gods than
out of the Egyptian deities, and determined that, whatever
had been the case previously, henceforth he would renounce
polytheism, and worship one only lord and god, long known
to his nation, and to his own ancestors,§ under the name
above mentioned. There is reason to believe that he did
not identify him with the Egyptian god, Set, or Sutech, but
rather with some form or other of the Egyptian sun-god, or
else with their sun-gods generally, since he appointed sacri
fice to be made to Sutech, " with all the rites that are per
formed in the temple of Ra-Harmachis," || who was one of
these gods, and required the vassal king of Thebes, Ra-
Sekenen, to neglect the worship of all the other gods honored
in his part of Egypt, excepting Ammon-Ra, who was another
of them. Sutech, among the Hittites, seems to bave been
equivalent to Baal, and was certainly a sun-god, IT probably
identified with the material sun itseK, viewed as having also
a spiritual nature, and as the creator and sustainer of the
universe. Apepi's great temple of Sutech at Tanis was the
natural outcome of his exclusive worship of this god, and
showed forth in a tangible and conspicuous form the earnest
ness of his piety.
Among the changes in manners and customs belonging
to the Middle Empire, there is one which cannot be gainsaid
—the introduction of the horse. The horse, which is wholly
absent from the remains, written or sculptured, of the Old
Empire, appears as well known and constantly employed in
the very earliest records of the New, and must consequently
have made its appearance in the interval. Hence it has been
argued by those best acquainted with the ancient remains
that the military successes of the Hyksos, and especially
* Chabas, "LesPasteurs enEgypte," p. 35.
t Mariette, " Lettre a M. le Vicomte de Rouge"," in the Revue
Archeologique, vol.v., p. 303.
1 "Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 31. § Ibid., p. 36.
II Ibid., vol. viii., p. 3.
T " Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 28, par. 8.

128 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
their conquest of Egypt, were probably the result to a con
siderable extent of their invading the country with a chariot
force and with cavalry at a time when the Egyptians fought
wholly on foot. Neither horses nor chariots, nor even carts,
where known under the Pharaohs of the Old Empire ; they
were employed largely from the very beginning of the New
Empire, the change having been effected by the empire
which occupied the intervening space.
Before proceeding further, let us consider how these
characteristics suit the Egypt of Joseph. First, then, the
indications of Genesis, though not very precise, decidedly
favor the view that the king is residing in the Delta. He
receives in person the brethren of Joseph on their arrival
in the land, even has an interview with the aged Jacob him
self (Gen. xlvii. 7-10), whom his son would certainly aot
have presented to him if the court had not been near at
hand. Goshen, the eastern portion of the Delta, is chosen
for the residence of the family, especially because, dwell
ing there, they will be " near to Joseph " (ch. xiv. 10), who
must have been in constant attendance on the monarch.
" All the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his house, and
all the elders of the land of Egypt " (ch. 1. 7) would scarcely
have accompanied the body of Jacob to the cave of Mach-
pelah unless the court had been residing in Lower Egypt.
Bishop Harold Browne, who writes as a common-sense critic,
and not as an Egyptologist, well observes, " Joseph placed
his brethren naturally on the confines of Egypt nearest to
Palestine, and yet near himself. It is probable that Memphis
or Tanis was then the metropolis of Egypt."* But both be
fore and after the shepherd kings the capital for many hun
dred years was Thebes.
Secondly, there are indications in the later chapters of
Genesis that the Pharaoh of the time was a monotheist. Not
only does he make no protest against the pronounced mono
theism of Joseph (ch. xli. 16, 25, 32), as Nebuchadnezzar
does against that of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego,
when he draws the conclusion from their escape that " no
other god can deliver after this sort," but he uses himself the
most decidedly monotheistic language when he says to his
nobles, " Can we find such a one as this is — a man in whom
the Spirit of God is? " ib. 38), and again when he addresses
* "Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 215.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 129
Joseph as follows : " Forasmuch as God hath showed thee
aU this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art " (ib.
39). No such distinct recognition of the unity of God is
ascribed either to the Pharaoh of the Old Empire who re
ceived Abraham (ch. xii. 15-20), or to those of the New
Empire who came into contact with Moses (Exod. i-xiv.).
The contrast between the Egypt of Abraham's time and
that Of the time of Joseph in respect of horses has often been
noticed. As the absence of horses from the list of the
presents made to Abraham (ch. xii. 16) indicates with suffi
cient clearness the time of the Old Empire, so the mention
of horses, chariots, and wagons in connection with Joseph
(ch. xli. 43 ; xlvi. 29 ; xlvii. 17 ; 1. 9) makes his time either
that of the Middle Empire or the New. The fact that the
possession of horses does not seem to be as yet very com
mon points to the Middle Empire as the more probable of
the two.
Certain leading features, moreover, of the narrative, which
have been reckoned among its main difficulties, either cease
to be difficulties at all, or are reduced to comparative insigni
ficance, if, in accordance with tradition and with the most
probable chronology, we regard Joseph as the minister of a
shepherd king.
The native Egyptian monarchs had an extreme jealousy
of their Eastern neighbors. The East was the quarter from
which Egypt lay most open to invasion, and from the later
times of the Old Empire down to the twentieth dynasty in
the New there was continual fear, when a native dynasty sat
upon the throne, lest immigrants from these parts should by
, degrees filch away from Egypt the possessions of the Delta.
Small bodies of Asiatics, like those who came with Abraham,
or the thirty-seven Amu under Abusha,* might occasionally
1 be received with favor, to sojourn or to dwell in the land ;
but larger settlements would have been very distasteful. An
early king of the twelfth dynasty built a wall " to keep off
the Sakti," as the Asiatics of these parts were called,} and
such powerful monarchs as Seti I. and Rameses II. followed
his example. The only kings who were friendly to the
Asiatics, and likely to receive a large body of settlers with
favor, were the Hyks6s, Asiatics themselves, whom every such
settlement strengthened against the revolt, which always
* Brugsch, "History of Egypt," vol. i., p. 157.
t "Records of the Past," vol. vi., p. 135,

130 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
threatened, of their Egyptian subjects. Now the family
and dependants of Jacob were a large body of settlers. Abra
ham had three hundred and eighteen adult male servants
born in the house (Gen. xiv. 14). Jacob's attendants, when
he returned from serving Laban, formed " two bands " (Gen.
xxxii. 10), literally "two armies." The number of those who
entered Egypt with Jacob has been reasonably calculated at
" several thousands."* To place such a body of foreigners
" in the best of the land " (ch. xlvii. 6, 11), on the eastern
frontier, where they could readily give admission to others,
is what no king of either the Old or the New Empire would
have been likely to have done ; but it is exactly what might
have been expected of one of the Hyksos.
Again, the sudden elevation of a foreigner from the slave
condition to the second place in the kingdom, the putting
him above all the Egyptians and making them bow down to
him (ch. xli. 43), and the giving him in marriage the daughter
of the high-priest of Heliopolis (ib. 45), though perhaps
within the prerogative of any Egyptian king, who, as a god
upon earth, — " son of the sun," — could do no wrong, are yet
exceedingly unlikely things, if Egypt were in its normal
condition. It is far from paralleled by the " story of Saneha,"
even if that story is a true one, and not a novelette ;
for Saneha's rise is very gradual ; he is a courtier in- his
youth ; he commits an offence, and flies to a foreign land,
where he passes the greater part of his life ; it is not until
he is an old man that his pardon reaches him, and he returns,
and is restored to favor ; nor does he rise even then to a
rank at all equal to that of Joseph.} Joseph's history would
have been " incredible " if Egypt had never had foreign
rulers.} But a Hyksds monarch would be trammeled by
none of the feelings or restraints natural to an Egyptian. A
foreigner himself, he would be glad to advance a foreigner,
would not be very careful of offending a high-priest, and
would feel more confidence in committing important affairs
to a stranger wholly dependent upon himself than to a native
who might at any time turn traitor.
Our limits will not allow us to treat this point at greater
length. It is necessary, however, before concluding this
chapter, to notice briefly two objections which Genesis
* Kurtz, "History of the Old Covenant," vol. ii., p. 149, E. T,
t " Records of the Past," vol. vi., pp. 135-150.
J Stuart Poole in Smith's " Diet, of the Bible," vol. i., p. 509.

NOTICES IN GENESIS. 131
is supposed to offer to the traditional view of Joseph's place
in Egyptian history. The first is the designation of Goshen
in one passage (ch. xlvii. 11) as " the land of Rameses." Now
Rameses is a name which first appears in Egypt under the
New Empire, and a land " of Rameses " is not likely to have
existed until there had been a monarch of the name, which
first happened under the nineteenth dynasty. But it is quite
possible, as Bishop Harold Browne suggests, that the writer
of Genesis may have used the phrase, " land of Rameses,"
by anticipation,* to designate the tract so called in his day.
This would be merely as if a modern writer were to say that
the Romans under Julius Csesar invaded England, or that
Pontius Pilate, when recalled from Judaea, was banished to
France. The other objection is drawn from the statement that in
Joseph's time " every shepherd was an abomination to the
Egyptians " (ch. xlvi. 34). This is said to be " quite conclu- <
sive" against the view that the Pharaoh of Joseph was a
shepherd king.} But it is admitted that the prejudice was
anterior to the invasion of the Hyks6s, and appears on the
monuments of the Old Empire. It would certainly not have
been lessened by the Hyks6s conquest, nor can the shepherd
kings be supposed to have been ignorant of it. If it was a
caste prejudice, it would have been quite beyond their power
to put down ; and nothing would have been left for them but
to bear with it, and make the best of it. This is what they
seem to have done. When men of the nomadic races were
feasted at the Hyksos court, they were feasted separately
from the Egyptians (ch. xliii. 32) ; and when a nomad tribe
had to be located on Egyptian territory, it was placed in a
position which brought it as little as possible into contact
with the natives. Pharaoh had already put his own herds
men in Goshen (ch. xlvii. 6), with the view of isolating them.
In planting the Israelite settlers there, he did but follow the
same principle.' Like a wise ruler, he arranged to keep
apart those diverse elements in the population of his country
which were sure not to amalgamate. i
* " Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 221.
t Ibid., vol. i. p. 449, note 33.

132 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER XV.
THE NOTICES OF EGYPT IN EXODTJS.
" Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not
Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the chil
dren of Israel are more and mightier than we ; come on= let us deal
wisely with them, lest they multiply, and it come to pass that, when
there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight
fcgainst us, and so get them up out of the land. Therefore they did
set over them taskmasters, to afflict them with their burdens. And
they built for Pharaoh treasure-cities, Pithom and Raamses."— Exon.
i. 8-19. The question of the period of Egyptian history into
which the severe oppression of the Israelites, and their
" exodus " from Egypt, are to be regarded as falling, is one
of no little interest, and at the same time of no little diffi
culty. In the last chapter we saw reason for accepting the
view that the Pharaoh whom Joseph served was Apepi, the
last king of the seventeenth (shepherd) dynasty. In order,
however, to obtain from this fact any guidance as to the
dynasty, and still more as to the kings, under whom the
events took place which are related in the first section of the
Book of Exodus (chs i.-xiv.), we have to determine, first of
all, what was the length of the Egyptian sojourn. But here
we find ourselves in the jaws of a great controversy. Taking
the Authorized Version as our sole guide, we should indeed
think the matter plain enough, for there we are told (ch. xii.
40, 41), that "the sojourning of the children of Israel, who
dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years ; and it
came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years,
even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the
Lord went out from the land of Egypt." If we consult the
Hebrew original, the plainness and certainty seem increased,
for there we find that the words run thus : — " The sojourn
ing of the children of Israel, which they sojourned in Egypt

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 133
was four hundred and thirty years," which seem to leave no
loophole of escape from the conclusion that the four hundred
and thirty years mentioned are those of Israel's stay in
Egypt. And it is quite admitted that thus far — if this were
all the evidence — there could be no controversy upon the
subject. Doubt arises from the fact that in the two most
ancient versions of Exodus that we possess the passage runs
differently. We read in the Septuagint, " The sojourning
of the children of Israel, which they sojourned in Egypt and
in the land of Canaan, was four hundred and thirty years ;"
and in the Samaritan version, " The sojourning of the chil
dren of Israel and of their fathers, which they sojourned in
the land of Canaan and in Egypt, was four hundred and
thirty years." Nor is this the whole. St. Paul, it is observed,
writing to the Galatians (ch. iii. 17), makes the giving of the
law from Mount Sinai "four hundred and thirty years after,"
not the going down into Egypt, but the entering into cove
nant with Abraham. And it is further argued that the gene
alogies for the time of the stay in Egypt are incompatible
with the long period of four hundred and thirty years, and
require the cutting down of the time to the dimensions im
phed by the Septuagint and Samaritan translations. This
time is two hundred and fifteen years, or exactly half the
other, since it was two hundred and fifteen years from the
promise made to Abraham until the entering of the Israel
ites into Egypt.
Now, if the Exodus was but two hundred and fifteen
years after any date in the reign of Apepi, it must have fallen
within the period assigned by Manetho and the monuments
to the eighteenth dynasty. But if we are to substitute four
hundred and thirty years for two hundred and fifteen, it
must have belonged rather to the latter part of the nine
teenth. Let us consider, therefore, whether on the whole
the weight of argument is in favor of the shorter or the
longer term of years.
First, then, with regard to the versions. The Hebrew
text must always be considered of paramount authority, un
less there is reason to suspect that it has been tampered with.
But, in this case, there is no such reason. Had the clause
inserted by the LXX. existed in the Hebrew original, there
is no assignable ground on which we can imagine it left out.
There is, on the other hand, a readily conceivable ground for
the insertion of the clause by the LXX. in their anxiety' to

134 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
harmonize their chronology with the Egyptian system preva
lent in their day. Further, the clause has the appearance
of an insertion, being irrelevant to the narrative, which is
naturally concerned at this point with Egypt only. The
Samaritan version may appear at first sight to lend the Sep
tuagint confirmation; but a. little examination shows the
contrary. The Samaritan translator has the Septuagint
before him, but is dissatisfied with the way in which his
Greek predecessor has amended the Hebrew text. His version
is an amendment of the Greek text in two points. First, he
sees that the name " children of Israel " could not properly
be given to any but the descendants of Jacob, and therefore
he inserts the clause " and of their fathers." Secondly, he
observes that the LXX. have inverted the historical order of
the' sojourns in Egypt and in Canaan, placing that in Egypt
first. This he corrects by a transposition. No one can sup
pose that he derived his emendations from the Hebrew.
He evolved them from his inner consciousness. He gave his,
readers, not what Moses had said, but what, in his opinion,
he ought to have said.
Secondly, with respect to St. Paul's statement to the Gal
atians, it is to be borne in mind that he wrote to Greek-
speaking Jews, whose only Bible was the Septuagint Version,
and that he could not but follow it unless he was prepared
to intrude on them a chronological discussion, which would
in no way have advanced his argument. His argument is
that the law having been given long after the covenant
made with Abraham, could not disannul it ; how long after
was of no consequence, whether four hundred and thirty or
six hundred and forty-five years.
Thirdly, the genealogies of the period, as given in the
Pentateuch, contain undoubtedly no more than six names —
in fact, vary between four and six — which, taken by itself, is
doubtless an argument for the shorter period. But (a) the
Jews constantly abbreviated genealogies by the omission of
a portion of the names (Ezra vii. 1-5 ; Matt. i. 2-16 ; comp. 1
Chron. ix 4-19 with Neh. xi. 4-22) ; and (b) there is one
geneology belonging to the period, given in 1 Chron. vii.
22-27, that of Joshua, which contains ten names. The
Hebrews, at this portion of their history, and indeed to a
considerably later date, reckoned a generation at forty years,
so that the ten generations from Jacob to Joshua, who was
fully grown up at the time of the Exodus (Exod. xvii. 9-13),

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 135
would cover four hundred years, or not improbably a little
more. Another argument in favor of the longer date is derivable
from the terms of the announcement made to Abraham with
respect to the Egyptian servitude : — " Know of a surety, that
thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and
shall serve them, and they shall afflict them four hundred
years ; and also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I.
judge ; and afterward shall they come out with great sub
stance " (Gen. xv. 13, 14). In this prophecy but one land is
spoken of, and but one people ; this people is to afflict Israel
for four hundred years ; it is then to be judged ; and, after
the judgement, Israel is to " come out," to come out, more
over, with great substance. Nothing is said that can by any
possibility allude to the Canaanites, or the land of Canaan.
One continuous affliction in one country, and by one people,
lasting in round numbers — four hundred years, is announced
with the utmost plainness.
But the crowning argument of all, which ought to be re
garded as completely settling the question, is that derivable
from the numbers of the Israelites on entering and on quitting
Egypt. Their fmmbers, indeed, on entering, cannot be defi
nitely fixed, since they Went down to Egypt "with their
households " (Exod. i. 1), and these, to judge by that of
Abraham (Gen. xiv. 14), were very numerous. Still no writer
has supposed that altogether the settlers exceeded more than
a few — say two or three — thousands* On quitting Egypt,
they were, at the lowest estimate, two millions. What time,
then, is required, under favorable circumstances, for the ex
pansion of a body (say) of two thousand persons into one a
thousand times that number ?
There are writers who have argued that population may
double itself in the space of fifteen, nay, in that of thirteen.
years.} But I know of no proved instance of the kind where
there has not been a large influx through immigration. No
increase, or, at any rate, no important increase, of the
Israelites in Egypt can be assigned to this cause. They mul
tiplied, as is distinctly implied in the narrative, in the ordi
nary way, without foreign accretion. It is reasonable,
* Kurtz (" History of the Old Covenant," vol. ii.. p. 149) uses the
vague expression, "several thousands." Dean Payne Smith, in his
" Brampton Lectures " (p. 89), suggests three thousand.
t Clinton, " Fasti Hellenici," vol. i., p. 294.

136 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
therefore, to apply to them Mr. Malthus's law for the natural
increase of population by descent under favorable circum
stances. Now this is a doubling of the population, not every
thirteen, or every fifteen, but every twenty-five years.* By
this law two thousand persons would, in two hundred and
fifteen years, have multiplied to the extent, not of two mil
lions, but of less than one million. The law, moreover, only
acts where population is scanty, where the sanitary circum
stances are favorable, and where the means of subsistance
are wholesome, and readily obtained. Long before the time
that the Israelites reached a quarter of a million, most of the
artificial checks which tend to keep down the natural increase
of population would have begun to operate among them.
The territory assigned them was not a very large one, and
they were not its sole inhabitants (Gen. xlvii. 6 ; Exod. iii. 22,
xii. 31-36). It would soon be pretty densely peopled. The
tasks in which they were employed by their Egyptian lords,
from the time that the severe oppression began (Exod. i. 13,
14), could not be favorable to health. They were no doubt
sufficiently well fed, as slaves usually are, but not on a very
wholesome dietary (Num. xi 5). The rate of increase would
naturally fall under these circumstances, and it may ere long
have taken them fifty years to double their numbers, which
is about the rate now existing among ourselves. Supposing
them to have been two thousand at the first, and to have
doubled their numbers at the end of the first twenty-five years,
but to have required five years longer for each successive du
plication until the full term of fifty years was reached, it
would have taken them four hundred and twenty-five years
to reach the amount of two millions.
Altogether it is perfectly clear that an increase which
is abnormal, and requires some explanation, if it be regarded
as occupying the space of four hundred and thirty years,
must be most unlikely, if not impossible, to have occurred
in half that time.
If then we take four hundred and thirty years from the
early part of Apepi's reign, and follow the line of the
Egyptian kings, as we find it in Manetho, or in the monu
ments, we are carried on beyond the time of the eighteenth
dynasty into that of the nineteenth, and have to look for the
monarchs mentioned in Exodus among those who reigneii
* "Essay on Population," vol. i., p. 8 ; " Encyclopaedia Britan-
nica," vol. xviii., p. 340.

NOTTCES IN EXODUS. 137
in Egypt between the close of the eighteenth dynasty and
the commencement of the twentieth.
Before proceeding, however, with this inquiry, it seems
natural to ask, Is there no tradition with respect to the time
of the Exodus in Egyptian history, as we found that there
was with respect to the time of Jo'seph ; and if there is any
such tradition, what is it ?
The Egyptian tradition was delivered at great length by
Manetho, whose account is preserved to us in Josephus.* It
was also reported more briefly by Chaeremon.} It placed
the Exodus in the reign of an " Amenophis," who was the
son of a " Rameses," and the father of a " Sethos." Each
of these two facts belong to one " Amenophis " only out of
the four or five in Manetho's lists, and we have thus a double
certainty that he intended the monarch of the nineteenth
dynasty, who was the son and successor of Rameses II .,
commonly called " Rameses the Great," and was himself suc
ceeded on the throne by his son, Seti-Menephthah, or Seti
IL, about b. c. 1300, or a little earlier. There is no other
Egyptian tradition, excepting one reported by George the
Syncellus,} which is wholly incompatible with the univer
sally allowed synchronism of Joseph with Apepi, and quite
unworthy of consideration ; viz., that the Exodus took place
under Amasis (Aahmes), the first king of the eighteenth
dynasty, who was probably contemporary with the later
years of Joseph himself.
Manetho's tradition then, harmonizing, as it does, with
the chronological considerations above adduced, which would
place the Exodus towards the end of the nineteenth dynasty,.
seems to deserve our accedtance, and indeed has been ac
cepted by the great bulk of modern Egyptologists, as by
Brugsch, Birch, Lenormant, Chabas, and others.§ Allowing
it, we are able to fix definitely on the three Pharaohs especi
ally concerned in the severe oppression of the Israelites,
and thus to give a vividness and realism to our conception
of the period of history treated of in Exod. i.-xiv. which '
add greatly, to the interest of the narrative.
* Joseph., " Contra Apion," i. § 26. t Ibid., § 32.
X " Chronographia, p. 62, B.
§ See Brugsch, " History of Egypt," vol." ii. p. 125; Birch, " Egypt
from the Earliest Times," p. 133; Lenormant, "Manuel d'Histoire.
Ancienne de l'Orient," vol. ii., p. 292, edition of 1882; Chabas, "Re-
cherches pour servir a l'histoire de la Xixme Dynastie," p. 157.

138 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
If Menephthah I., the son and successor of Rameses IL,
was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, it follows necessarily that
his father, the great Rameses, was the king of Exod. ii., from
whom Moses fled, and after whose death he was directed to
quit Midian and return into Egypt for the purpose of de
livering his brethren (ch. ii. 23 ; iv. 16). But as Moses was
eighty years old at this time (ch. vii, 7), it is evident that
the Pharaoh from whom he fled cannot be the same with the
one who, more than eighty years previously, gave the order
for the destruction of the Hebrew male children (ch. i. 22).
The narrative of' Exodus must speak of three Pharaohs, of
the first in ch. i., of the second in ch. ii., and of the third in
chs. v.-xiv. In the second of these is Rameses IL, the father
of Menephthah I., the first must be Seti. I., the father of
Rameses II.
Now, it happens that Seti I. and Rameses II. are among
the most distinguished of all the Egyptian monarchs, great
warriors, great builders, setters-up of numerous inscriptions.
We know them almost better than any other Egyptian kings,
are familiar with their very countenances, have ample means
of forming an estimate of their characters from their own
words. Seti I. may well be the " new king, which knew
not Joseph." He was the second king of a new dynasty, un
connected with either of the dynasties with which Joseph
had been contemporary. He came to the throne at the time
when a new danger to Egypt had sprung up on the north
eastern frontier, and when consequently it was natural that
fear should be felt by the Egyptian ruler lest, " when any
war fell out, the people of Israel should join unto Egypt's
enemies, and fight against the Egyptians, and so get them
up out of the land" (ver. 10). The Hittites had become
masters of Syria, and were dominant over the whole region
from Mount Taurus to Philistia. " Scarcely was Seti settled
upon the throne, when he found himself menaced on the
north-east by a formidable combination of Semitic wi,th
Turanian races, which boded ill for the tranquility of his
kingdom." * He was occupied in a war with them for some
years. At its close he engaged in the construction, or
reparation, of a great wall for the defence of the eastern
frontier. It would be natural that, in connection with this
wall, and as a part of his general system for the protection
* Rawlinson, "History of Ancient Egypt," vol. ii., p. 287.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 139
of the frontier, he should build " treasure-cities" (ver. 11),
or more properly " store-cities," i.e., arsenals and magazines.
That he should name one of these after a god whom he was
in the habit of honoring,* and the other after his father, or
after his son, whom he early associated, is not surprising.
The ardor for building which characterized him would ac
count for his employing the Israelites so largely " in mortar,
and in brick" (ver. 14), and in the construction of edifices.
The severity of his oppression is quite in accordance with the
cruelty which he exhibited in his wars, and of which he
boasts in his inscriptions.}
Rameses II. was associated on the throne by his father
when he was ten or eleven years of age. The two kings
then reigned conjointly for about twenty years. Rameses
outlived his father forty-seven years, and probably had the
real direction of the government for about sixty years.
There is no other reign in the New Empire which reaches
nearly to the length of his. He was less of a warrior than
his father, and more of a builder. Among his principal
works was the completion of the city of Rameses (Pi-
Ramesu), began by his father, and made by Rameses the
residence of the court, and one of the chief cities of the em
pire. He appears also to have completed Pithom (Pi-Tum),
and to have entirely built many other important towns. All
his works were raised by means of forced labor ; and for
the purpose of their construction he required an enormous
mass of human material, which had to be constantly em
ployed under taskmasters in the most severe and exhausting
toil, under a burning sun, and with few sanitary precautions.
M. Lenormant says of him and his " great works " } : — " Ce
n'est qu'avec un veritable sentiment d'horreur que l'on peut
songer aux milliers de captifs qui durent mourir sous le baton
des gardes-chiourmes, ou bien victimes des fatigues exces-
sives et des privations de toute nature, en elevant en quality
de forcats les gigantesques constructions auxquelles se
plaisait I'insatiable orgueil du monarque egyptien. Dans
les monuments du regne de Ramses il n'y a pas une pierre,
pour ainsi dire, qui n'ait coute une vie humaine." Such was
the character of the monarch under whom the Israelites are
said to have " sighed by reason of their bondage," and to
* Birch, " Egypt from the Earliest Times," p. 119.
t " History of Ancient Egypt," vol. ii., pp. 288-291.
J " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. i. 423.

140 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
have " cried " so that " their cry came up to God by reason
of their bondage ; and God heard their groaning, and God
remembered His covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and
with Jacob ; and God looked upon the children of Israel,
and God had respect unto them " (Exod. ii. 25-25).
Besides his suitability in character to be the Pharaoh
who continued the severe oppression begun by Seti I.,
Rameses IL, by the great length of his reign, exactly fits
into the requirements of the Biblical narrative. The- narra
tive requires for its second Pharaoh a king who reigned at least
forty years, probably longer. The New Empire furnishes
only three reigns of the necessary duration, — those of Thoth-
mes III. (fifty-four years), Rameses II. (sixty-seven years),
and Psammetichus I. (fifty-four years). Psammetichus, who
reigned from b. c. 667 to 613, is greatly too late ; Tfiothmes
III is very much too early ; Rameses II. alone verges upon
the time at which the severe oppression must necessarily be
placed. It can scarcely be a coincidence that Egyptian tra
dition should point out Menephthah I. as the Pharaoh of the
Exodus, and that, the Biblical narrative assigning to his pre
decessor an exceptionally long reign, the monuments and
Manetho should agree in giving to that predecessor the ex-
ceptionally long reign of sixty-six or sixty-seven years.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 141

CHAPTER XVI.
FURTHER NOTICES OF EGYPT IN EXODUS.
The portraits of the first and second Pharaohs men
tioned in the Book of Exodus are only faintly and slightly
sketched. That of the third monarch — "the Pharaoh of
the Exodus," as he is commonly termed — is, on the contrary,
presented to us with much clearness and distinctness, though
without effort or conscious elaboration. He is an oppressor
as merciless as either of his predecessors, as deaf to pity, as
determined to crush the aspirations of the Hebrews by hard
labor. To him belongs the ingenious device for aggravating
suffering, which has passed into the proverbial phraseology
of modern Europe, the requirement of bricks without straw "
(ch. v. 7-19). He disregards the afflictions of his own coun
trymen as completely as those of his foreign slaves, and con
tinues fixed in his determination not to " let Israel go,"
until he suffers the loss of his own first-born (ch. xii. 29-32).
When finally he has been induced to allow the Hebrews to
withdraw themselves from his land, he suddenly repents of
his concession, pursues after them, and seeks, not so much
to prevent their escape, as to destroy them to the last man
(ch. xv. 9) To this harshness and cruelty of temper he adds
a remarkable weakness and vacillation — he will and he will
not ; he makes promises and retracts them ; he " thrusts the
Israelites out " (ch. xi. I ; xii. 31), and then rushes after them
at the head of all the troops that he can muster (ch. xiv.
5-9). Further — and this is most remarkable — unlike the
generality of Egyptian monarchs, he seems to be deficient
in personal courage ; at any rate, there is no appearance of
his having imperilled himself in the attack made on the
Israelites at the Red Sea, — " the Egyptians pursued, and
went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh's
horses, his chariots, and hi$ horsemen" (ch. xiv. 23) ; but
not, so far as appears, Pharaoh himself. This, indeed has

142 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
been disputed, and Ps. cxxxvi. 15 ; has been quoted ns a
positive proof to the contrary ; * but the expression of a
poet who wrote some centuries after the event would bo
very weak evidence with respect to the fact, besides which
his statement is, not that the Pharaoh was killed, but that
he was " overthrown." Neither the narrative in Exod. xiv.
nor the song of rejoicing in the following chapter contains
the slightest allusion to the Pharaoh's death, an omission al
most inconceivable if he really perished with his warriors.}
Further, the Pharaoh of the Exodus seems to have been
grossly and abnormally superstitious, one who put real trust
in magicians and sorcerers, and turned to them in times of
difficulty rather than to statesmen and persons of experience
in affairs. What, then, does profane history tell us of the Men
ephthah whom we have shown to be at once the traditional
" Pharaoh of the Exodus " and the king pointed out by
chronological considerations as the ruler of Egypt at the
period ? M. Lenormant begins his account of him by observ
ing,} "Moreover, he was neither a soldier nor an adminis
trator, but one whose mind was turned almost exclusively
towards the chimeras of sorcery and magic, resembling in
this respect his brother, Kha-m-uas." "The Book of Ex
odus," he adds, " is in the most exact agreement with his
torical truth when it depicts him as surrounded by priest-
magicians, with whom Moses contends in working prodigies,
in order to affect the mind of the Pharaoh."§
Later on in his history of Menephthah, M. Lenormant
has the following passage. || He is describing the great in
vasion of Libyans and others which Menephthah repulsed
in his fifth year. " The barbarians advanced without meet
ing any serious resistance. The terrified population either
fled before them, or made its submission, but attempted
nothing like a struggle. Already had the invading army
reached the neighborhood of Pa-ari-sheps, the Prosopis of
* Canon Cook in the " Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 309.
t That the Pharaoh did not perish is maintained by Wilkinson
("Ancient Egyptians," vol. i., p. 54), Chabas ("Recherches pourservir
a l'histoire de l'Egypte," pp. 152, 161), Lenormant ("Manuel d'His-
toire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 292, edition of 1S83), and others.
X '" Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 281 (edition of 1883)
§ Ibid.
II Ibid., p. 289. Compare "Records of the Past." vol. iv., pp.
41-44. ' vv

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 143
the Greeks ; On (Heliopolis) and Man-nofri (Memphis) were
seriously threatened. Menephthah assembled his army in
front of these two towns, in order to cover them ; he drew
from Asia a number of mercenaries, to supply the lack of
Egyptian soldiers of sufficient experience ; at the same time
he fortified the banks of the middle branch of the Nile, to
prevent the enemy from crossing ix;, and to place in safety,
at any rate, the eastern half of the Delta. Sending forward
in advance, first of all, his chariot-force and his light-armed
auxiliaries, the Pharaoh promised to join the battle array
with the bulk of his troops at the end of fourteen days. But
he was not personally fond of actual fight, and disliked ex
posing himself to the chance of defeat. An apparition of
the god Phthah, which he saw in a dream, warned him that
his lofty rank required him not to cross the river. He there-
foresent his army to the combat under the command of
some of his father's generals, who were still living." Two
features of Menephthah's character, as represented in Scrip
ture, are here illustrated : his want of personal courage and
his habit of departing from his promises with or without a
pretext. The apparition of the god Phthah in a dream is
clearly a convenient fiction, by means of which he might at
once conceal his cowardice and excuse the forfeiture of his
word. The Egyptian monuments thus confirm three leading
features in the character of Menephthah, — his superstitious-
ness, his want of courage, and his weak, shifty, false temper.
They do not, howevor, furnish much indication of his cruelty.
This is, perhaps, sufficiently accounted for by their scanti
ness. Menephthah is a king of whom it has been said *
that he " belongs to the number of those monarchs whose
memory has been with difficulty preserved by a few monu
ments of inferior value, and a few inscriptions of but little
importance." We have, in fact, but one inscription of any
considerable length belonging to his reign.} It gives mainly
an account of the Libyan war, in which he was not person
ally engaged. A tone of pride and arrogance common to
the autobiographical memoirs of Egyptian kings pervades
it, but it contains few notices of any severities for which the
* Brugsch, "Histoire d'Egypte,"p. 175.
t This inscription will be found translated in " Records of the
Past," vol. iv., pp. 39-48, and in M. Chabas' " Recherches pour servir
a l'histoire de l'Egypte," pp. 84-94.

144 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
monarch himself can be regarded as responsible. That he
made slaves of the prisoners taken in the Libyan war*
merely shows that he acted like other monarchs of the time.
He speaks, however, of having in a Cushite war " slaughtered
the .people, and set fire to them, and netted, as men net
birds, the entire country." } This last expression reminds
one of a cruel Persian practice, whereby whole populations
were exterminated, or reduced to slavery ; } the preceding
one, if it is to be taken literally, implies a still more extreme
and more unusual barbarity.
It was not to be expected that the general series of events
related in the first fourteen chapters of Exodus should obtain
any direct mention in the historical records of Egypt. As M.
Chabas remarks,§ " events of this kind were not entitled to
be inscribed on the public monuments, where nothing was
ever registered except successes and triumphs." The court
historiographers would naturally refrain from all mention of
the terrible plagues from which Egypt suffered during a
whole year, as well as from any record of the disaster of the
Red Sea ; and the monarch would certainly not inscribe any
account of them upon his edifices. Still there are points of
the narrative which admit of comparison with the records of
the time, and in which an agreement or disagreement with
those records would almost of necessity show itself ; and these
it is proposed to consider in the remainder of this chapter.
Such are (1) the employment of forced labor in Egypt at
this period of its history, and the method of its employment ;
(2) the inclusion, or non-inclusion, of the Hebrews among the
forced laborers; (3) the construction at the period of " store-
cities," and the names of the cities ; (4) the military organi
zation of the time ; (5) the untimely loss of a son by the king
under whom the Exodus took place ; and (6) the existence
or non-existence of any indication in the records of such ex
haustion and weakness as might be expected to follow the
events related in Exodus.
The use of forced labor by the Egyptian monarchs of the
time, especially by Seti I. arid Rameses IL, is abundantly
witnessed to by the monuments. The kings speak of it as
a matter of course ; the poets deplore it ; the artists repre
sent it. " It was the custom of the Egyptians to subject
* " Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 47, 1. 63.
t Ibid., 1. 67. 1 Herod, iii. 149 ; vi. 31.
§ "Recherches," etc., p. 152.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 145
prisoners of war to this life of forced labor. A tomb of
the time of Thothmes III. has furnished pictures which rep
resent Asiatic captives making bricks, and working at build
ings under the rod of task-masters — pictures which are a
figured commentary on the verses of Exodus (ch. i. 11-14)
which we have just cited. But under Rameses II. the un
precedented development of architectural works rendered
the fatigues to which such wretches were exposed far more
overwhelming." * Gangs of laborers were placed under the
charge of an overseer armed with a stick which he applied
freely to their naked backs and shoulders on the slightest
provocation. A certain definite amount of task-work was
required every day of each laborer. Some worked at brick-
making, some at stone-cutting, some at dragging blocks
from the quarries, some at erecting edifices. Food was pro
vided by the Government, and appears not to have been
insufficient ; but the hard work, and the exposure to the
burning sun of Egypt, were exhausting in the extreme, and
rendered their life a burden to those condemned to pass it
in this sort of employ.
Whether the monuments indicate, or do not indicate, the
inclusion of the Hebrews among the forced laborers of this
period depends on our acceptance or non-acceptance of a
suggested identification.} Are we, or are we not, to regard
the Hebrews as the same people with the Aperu or Apuriu ?
In favor of the identification, there is, in the firs tplace, the
close resemblance of the words. M. Chabas, indeed, over
states the case when he says} that the Egyptian Aperu is
" the exact transcription of the Hebrew ." It is not so
really, since the exact transcription would be " Aberu " ; but
it is a very near approach to an exact transcription. It falls
short of exactness merely by the substitution of ap for a b,
the two letters being closely cognate, and the ear of the
Egyptians for foreign sounds not very accurate. In the
next place, it is found that Rameses II. employs the Aperu
in the building of his city of Rameses (Pa-Ramesu), which
is exactly one of the works ascribed to the Hebrews in
Exodus (ch. i. 11). Further, we must either accept the
* Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 269,
edition of 1883. ,
t On this identification, see Chabas, "Recherches pour servir a
l'histoire de l'Egypte," pp. 142-150 ; "Melanges Egyptologiques," 2me
Se'rie, p. IOS, et seg. X " Recherches," p. 142.

146 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
identity of the Hebrews with the Aperu, or we must suppose
that the kings of this period had in their service at this time
two sets of forced laborers quite unconnected, yet with names
almost exactly alike. Against the identification, almost the
sole point that can be urged, is the fact that Aperu are found
still to be employed by the Egyptian kings after the Exodus
is a thing of the past, as by Rameses III. and Rameses IV.
But this objection seems to be sufficiently met by M. Chabas.
" It is quite certain that, spread as the text of Scripture de
clares that they were over the whole of Egypt, the Hebrews
could not by any possibility respond universally to the appeal
of Moses ; perhaps some of them did not even wish to do so.
Such was doubtless the case with those [Aperu] whom we
find enrolled in regiments in the reigns of Rameses III. and
Rameses IV." *
The construction of " store-cities " at the required period
has received recent illustration of the most remarkable kind.
The explorers employed by the " Egypt Exploration Fund"
have uncovered at Tel-el-Maskoutah, near Tel-el-Kebir, an
ancient city, which the inscriptions found on the spot show
to have been built, in part at any rate, by Rameses IL, and
which is of so peculiar a construction as to suggest at once
to those engaged in the work the idea that it was built for a
" store-city."} The town is altogether a square, enclosed by
a brick wall twenty-two feet thick, and measuring six hun
dred and fifty feet along each side. The area contained
within the wall is estimated at about ten acres. Nearly the
whole of this space is occupied by solidly built square cham
bers, divided one from the other by brick walls from eight to
ten feet thick, which are unpierced by window or door, or
opening of any kind. About ten feet from the bottom the
walls show a row of recesses for beams, in some of which de
cayed wood still remains, indicating that the buildings were
two-storied, having a lower room, which could only be en
tered by means of a trap-door, used probably as a store
house or magazine, and an upper one, in which the keeper
of the store may have had his abode. Thus far ttie discovery
is simply that of a " store-city," built partly by Rameses II.,
* " Recherches," p. 163.
t- See an article in the British Quarterly Review for July, 1883, pp.
110-115 ; and compare the letters on the same subject in the Academy
for February, 24th, March 3d and 17th, and April 7th of the same
year.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 147
but it further appears, from several short inscriptions, that
the name of the city was Pa-Tum, or Pithom ; and there is
no reasonable doubt that one of the two cities built by the
Israelites has been laid bare, and answers completely to the
description given of it. Of the twin city, Rameses, the re
mains have not yet been identified. Wc know, however,
from the inscription, that it was in the immediate vicinity of
Tanis, and that it was built perhaps in part by Seti I., but
mainly by his son Rameses II.
It lends additional interest to the discovery of Pithom
that the city is found to be built almost entirely of brick.
It was in brick-making that the Israelites are said in the
Book of Exodus (ch. i. 14 ; v. 7-19) to have been principally
employed. They are also said to have been occupied to
some extent " in mortar " (ch. i. 14) ; and the bricks of the
store-chambers of Pithom are " laid with mortar in regular
tiers." * They made their bricks " with straw " until no
straw was given them, when they were reduced to straits
(ch. v. 7-19). It is in accordance with this part of the
narrative, and sheds some additional light upon it to find
that the bricks of the Pithom chambers, while generally con-
tainitag a certam amount of straw, are in some instances
destitute of it. The king's cruelty forced the Israelites
to produce in some cases an inferior article.
The military organization of the Egyptians at the time
of the Exodus is represented as very complete. The king
is able, almost at a moment's warning, to take the field with
a force of six hundred picked chariots, and numerous others
of a more ordinary description, together with a considerable
body of footmen. It does not appear that he has any cav
alry, for the word translated " horsemen " in our version
probably designates the riders in the chariots. Each squad
ron of thirty chariots is apparently under the command of a
" captain " (ch. xiv. 7). The entire force, large as it is, is
ready to take the field in a few days, for otherwise the
Israelites would have got beyond the Egyptian border
before the Pharaoh could have overtaken them. It acts
promptly and bravely, and only suffers disaster through cir
cumstances of an abnormal and indeed miraculous character.
Now it appears by the Egyptian monuments that the mili
tary system was brought to its highest perfection by Seti I.
* British Quarterly Review, July 1883, p. 110.

148 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
and Rameses II, It is certain that, in their times the army
was most carefully organized, divided into brigades,* and
maintained in a state of constant preparation. The chariot
force was regarded as of very much the highest importance,
and amounted, according to the lowest computation, to.
several thousands. It is doubtful whether any cavalry was
employed, none appearing on the monuments, and the word
so translated by many writers } being regarded by others
as the proper designation of the troops who fought in
chariots. } Infantry, however, in large well-disciplined
bodies, always attended and supported the chariot force.
Under Menephthah the system of his father and grandfather
was still maintained, though no longer in full vigor. He
required a fortnight to collect sufficient troops to meet the
Libyan invasion. § He had then, however, to meet an army
of trained soldiers, and had no need to hasten, since he
occupied a strong position. Under the circumstances of the
Exodus, it was necessary to be more prompt, and sufficient
to collect a much smaller army. This he appears to have
been able to do at the end of a few days.
It was scarcely to be expected that the Egyptian records
would present any evidence on the subject of Menephthah's
loss of a son by an untimely death. Curiously, however, it
does happen that a monument, at present in the Berlin
Museum, contains a proof of his having suffered such a loss. ||
There is no description of the circumstances, but a mere in
dication of the bare fact. The confirmation thus lent to the
Scriptural narrative is slight ; but it has a value in a case
where the entire force of the evidence consists in its being
cumulative. Three results would naturally follow on the occurrence of
such circumstances as those recorded in Exodus. Egypt
would be for a time weakened in a military point of view,
and her glory, as a conquering power, would suffer tempo-
* " Records of the Past," vol. ii., p. 68.
t As generally in the " Records of the Past," and by M. Chabas in
his " Recherches pour servir," etc., pp. 85, 88, 89, etc.
X M. Lenormant almost always replaces the "cavalry "of other
translators by the expression " des chars " (Manuel d'Histoire
Ancienne," vol. ii., pp. 255, 256, etc.) He observes in one place,
" The military education of the Egyptians did not include teaching
men to ride, since they fought in chariots."
§ " Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 43.
II Brugsch, " Histoire d'Egypte," p. 175.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 149
rary eclipse. The royal auhtority would be shaken, and
encouragement afforded to the pretensions of any rival
claimants of the throne. The loss of six hundred thousand
laborers would bring to an end the period of the construction
of great works, or, at the least, greatly check their rapid
multiplication. Now this is exactly what all historians of
Egypt agree to have been the general condition of things in
Egypt in the later years of Menephthah and the period im
mediately following. Military expeditions cease until the
time of Rameses III., a space of nearly forty years. The
later years of Menephthah. are disturbed by the rise of a
pretender, Ammon-mes, who disputes the , throne with his
son, and according to Manetho,* occupies it for five years.
Seti IL, or Seti-Menephthah, has then a short reign ; but
another claimant is brought forward by a high official, and
established in his place. Soon afterwards complete anarchy
sets in, and continues for several years,} till a certain Set-
nekht is made king by the priests, and tranquility once
more restored. The construction of monuments during this
period almost entirely ceases ; and when Rameses III. shows
the desire to emulate the architectural glories of former
kings, he is compelled to work on a much smaller scale, and
to content himself with the erection of a comparatively few
edifices. * Ap. Syncell., " Chronographia," p. 72. C.
t See the " Great Harris Papyrus," translated by Dr. Eisenlohr in
the "Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archaeology," vol. i., p.
359, et »eq.

150 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER XVII.
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN EXODUS AND NTJMBEBS.
" The children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth." —
Exod. xii. 37.
" It came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God
led them not [through] the way of the land of. the Philistines, although
that was near . . . But God led the people about [through] the way
of the wilderness of the Red Sea . . . And they took their journey
from Succoth, and encamped in Etham, in the edge of the wilder
ness." — Exod. xiii 17-20.
" Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn and encamp
before Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baal-
Zephon; before it shall ye encamp by the sea." — Exod". xiv. 2.
" These are the journeys of the children of Israel, which went forth
out of the land of Egypt with their armies under the hand of Moses
and Aaron. And Moses wrote their goings out according to their
journeys by the commandment of the Lord : and these are their jour
neys according to their goings out. And they departed from Rameses
in the first month,' on the fifteenth day of the first month . . . And
the children of Israel removed from Rameses, and pitched in Succoth
And they departed from Succoth, and pitched in Etham, which is in
the edge of the wilderness. And they removed from Etham, and
turned again unto Pi-hahiroth, which is before Baal-Zephon : and they
pitched before Migdol. And they departed from before Pi-hahiroth,
and passed through the midst of the sea into the wilderness, and went
three days' journey in the wilderness of Etham, and pitched in
Marah. And they removed from Marah, and came unto Elim . . .
And they removed from Elim, and encamped by the Red Sea." —
Numb, xxxiii. 1-10.
Although the geographical problems connected with the
Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt cannot be said to be as
yet completely solved, yet the course of modern research
has shed considerable light upon the route followed by the
flying people, and the position of their various resting-places.
The results arrived at may be regarded as tolerably assured,
since they have not been reached without very searching
criticism and the suggestion of many rival hypotheses. The
boldest of these, started in the year 1874 by one of the first

NOTICES INEXODUS AND NUMBERS. 151
of modern Egyptologists, Dr. Brugsch,* for a time shook to
its foundation the fabric of earlier belief. The authority of
its propounder was great, his acquaintance with the ancient
geography of Egypt unrivaled, and his argument conducted
with extreme skill and ingenuity ; it was not to be wondered
at, therefore, that his views obtained for a time very general
credence. But researches conducted subsequently to the
enunciation of his views, partly with the object of testing
tfiem, partly without any such object, have shown his theory
to be untenable} ; and opinion has recently reverted to the
old channel, having gained by the discussion some additional
precision and definiteness. We propose in the present
chapter to consider the Exodus geographically, and to trace,
as distinctly as possible, the " journeys " of the Israelites
from their start on the day following the destruction of the
first-born to their entrance on the " wilderness of Etham "
after their passage of the Red Sea.
The point of departure is clearly stated both in Exodus
(ch. xii, 37), and in Numbers (ch. xxxiii. 3. 5) to have been
" Rameses." What does this mean ? We hear in Scripture
both of a " land of Rameses " (Gen. xlvii. 11), and of a city
" Raamses," or Rameses. It is not disputed that these two
words are the same ; nor does it seem to be seriously doubt
ed that the land received its name from the town. From
which, then, are we to understand that the Israelites made
their start ? It has been argued strongly that " the land "
is intended ; } and with this contention we are so far agreed,
that we should not suppose any general gathering of the
people to the city of Rameses, but a movement from all
parts of the land of Rameses or Goshen to the general
rnuster at Succoth. Succoth seems to us to have been the
first rendezvous. But a portion of the Israelites, and that
the leading and guiding portion, started probably from
the town. Menephthah resided at Pa-Ramesu, a suburb of
Tanis. Moses and Aaron held communication with him
* The views of Dr. Brugsch were first propounded at the Interna
tional Congress of Orientalists, held in 1874. They were afterwards
published in the English translation of his " Hi3tory of Egypt," Lon
don, 1879.
, t See Mr. Greville Chester's papers in the " Quarterly Statements"
of the Palestine Exploration Fund, July, 1S80, and April, 1881 ; and
Mr. Stanley Poole's paper in the British Quarterly Review for July,
1883. X See Dr. Trumbull's " Kadesh-Barnea " (New York, 1884), p. 3S2.

152 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
during the night, after the first-born were slain. They must,
therefore, have been in the town or in its immediate neigh
borhood. They received permission to depart (Exodus xii.
31), and, as soon as morning broke, they set off with the
other Israelites of the neighborhood. It is this start from
the town of Rameses which the historian has in his eye ; he
needs a definite terminus a quo from which to begin his
account of the journeying (Numb, xxxiii. 5), and he finds it
in this city, the seat of the court at the time. Rameses
was in lat. 31°, long. 32°, nearly, towards the north-eastern
corner of Egypt, about thirty miles almost due west of Pelu-
sium, from which, however, it was separated by a great
marshy tract, the modern Lake Menzaleh, which in long. 32°
20' penetrates deep into the country, and renders a march to
the south-east necessary in order to reach the eastern frontier
of Egypt. The rendezvous must, consequently, have been
appointed for some place in this direction ; and it is in this
direction that we must seek it.
This place is termed both in Exodus (ch. xii. 37; xiii. 20)
and in Numbers (ch. xxxiii. 5. 6) "Succoth " — i.e., "Tents"
or " Booths " — an equivalent of the Greek Sxv^i which is
often used as a geographical designation. It has been pro
posed to identify Succoth with an Egyptian district called
"Thuku" or "Thukut,"* and more recently with the newly-
discovered town of Pithom } (Tel-el-Maskouteh). There is
no evidence, however, that Pithom was ever called Succoth,
nor would Tel-el-Maskouteh have been a convenient rendez
vous for two millions of persons, with their flocks and herds.
The Wady Toumilat offers but a thin thread of verdure
along the line of the fresh-water canal, and though a con
venient route for those who came from the more southern
part of the " land of Goshen," would have been very much
out of the way for such as started from the more northern
portion, as from Tanis, or from the town of Goshen (Qosem)
itself. But the district of Thukut, if it lay where Dr. Trum
bull places' it,* north and north-west of Lake Timseh, would
be a very convenient place for a general muster^ affording a
wide space and abundant pasture in the spring-time, and
easily reached both from south-west and north-west — in the
* Brugsch, " History of Egypt," translated by Philip Smith, 2d
edit., p. 370^.
t Stanley Poole in the British Quarterly Review, July, 1883, p. 113.
} See "Kadesh-Barnea," pp. 392-5.

NOTICES IN EXODUS AND NUMBERS. 153
one case by the Wady Toumilat, in the other by way of Tel-
Dafneh and the western shore of Lake Ballah. This posi
tion for Thukut seems indeed to be definitely fixed by the
discovery of the ruins of Pithom, the capital of Thukut, at
Tel-el-Maskouteh, combined with the statement in an Egyp
tian text,* that Thukut was a region just within the Egyptian
frontier, suited for grazing, and in the vicinity of some lakes.
Dr.«Brugsch's location of it on the southern shores of Lake
Menzaleh became impossible from the moment tb.at Tel-el-
Maskouteh was proved to mark the site of Pithom.
It may, perhaps, be objected to the location of Succoth
on the north and west of Lake Timseh, that the distance is
thirty-five miles from Rameses (Tanis), and therefore could
not have been traversed in a day. But nothing is said in
Exodus, or elsewhere in Scripture, with respect to the length
of time occupied by the journey between any two stations
mentioned, except in one instance, when the time occupied
was "three days" (Exod. xv. 12; Numb, xxxiii. 8). It
took a month for the multitude to reach the wilderness of
Sin from- their starting-point (Exod. xii. 18 ; xvi. 1) ; dur
ing this time we have only six stations mentioned ; it took
above a fortnight for them to move from the wilderness
of Sin to the plain before Sinai (ch. xvi. 1 ; xix. 1) ; along
this route are mentioned only three stations (Numb, xxxiii.
12-15). Thus there is every reason for supposing that the
journey from station to station occupied, in most cases,
several days.
The children of Israel " took their journey from Succoth
and encamped in Etham," or " at Etham, in the edge of the
wilderness" (Exod. xiii. 20). No name resembling Etham
is to be found in the geographical nomenclature of Egypt,
either native or classical. Hence it is suspected that the
word is rather a common appellation than a proper name.
" Khetam " in Egyptian meant " fortress " ; and various
khetamu are mentioned in the inscriptions— one near Pelu-
sium, called the " khetam of Zor " ; another near Tanis ; a
third, called the " khetam of King Menephthah," within
the region of Thukot.} The eastern frontier was, in fact,
guarded by a series of such fortresses, perhaps connected
* Brugsch, " History of Egypt," vol. ii., p. 133.
t Trumbull, " Kadesh-Barnea," p. 329; Brugsch, "History of
Egypt," vol. ii., p. 380.

154 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
together by a wall or rampart ; and especially the routes
out of Egypt were thus guarded and watched. It was prob
ably to one of these " khetams " — that which guarded the
way out of Egypt, known to the Hebrews as the " way of
Shur " (Gen. xvi-7) — that the march of the Israelites was
directed from Succoth. The khetam lay " in the edge of
the wilderness," and may perhaps be identified with that of
King Menephthah. It was probably not far from the Bir -
Makdal of the maps, situated about ten miles east of the
Suez Canal, east by north of Ismailia.
The multitude must have supposed that they were now
about to enter the wilderness. They were " in its edge."
Their leaders had doubtless brought with them the king's
permission to pass the frontier fortress. The expectation
must have been that on the morrow they would quit Egypt
forever. _ But . here God interposed. Had the Israelites
.passed out of Egypt at this point, the march would natu
rally have been across the desert some way south of Lake
Serbdnis to the Wady El Arish, and thence along the coast
of the Mediterranean to Gaza and the low tract of the Shef-
eleh. But the nation was not yet in a fit condition to meet
and contend with the warlike people of that rich and val
uable region — the Philistines. God accordingly, who guided
the march by the pillar of the cloud and of fire (ch. xiii.
21, 22), "led them not the way of the land of the Philistines,
although that was near ; for God said, Lest the people
repent when they see war, and return to Egypt : but God
led the people about, the way of the wilderness of the Red
Sea " (ib. 17, 18). Moreover, a direction was given through
Moses to the people, " that they turn and encamp before
Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over against Baal-
Zephon" (ch. xiv. 2). It is clear that at this point the
direction of the march was changed ; and so far all are
agreed. But was the " turn " towards the left or towards
the right ? Was the " sea " by which they were command
ed to encamp the Mediterranean or the Red Sea ?
It is the main point of Dr. Brugsch's theory that he
holds "the sea " to have been the Mediterranean. He pro- '
fesses to find in this direction a Migdol, a Pihahiroth, and a
Baal-Zephon. The Migdol is twenty miles from the Pi
hahiroth, and the Pi-hahiroth twenty-five from the Baal-
Zephon, which is thus forty-five from the Migdol, for the
three are nearly in a straight line. The Pi-hahiroth and the

NOTICES IN EXODUS AND NUMBERS. 155
Baal-Zephon are not visible the one from the other.* Still,
though these particulars of distance and position ill accord
with the expressions used in Exod. xiv. 2 and Numb, xxxiii.
7, which imply proximity and the being within view, it
would have been a most curious circumstance had there been
on this side of the Isthmus of Suez, and also on the opposite
one, three places similarly named within a moderate distance
of each other. But on examination it -appears that only one
of the three names is attached to any locality on the north
side of the Isthmus otherwise than by conjecture. Dr.
Brugsch does not profess to have found in the remains of
ancient Egypt any place called Pi-hahiroth or any called
Baal-Zephon. He finds in Egyptian a word khirot, signify
ing " gulfs," and he finds in Diodorus a mention that there
were p&padpa, " pits," at the western end of Lake Serbonis.
Out of these two facts he constructs an Egyptian Pi-khirot,}
which he thinks may have been the original of the Pi-hahi
roth of the Hebrews. Baal-Zephon he finds only mentioned
in Egyptian documents as a God, — he conjectures his iden
tity with Zeus Kasios, — and upon this pure conjecture
locates his temple where one stood, erected to Zeus Kasios,
in post-Alexandrine times. If we put aside these two mere
conjectures, there remains only a Migdol, which has a proved
existence in these parts, though its exact emplacement is un
certain. Migdol, however, is a generic term, meaning " a watch
-tower." There are likely to have been many " Migdols" on
' the eastern frontier of Egypt, and it is maintained } that
there are traces of at least three. One of these, called by
the Greeks Magdolos, was certainly towards the north, not
far from Pelusium ; another, central, has left its name to
Bir Makdal ; a third, towards the south, is represented by
. the existing Muktala. This last may well be the Migdol of
Exodus. Dr. Brugsch's theory that Lake Serb6nis is the true
"Yam Suph?' or " Sea of Weeds," wrongly understood by the
Septuagint translators as "the Red Sea," has been ccm-
* Mr. Greville Chester in the " Quarterly Statement of the Pales
tine Exploration Fund," July, 1880, p. 154, note.
t "' History of Egypt," vol. ii., p. 393. The real Egyptian original
of Pi-hahiroth seems to have been " Pi-keheret," which is mentioned
on a tablet of the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, found at Te.-el- ,
Mank'Miteft. „ „„. „
X Trumbull, " Kadesh-Barnea," pp. 374-8.

156 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
pletely disposed of by Mr. Greville Chester, who shows, first,
that Lake Serb6nis is almost wholly devoid of vegetation,
either marine or lacustrine ; * secondly, that the spit of land
between it and the Mediterranean is not continuous, but in
terrupted at the eastern extremity of the lake by a deep sea-
channel ; } thirdly, that there is no isthmus opposite El
Gelse dividing the lake into nearly equal portions, } as Dr.
Brugsch supposed ; and, fourthly, that the spit of land is
above fifty miles long, and takes a lightly-equiped traveler
three days to traverse,§ instead of being passable in the course
of a night. It may be added that, as the term " Yam Suph"
is allowed by all, including Dr. Brugsch, to designate the
Red Sea in Exod. xiii. 17 and Numb, xxxiii. 10, 11, it is in
conceivable that the same writer should in the same narra
tive use it also of another far-distant sheet of water (Exod.
xv. 4, 22).
The propriety of the name " Yam Suph," as applied to
tho Red Sea, has been well illustrated by Dr. Trumbull, ||
" Suph " in Hebrew means at once " seaweed " (Jonah ii. 5),
and "rushes" or "sedge." (Exod. ii. 3, etc.). The Red
Sea is famous for the number and variety of its marine
growths. " Weeds and corals are to be seen in such profu
sion and beauty at many places along the shores of Red Sea,
and again below its surface, as disclosed at low water, as
almost to have the appearance of groves and gardens." ^
Again, "the juncus acutus arundo (Egyptiaca, or arundo
Isaica, grows commonly on the shore of the Red Sea, so
that at this day a bay of the same is called Ghubbet-el-bus,
or ' Reed Bay.' " ** The observing naturalist, Klunzinger,
says that, " Where the soil of the desert along that coast
is kept moist by lagoons of sea water, the eye is gladdened
by spreading meadows of green verdure. The coast flora of
the desert, which requires the saline vapor of the sea, is
peculiar. A celebrated plant is the shora (Avicennia offici
nalis), which forms large dense groves in the sea, these being
laid bare only at very low ebb. Ships are laden with its
wood, which, is used as fuel, and many camels live altogether
* " Quarterly Statement " of Palestine Exploration Fund for July,
1S80, p. 155.
t Ibid., p. 157. X Ibid., p. 154.
§ Ibid., pp. 152-157. || '< Kadesh-Bamea." pp. 353-356.
1 Laborde, " Voyage de l'Arabie Pe"tre'e," p. 5.
** Stickel, " Der Israeliten Auszug aus jEgypten" in "Studien und
Kritiken " for 1850, p. 331.

NOTICES IN EXODUS AND NUMBERS. 157
on its laurel-like leaves." He divides, indeed, the shore
line of the Red Sea into the " outer shore zone " or the
reef line, and the "inner shore or sea-grass zone." Even
in the outer shore zone there " flourish also in many in
lets of the sea thickets of the laurel-like shora shrub," as
above described ; and there are " sea-grass pools." In the
inner shore zone, " among the rocks, which are either bare
or covered with a blackish and red mucilaginous sea-weed,"
there " grow green phanerogamous grasses of the family of
the Naiadeae."*
But if the sea intended in the directions given to Moses
(Exod. xiv. 2) was the Red Sea, Migdol, Pihahiroth, and
Baal-Zephon must be sought towards the south ; and. the
" turn " in the journey (ibid, and Numb, xxxiii. 7), of which
we have spoken, must have been a turn to the right. It was
to some extent a " turning back," as the Hebrew word used
implies, a " return " into Egypt when the frontier had been
Reached, and might have been crossed. It looked like hesi
tation and doubt, like the commencement of an aimless,
purposeless wandering. Hence the Pharaoh took heart, and
made preparations for a pursuit at the head of an army (ch.
xiv. 3, 59).
If the " bitter lakes " were (as supposed by many }) con
nected at the time with the northern end of the Red Sea, as
a marshy inlet, overflowed at high water, and Pi-hahiroth
were near Muktala, the Israelites, to reach it, must have
skirted the northern extremity of the lakes, and have pro
ceeded southward along their western shores. A march of
three days would bring them into the plain north-west of
Suez, at the western edge of which the station Muktala
(Migdol) is found. The Israelites " encamped between
Migdol and the sea," for which there would be abundant
room, as the distance is above ten miles. They were " be
side Pi-hahiroth and before Baal-Zephon " (ch. xiv. 9).
These conditions would be sufficiently answered if Pi-hahi
roth were at Ajrud, which is thought to retain a trace of the
name,} and Baal-Zephon were on the north-eastern flank of
* Quoted from Dr. Trumbull's " Kadesh-Bamea," pp. 355-6.
t As Kurtz, Sharpe, Stanley Poole, Reginald Stuart Poole, Canon
Cook Lieutenant Conder, Burton, Villiers Stuart, Gratz, and others.
*So Ebers ("Gosen zum Pinai," p. 526), Kurtz ("Hist, of Old
Covenant," vol. ii., p. 323), Keil andDelitzsch ("Bible Comment. "on
Exod. xiv. 2), etc.

158 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Jebel Atakah. Baal-Zephon is not necessarily a Phoenician
name, for the Egyptians had adopted " Baal "' as a god long
before the time of Menephthah, and Zephon (Zapouna or
Typhon) was altogether Egyptian. There is no proof be
yond the notices in Exodus that he had a temple, or a town
named after him, in this quarter ; but neither is there any
proof of his having had one in any part of Egypt. It has
been argued that the position on Jebel Ataka would be one
exactly adapted to such a god as Baal-Zephon ; } but we
scarcely know enough of the Egyptian religion to be sure of
this. We can only say that here, on the western coast of
the Gulf of Suez, would be ample room for the encampment
of the entire Israelitish host ; that in this position it might
well seem that " the wilderness had shut them in " (ch. xiv.
3) ; and that the host would be " before a Migdol " (Numb.
xxxiii. 7), and perhaps " beside a Pi-hahiroth " (Exod. xiv.
9). The sea in front was but two or three miles across, and
might easily have been passed in a night ; the bottom was
such as would naturally clog the Egyptian chariot wheels
(ver. 25), and the further shore was destitute of springs, a
true " wilderness " (ch. xv. 22), where the Israelites may
well have gone " three days without water."
t Trumbull, " Kadesh-Barnea," p. 421.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 159

CHAPTER XVIII.
FURTHER NOTICES OF EGYPT IN EXODUS.
In considering the Biblical notices of Egypt contained in
the Book of Exodus, we have hitherto confined ourselves
almost entirely to the main narrative, and indeed to such
points of it as are capable of illustration from historical docu
ments, monumental, or literary. But the full force of the
illustration which profane sources are capable of lending to
the scriptural accounts cannot be rightly estimated, unless
we add to this some consideration of those various minor
matters, incidentally touched • upon, which constitutes the
entourage of the main narrative, and render it altogether so
graphic and life-like. These touches must be either the
natural utterances of one familiar with the country at the
time, as Moses, the traditional author of Exodus would have
been, or the artful imitation of such utterances by a later
"writer, unfamiliar with the time, and probably with the
scene, drawing upon his imagination or his stock of antiqua
rian knowledge. In the former case, a general agreement
between the Biblical portraiture and the facts as otherwise
known to us might be confidently looked for ; in the latter,
there would be sure to appear, on examination, repeated con
tradictions and discrepancies.
It will be the object of the present chapter to show that
there is a close accord between the Scriptural notices and
the facts as otherwise known to us in respect of almost all
the minor matters of which we have Spoken. These may be
summed up under the following principal heads : — (a) the
climate and productions of Egypt, (b) the dress and domestic
habits of the people, (c) the ordinary food of the laboring
classes, (d) customs connected with farming and cattle-keep
ing, and (e) miscellaneous customs.
The climate of Egypt is touched upon mainly in con
nection with the seventh plague, in ch. ix. We find there

160 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
heavy rain (ver. 33),, hail, thunder and lightning mentioned
as occurring in early spring, and doing great damage to the
crops. The particular visitation is spoken of as miraculous
in coming at the command of Moses (ver. 23), and as ex
traordinary in its intensity (ver. 24), but not as a thing
previously unknown. On the contrary, it is implied that
similar visitations of less severity were not unusual. Objec
tion has been taken to the narrative on this account ; and it
has been represented as indicative of a great want of acquain
tance with the climatic circumstances of the country, since
rain and hail are, it has been said, unknown in Egypt. But
the only ground for such a statement is the authority of the
classical writers. Herodotus regarded rain in Upper Egypt
as a prodigy, * and Mela goes so far as to call Egypt gener
ally " a land devoid of showers." } But the observation of
modern travelers runs counter to such views, } and sup
ports the credit of the author of Exodus. In Upper Egypt,
indeed, " very heavy rain is unusual, and happens only about
once in ten years. Four or five showers fall there every year,
after long intervals." § But in Lower Egypt, rain is as com
mon in winter as it is in the south of Europe. Storms of
great severity occur occasionally, more especially in February
and March, when snow, hail, thunder and lightning are not
uncommon. The Rev. T. H. Tooke " describes a storm of
extreme" severity, which lasted twenty-four hours, in the
middle of February," || as high up the valley as Beni-Hassan.
Other travelers, as Seetzen and Willmann, speak of storms
of thunder and hail in March. " The ravines in the valley
of the kings' tomb near Thebes, and the precautions taken
in the oldest temples at Thebes to guard the roofs against
rain by lions' mouths, or gutters, for letting off the water
from them," IT prove sufficiently that there was no great
difference between ancient and modern times in respect of
the rainfall of the Nile valley.
Among the cultivated products of Egypt mentioned in
Exodus, the principal are, wheat, barley, flax, and rye, or spelt
* Herod, ii'". 10.
t Pomp. Mel., " De Situ Orbis," i. 9; " jEgyptus terraexpers im-
brium. "
X See the passages collected by Hengstenberg, " Egypt and the
Books of Moses," pp. 117, 118.
§ Williamson in Rawlinson's " Herodotus," vol. ii., p. 409, note 4.
|| " Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 285.
f Wilkinson, 1. s. c. Compare " Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., p. 426.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 161
(ix. 32), to which may be added from the Book of Numbers
(xi. 5) cucumbers, melons, onions, garlick, and leeks. Grains
of wheat have been found abundantly in the coffins contain
ing mummies, and " mummy wheat " is said to have been
raised from such grains in various parts of Europe. The
monuments, moreover, represented to us in numerous in
stances the growth of wheat, the mode in which it was cut,
bound into sheaves, or gathered into baskets, and threshed by
the tread of cattle on a threshing-floor. * Barley does not
appear to be represented, } but its growth is manifest. It is
mentioned as the ordinary food of the Egyptian horses, }
and as one of the chief materials used in the making of bread. §
It was also largely employed in the manufacture of beer. |
Flax was likewise cultivated on an extensive scale to furnish
the linen garments necessarily worn by the priests, and pre
ferentially by others, and needed also for mummy-cloths,
corselets,' and various other uses. Spelt, like wheat, is rep
resented on the monuments, IT and according to Herodotus,
was the grain ordinarily consumed by the Egyptians,** as is
the doora— probably the same plant— at the present day.
Herodotus also witnesses to the cultivation of onions and of
garlick,}} while that of cucumbers is attested by their being
'frequently figured in the tombs. The leeks of Egypt had
the character of being superior to all others in the time of
Pliny,}} which would imply a long anterior cultivation. Mel
ons are among the most abundant of the modern products,
but their growth in ancient times seems not to be distinctly
attested. The abundant use of personal ornaments by the Egyptians,
and especially of ornaments in silver and gold, implied in the
direction given to the Israelites to " borrow " such things of
their neighbors and lodgers before their departure from
Egypt (ch. iii. 22), and in the " spoil " which they thus ac
quired (ch. xii. 36), is among the facts most copiously attested
by the extant remains. Ornaments in gold and silver have
been found in the tombs, not only of the great and opulent,
but even of comparatively poor persons ; they were frequently
* See Wilkinson, " Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., pp. 418-427.
t The Egyptian wheat being bearded, it is not easy to say in some
cases whether barley or wheat is represented.
X " Records of the Past," vol. ii., p. 75. § Ibid., vol. via., p. 44.
|| Wilkinson, "Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., p. 42.
1 Ibid., p. 427. ** Herod, n. 36
tf Herod., ii. 125. tt Plin., '« H.N." xix. 33.

162 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
worn by the men, and probably few women were without
them. Among the articles obtained from the tombs are
" rings, bracelets, armlets, necklaces, earrings, and numerous
trinkets belonging to the toilet." * Most of these articles
were common to the two sexes ; but ear-rings were affected
especially, if not exclusively, by the women.
Egyptian men of the upper class carried, as a matter of
course, " walking-sticks." } Hence the " rod " of Aaron was
naturally brought into the presence of Pharaoh (ch. vii. 10) ;,
and the magicians had also " rods " in their hands (ib. ver.
12), which they " cast down " before Pharaoh, as Aaron had
cast his. These " rods," or rather " sticks," are continually
represented on the monuments : no Egyptian lord is with
out one ; } at an entertainment there was an attendant whose
especial duty it was to receive the sticks of the male guests
on their arrival, and restore them at their departure. §
The Egyptians employed "furnaces" (ch. ix. 8) for vari
ous purposes, " (ch.. viii. 3^ for the baking of their bread,
"kneading-troughs " (ibid,) for the formation of the dough,
and "hand-mills " (ch. xi. 5) for the grinding of the corn into
flour. " Their mills," says Sir Gardner Wilkinson, " were
of simple and rude construction. They consisted of two*
circular stones, nearly flat, the lower one fixed, while the
other turned on a pivot, or shaft, rising from the centre of
that beneath it ; and the grain, descending through an aper
ture in the upper stone, immediately above the pivot,
gradually underwent the process of grinding as it passed.
It was turned by a woman, seated and holding a handle fixed
Eerpendicularly near the edge. . . . The stone of which the
and-mills were made was usually a hard grit." || Sir Gard
ner adds in a note that he draws these conclusions from the
fragments of the old stones discovered among the ancient
remains. The same writer witnesses to the use by the
ancient Egyptians of furnaces, ovens, and kneading troughs.1T
One curious custom of an Egyptian household obtains
incidental mention in the account of the first plague, viz.,
* Wilkinson, "Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., p. 236.
t Ibid., vol. ii., p. 28; vol. i'ii.. p. 447.
} Birch, " Egypt from the Earliest 1 imes," p. 45: " The Egyptian
lord . . . carried a wand or walking-stick as a sign of dignity or au
thority." § Wilkinson, "Ancient Egyptians," vol. i., pi. xi., fig. 10.
II Ibid., vol. i., p. 359.
1 Wilkinson, ''Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., pp. 84, 192.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 163
the storing of water in vessels of wood and in vessels of
stone " (ch. vii. 19). Water being exceedingly abundant in
Egypt by reason of the Nile, with its numerous branches,
natural and artificial, which conveyed the indispensable fluid
almost to every house, " storing " would have been quite un
necessary but for one circumstance. The Nile water during
the period of the inundation is turbid, and requires to be
kept for a considerable time before it becomes palatable and
fit for use by the muddy particles sinking gradually to the
bottom, and leaving pure water at the top. To produce this
effect, it has always been, and still is, usual to keep the Nile
water iu jars, or stone-troughs, until the sediment is deposited,
and the fluid rendered fit for drinking.*
Another still more remarkable custom is brought under
notice by the narrative in ch. i. " When ye do the office of
a. midwife to the Hebrew women," says the Pharaoh to
Shiphrah and Puah, " and see them upon the stools, if it be
a son, then ye shall kill him," etc. The incident is one which
its delicate nature unfits for representation, and the monu
ments thus fail to confirm it ; but a modern practice, peculiar,
as far as we know, to Egypt, is probably the direct de
scendant of the ancient one, and at any rate lends it illus
tration. " Two or three days before the expected time of
" delivery," says Mr. Lane, in his account of the manners and
customs of the modern Egyptians, "the layah (midwife)
conveys to the house the kursee ehcilddeh, a chair of a
peculiar form, upon which the patient is to be seated during
the birth." }
The ordinary food of the Israelites during the time of
their sojourn in Egypt is stated in one place (Exod. xvi. 3)
to have consisted of " bread " and " flesh." But from an
other we can learn that it embraced also " fish " in abundance,
and likewise the following vegetables : " cucumbers, melons,
leeks, onions, and garlic" (Numb. xi. 5) That bread was
its staple mav be gathered from the institution of the feast
of unleavened bread (eh. xii. 15-20), as well as from the
mention of " dough " (ibid. vers. 34, 39) as the only provision
that -they took with them, besides their beasts, when they
quitted the country. Now •' bread " was certainly " the staff
of life " to the Egyptian nation, and the food on which they
* Wilkinson. " Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., p. 42S. Compare
Pococke. " Travels," vol. i., p. 312.
t Lane, " Modern Egyptians," vol. iii., p. 142.

164 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
would naturally nourish their slaves. We find a king stating
that he offered in a single temple loaves of three distinct
kinds, viz., " best bread," " great loaves of bread for eating,"
and "loaves of barley hread," to the amount of 6,272,431*
He also offered to the same temple 5,279,552 bushels of
corn.} " Bread " is the ordinary representative of food
in Egyptian speech. The good man gives bread to the
hungry " ; } artisans labor for " bread " ; § " bread " is taken
out to the rustics who work in the fields, || and is brought for
the repast of young maidens. IT Flesh, on the other hand,
though largely consumed by the rich, was generally beyond
the means of the poor ; and the Israelites longing after the
" fleshpots " of Egypt can only be accounted for by suppos
ing that the king nourished his laborers on a more generous
diet that was obtainable by the working classes generally.
It is not likely, however, that they received flesh often. We
have probably in Num. xi. 5 the main constituents of their
dietary in addition to bread. Fish, which they " did eat in
Egypt freely," was undoubtedly one of the principal articles
of food consumed by the lower orders. Herodotus says
that a certain number of the poorer Egyptians " lived entirely
on fish." ** It was so abundant that it was necessarily cheap.
The Nile produced several kinds, which were easily caught ;
and in Lake Mceris the abundance of the fish was such that
the Pharaohs are said to have derived from the sale a re
venue of above £94,000 a year.}} Lake Menzaleh also, and
the other lakes near the coast, must have yielded a con
siderable supply. The fishermen of Egypt formed a numerous
class,}} and the salting and drying of fish furnished occupa
tion to a large number of persons.§§ The quantity of vege
table food which the poorer Egyptians consumed is noted
by Diodorus. || |l and Herodotus makes out that the laborers
whom Khufu (Cheops) employed to build the great pyramid
subsisted mainly, if not wholly, on radishes, onions, and
garlic. 1T1F Cucurbitaceous vegetables are at present among
* " Records of the Past," vol. viii., p. 44, line 5.
t Ibid., vol viii., p-. 45, line 12.
j X Bircb, " Egypt from the Earliest Times," p. 46.
j § " Records of the Past," vol. viii., p. 150.
II Ibid., vol. ii., p. 139. f Ibid., vol. vi., p. 151.
** Herod, ii. 92. tt Ibid. ii. 149.
tt Herod, ii. 92, 95 ; "Records of the Past," vol. viii., p. 153.
§§ Wilkinson, " Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., pp. 115-8.
|||| Diod. Sic. i. 80. IT Herod, ii. 125.

' l NOTICES IN EXODUS. 105
the most abundant productions of the Egyptian soil, and the
monuments frequently exhibit them.* On the whole, there
fore, the dietary assigned to the Israelites in Egypt may be
pronounced subh as the country was well capable of furnish
ing, and such as agrees in most particulars with the ordinary
food of the Egyptian laboring class.
The customs connected with farming and cattle-keeping
noticed in Exodus and the later books of the Pentateuch in
clude, besides the cultivation of certain cereals already men
tioned, (a) the comparative lateness of the wheat and doora
•harvest(ch. ix. 31, 32) ; (b) the leaving of stubble in the fields
after the gathering in of the crops (ch. v. 12) ; (c) the general
cultivation of the land after the fashion of a garden (Deut.
xi. 10) ; (d) the employment of irrigation in such a way that
the "foot "could direct the course of the life-giving fluid
(ibid.) ; (e) the cultivation of fruit-trees (Exod. ix. 25 ; x.
15) ; and (f) the keeping of cattle, partly in the fields,
partly in stalls, or the sheds, where the were protected from
the weather (ch. ix. 19-25). With respect to the first of
these points, it may be observed that there is exactly the
same difference now as that which the writer of Exodus
notes, — " Barley ripens and flax blossom about themiddle of
February, or, at the latest, early in March," } while the
wheat harvest does not begin till April. There is thus a full
month between the barley and the wheat harvest.} The
doora is also a late crop.
The mode of reaping wheat which prevailed in ancient
Egypt is amply represented upon the monuments, and ap
pears to have been such as to leave abundant stubble in the
fields, as implied in ch. v. 12. Not more than about a foot
of the straw was cut with the ear, two feet or more being
left. § The barley was probably reaped in the same way.
It is not, perhaps, quite clear what is meant in Deut. xi.
10 by the land of Egypt being cultivated " as a garden of
herbs " ; but most probably the reference is, as Wilkinson
suggests, || to the ordinary implement of cultivation, the
plough 'being largely dispensed with, and a slight dressing
with the hoe, if even so much as that, used instead. Hero-
* Wilkinson, " Ancient Egyptians," vol, iii., pp. 419, 431.
t Canon Cook in the " Speaker's Commentary," vol. i., p. 286.
X Birch in Wilkinson's "Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., p. 42, note.
§ Ibid., vol. ii., pp. 418-427.
II Wilkinson, "Ancient Egyptians," vol. ii., p. 3S9, note.

166 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
dotus witnesses to the prevalence of this method of cultiva
tion,* and the monuments occasionally represent it.
The absolute necessity of irrigation, and the nature of
the irrigation, implied in the expression, " where thou sowedst
thy seeds, and wateredst it with thy foot " (Deut. xi. 10),
receive illustration from the pictures in the tombs, which
show us the fields surrounded by broad canals, and inter
sected everywhere by cuttings from them, continually dimin
ishing in size, until at last they are no more than rills banked
up with a little mud, which the hand or " foot " might readily
remove and replace, so turning the water in any direction
that might be required by the cultivator.
Fruit-trees are represented on the monuments as largely
cultivated and much valued. Among them the vine holds
the foremost place. A sceptical critic was once bold enough
to assert that the statements in the Pentateuch which implied
the existence of the vine in Egypt were distinct evidence of
" the late origin of the narrative." } But the tombs of Beni-
hassan, which are anterior to the Exodus, contain " represen
tations of the culture of the vine, the vintage, the stripping
off and carrying away of the grapes, of two kinds of wine
presses, the one moved by the strength of human arms, the
other by mechanical power, the storing of wine in bottles or
jars, and its transportation into the cellar."} No one now
doubts that the vine was cultivated in Egypt from a time
long anterior to Moses. The fig and the date-bearing palm
were likewise grown for the sake of the fruit, grapes, figs
and dates constituting the Egyptian lord's usual dessert, §
while the last-named fruit was also made into a conserve, ||
which diversified the diet at rich men's tables.
The breeding and rearing of cattle was a regular part of
the farmer's business in Egypt, and the wealth of individuals
in flocks and herds was considerable. Three distinct kinds
of cattle were affected — the long-horned, the short-horned,
and the hornless. IT " During the greater part of the year
they were pastured in open fields, on the natural growth of
the rich soil, or on artificial grasses, which were cultivated
for the purpose ; but at the time of the inundation it was
* Herod, ii. 14.
t Von Bohlen, " Die Genesis historisch-critisch erlautert, § 373.
} Champollion, quoted by Hengatenberg, "Egypt and the Books
of Moses," p. 15.
§ Birch, " Egypt frnm the Earliest Times," p. 45.
|| Wilkinson, ••Ancient Egyptians, vol. ii., p. 43. 1 Ihid.

NOTICES IN EXODUS. 167
necessary to bring them in from the fields to the farmyards
or the villages, where they were kept in sheds or pens on
ground artificially raised, so as to be beyond the reach of the
river."* Thus the cattle generally had " houses " (Exod. ix.
20), i.e., sheds or stalls, into which it was possible to bring
them at short notice.
Among " miscellaneous customs " the following seem most
worthy of notice : (a) the practice of making boats out of
bulrushes (ch. ii. 3 ; compare Isa. xviii. 2), and (b) the
position occupied by magic at the court of the Pharaohs.
On the former point Sir Gardner Wilkinson remarks } :
" There was a small kind of punt or canoe made entirely of
the papyrus, bound together with bands of the same plant — •
the ' vessels of bulrushes ' mentioned in Isa. xviii. 2." On
the latter M. Maspero makes the following statement }:
" Magic was in Egypt a science, and the magician one of the
most esteemed of learned men. The nobles themselves, the
prince Khamuas and his brother, were adepts in the super
natural arts, and decipherers of magic formularies, in which
they had an entire belief. A prince who was a sorcerer
would nowadays inspire a very moderate sentiment of es
teem. Iii Egypt the profession of magic was not incompati
ble with royalty, and the sorcerers of a Pharaoh had not
uncommonly the Pharaoh himself for their pupil." The
magical texts form a considerable portion of the MSS. which
have come down to us from ancient times, particularly from
the nineteenth dynasty; and the composition of some of
them was ascribed to a divine source.
* "Rawlinson, " History of Ancient Egypt," vol. i., pp. 171, 172.
t In Rawlinson's "Herodotus," vol. ii., p. 154, note.
} Quoted by M. Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire' Ancienne." vol.
ii., pp. 126-7.

168 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER XIX.
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN THE FIEST BOOK OF KINGS.
It is, at first sight, surprising that there is no mention of.
Egypt in connection with the history of the Israelites be
tween the Exodus and the reign of Solomon. The interval
is one of, at least, three hundred — perhaps of four hundred
— years. During its earlier portion, and again about a cen
tury before its close, the Egyptian monarchs conducted ex
peditions into Northern Syria, if not even into Mesopotamia,
which might have been expected to have brought them into
contact with the Hebrew people ; but the Hebrew records
of the time are entirely silent on the subject, and indeed
only mention Egypt retrospectively, as the place where
Israel had once suffered affliction.* Perhaps the earlier ex
peditions — those of Rameses III.} — may have taken place
while Israel was still detained in the " Wilderness of the
Wanderings," in which case there would naturally have been
no collision between the two peoples ; while those of Rame
ses XII.} and of Herhor § (about b. c 1130-1100), having
Syria rather than Palestine for their object, may have been
conducted along the coast route by way of Philistia and
Phoenicia into Ccele-Syria, and so have left the Israelite terri
tory untouched, or nearly untouched. The main explanation,
however, of the disappearance of Egypt from the narrative,
is to be found in her general depression and weakness during
the period in question, which prevented any real conquests
from being made, or any large armies sent into Western Asia,
as in the earlier times of Thotmes III., Amenhotep IL, Seti,
and Rameses IL, or in the later ones of Sheshonk andNeku.
This depression is very marked in the Egyptian remains, ,
* Josh. i. 10 : xxiv. 4-7, 14, 17; 1 Sam. ii. 27; vi. 6 ; x. 18; xii. 6-8.
t Brugsch, " History of Egvpt," vol. ii , p. 152.
1 Ibid., vol. ii., pp. 184-7 ; Birch, " Egypt from the Earliest Times,"
pp. 149-153. § Birch, p. 154:

NOTICES IN THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 169
which show no really great or conquering monarch between
Rameses III. and Sheshonk I. During this space, which is
that of the judges and first two kings in Israel, Egypt really
ceased to be an aggressive power.
The Scriptural notices of Egypt belonging to the reign
of Solomon are the following : —
1. "Solomon made affinity with Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and took
Pharaoh's daughter, and brought her into the city of David." — 1
Kings iii. 1.
2. " Pharaoh, king of Egypt, had gone up and taken Gezer, and
burnt it with fire, and slain the Canaanites that dwelt in the city, and
given it for a present unto his daughter, Solomon's wife." — 1 Kings
ix. 16.
3. " Solomon had horses brought out of Egypt, and linen yarn ;
the king's merchants received the linen yarn at a price. And a chariot
came up and went out of Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver, and
an horse for a hundred and fifty : and so for all the kings of the
Hittities, and for the kings of Syria, did they bring them out by their
means."— 1 Kings*x. 28, 29.
4. "The Lord stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the
Edomite : he was of the king's seed in Edom. For it came to pass,
when David was in Edom, and Joab, the captain of the host, was
gone up to bury the slain, after he had smitten every male in Edom,
. . . that Hadad fled, he and certain Edomites of his father's servants
with him, to go into Egypt, Hadad being yet a little child ; and they
arose out of Midian, and came to Paran ; and they took men with
them out of Paran, and they came to Egypt, unto Pharaoh, king of
Egypt, whicli gave him an house, and appointed him victuals, and
gave him land. And Hadad found great favor in the sight of Pharaoh,
so that he gave him to wife the sister of his own wife, the sister of
Tahpenes the queen; and the, sister of Tahpenes bare him Genubath,
his son, whom Tahpenes weaned in Pharaoh's house : and Genubath
was in Pharaoh's household, ariiong the sons of Pharaoh." — 1 Kings
xi. 14-20.
5. " Solomon sought to kill Jeroboam. And Jeroboam arose and
fled into Egypt, unto Shishak, . . . unto the death of Solomon." — 1
Kings xi. 40.
There is nothing surprising in the willingness of a
Pharaoh of the twenty-first dynasty to give a daughter in
marriage to the foreign monarch of a neighboring country
Even in the most flourishing times the kings of Egypt had
been willing to form matrimonial alliances with the Ethio
pian royal house, and had both taken Ethiopian princesses
for their own wives * and given their daughters in marriage
to Ethiopian monarchs. The last king of. the twentieth
dynasty married a " princess of Baktan " } — a Syrian or
* Birch, " Egypt from the Earliest Times," pp 81, 1C7, etc.
t " Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 57.

170 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Mesopotamian ; and even the great Rameses married a
Hittite. * According to 1 Chron. iv. 18, there was one
Pharaoh who allowed a daughter of his to marry a mere
ordinary Israelite. To "make affinity" with a prince of
Solomon's rank and position would have been beneath the
dignity of few Egyptian monarchs ; it was probably felt as
a highly satisfabtory connection by the weak Tanite prince
whose daughter made so good a match.
With which of the Tanite monarchs it was that Solo
mon thus allied himself is uncertain. M. Lenormant fixes
definitely on Hor-Pasebensha,-} or Pasebensha IL, the last
king of the dynasty; but an earlier monarch is more prob
able. Solomon's marriage was early in his reign (1 Kings
iii. 1), and he reigned forty years (ch. xi. 42), during the
last five or ten of which he would seem to have been con
temporary with Shishak (ch. xi. 40). When he ascended
the throne, and the king who reigned in Egypt was probably
either Pasebensha L or Pinetem II. Unfortunately these
monarchs have left such scanty remains, that we know next
to nothing concerning them.
The conquest of Gezer by this Pharaoh, whoever he was,
and its transference to Solomon as his wife's dowry (ch. ix.
16), though it cannot be confirmed from Egyptian history,
may be illustrated from Assyrian. Sargon tells ns in one of
his inscriptions that, having conquered the country of Cilicia
with some difficulty, on account of its great natural strength,
he made it over to Ambris, King of Tubal, who had married
one of his daughters, as the princess's dowry.}
The establishment of commercial relations between Pal
estine and Syria on the one hand and Egypt on the other
(ch. x. 28, 29) is exactly what might have been expected to
follow on the matrimonial alliance concluded between Solo
mon and his Egyptian contemporary. When Rameses II.
allied himself with the Hittite royal house, interchange of
commodities between Egypt and Syria is the immediate
consequence. Corn is sent by sea from the valley of the
Nile to the Syrian mountain tract for the support of the
" children of Heth," § who doubtless made a return in timber,
or some other products of their own soil. In Solomon's
* Lenormant, "Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 264.
tlbid., vol. ii., p. 329.
X " Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., p. 442, note 383.
§ "Records of the Past," vol. iv., p. 42, 1. 24.

NOTICES IN THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 171
time the Egyptian commodities imported by the Western
Asiatics were different. Long practice had perfected in
Egypt the manufacture of chariots, and these had become
indispensable to the Hittite and Syrian kings for the main
tenance of their independence against the encroachments of
Assyria. Each king of these peoples — and there were several
kings of each * — maintained a war force of several hundred
chariots,} for each of which were needed two well-trained
horses. These Egypt supplied, together (if our translators
are right) with " linen yarn," also a commodity known to
have been produced largely in that country.}
The story of Hadad's flight to Egypt and hospitable re
ception by an Egyptian Pharaoh, whose queen's name was
Tahpenes, admits of no illustration from profane sources.
We do not know the names borne by the queens of the
later monarchs of the twenty-first dynasty, and we have
thus no means of identifying the Pharaoh intended. No
doubt Egypt was at all times open as a refuge to political
exiles ; but there must have been special reasons for the high
favor shown to Hadad. Perhaps he was already connected
by blood with the Tanite monarchs ; perhaps Edom had
been in alliance with Egypt before David conquered it.
Jeroboam's flight to Shishak brings before us an Egyptian
monarch who is fortunately unmistakable. Hitherto the
sacred writers have been content, when mentioning Egyptian
kings, to speak of them by their recognized official title of
"Pharaoh." § Now for the first time is this habit broken
through, and the actual proper name of an Egyptian mon
arch presented to us. The Hebrew Shishak (pptff) repre
sents almost exactly the Egyptian name ordinarily written
" Sheshenk," but sometimes "Sheshek,"|| and expressed in
the fragments of Monetho by Sesonchis, (2tooyXic).% This
is a name well known to Egyptologists. Wholly absent
from all the earlier Egyptian monuments, it appears sud
denly in those of the twenty-second (Bubastite) , dynasty,
where it is borne by no less than four monarchs, besides
* " See 2 Sam. viii. 3-12 ; x. 6-16 ; 1 Kings x. 29 ; 2 Kings vii. 6 ;
and the Assyrian inscriptions passim.
t " Ancient Monarchies," vol. i , p. 409, note 209.
f H-rod. ii. 37, 182; iii. 47; Plin., " H. N." xix. 1.
8 See above, ch. xiii. .,_... . . . „
|| Lepsius, " Ueber die XXII. ^Igyptische Konigs dynastie, pp
267. 2«9.
T Synceilus, " Chrcnographia,'' pp. 73d, 74d.

172 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
occurring also among the names of private individuals. This
abundance would be somewhat puzzling were it not for the
fact that one only of the four monarchs is a warrior, or leads
any expedition beyond the borders .* The records of the
time leave no doubt that the prince who received Jeroboam
was Sheshonk I., the founder of the Bubastite line, the son
of Namrot and Tentespeh, the first king of the twenty-second
dynasty. " It came to pass in tbe fifth year of King Rehoboam that Shishak,
king of Egypt, came up against Jerusalem; and he took away the
treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's
house ; he even took away all ; and he took away all the shields of gold
which Solomon had made." — 1 Kings xiv. 25, 26.
With this may be compared 2 Chron. xii. 1-9 ; —
"And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the king
dom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the Lord,
and all Israel with him; and it came to pass, that in the fifth year of
King Rehoboam Shishak, king of Egypt, came up against Jerusalem,
because they had transgressed against the Lord, with twelve hundred
chariots ana threescore thousand horsemen; and the people "were
without number that came with him out of Egypt — the Lubims, and
the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians. And he took the fenced cities
which pertained to Judah, and came to Jerusalem. Then came
Shemaiah the prophet to Rehoboam, and to the princes of Judah that
were gathered together to Jerusalem because of Shishak, and said
unto them, Thus saith the Lord, Ye have forsaken Me, and therefore
also have I left you in the hand of Shishak. Whereupon the princes
of Israel and the king humbled themselves, and they said, the Lord is
righteous. And when the Lord saw that they humbled themselves,
the word of the'Lord came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled"
themselves ; therefore 1 will not destroy them, but I will grant them
some deliverance; and My wrath shall not be poured out upon Jeru
salem by the hand of Shishak. Nevertheless they shall be his servants,
that they may know My service and the service of the kingdoms of the
countries. So Shishak, king of Egypt, came up against Jerusalem,
and took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treas
ures of the king's house: he took all; he carried away also the shields
of gold which Solomon had made."
The Palestinian expedition of Sheshonk I. forms the
subject of a remarkable bas-relief,} which, on his return
from it, he caused to be executed in commemoration of its
complete success. Selecting the Great Temple of Karnak,
* Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 340.
t For a representation of this monument, see the " Denkmaler " of
Lepsius, part iii. pis, 252 and 253 a.

NOTICES IN THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 173
at Thebes, which Seti I. and Rameses II. had already
adorned profusely with representations of their victories, he
built against its southern external wall , a fresh portico or
colonnade, known to Egyptologists as " the portico of the
Bubastites," and carved upon the wall itself, to the east of
his portico, a memorial of his grand campaign. First, he
represented himself in his war costume, holding by the hair
of their heads with his left hand thirty-eighty Captive Asiatic
chiefs, and with an iron mace uplifted in his right threatening
them with destruction. Further, he caused himself to be
figured a second time, and represented in the act of leading
captive a hundred and thirty-three cities or tribes, each
specified by name and personified in an individual form, ac
companied by a cartouche containing their respective names.
In the physiognomies of these ideal figures the critical
acumen or lively imagination of a French historian sees
rendered " with marvelous ethnographic exactness" the Jew
ish type of countenance ; * but less gifted travelers do not
find anything very peculiar in the profiles, which, whether
representing Jews or Arabs, are almost exactly alike.
The list of names contained in the record is very much
more interesting than the array of countenances accompany
ing them. They have been carefully transcribed, and com
pared with those which occur in the Hebrew Scriptures, both
by Mr. Reginald Stuart Poole} and by Dr. Brugsch.} It re
sults from the comparison, first, that of the ninety names
which are legible about forty or forty-five may be pretty
certainly identified either with Palestinian towns or districts
or with Arab tribes of the neighborhood ; secondly, that
the Arab tribe names are in several instances repeated. ; and
thirdly, that the Palestinian town names are divisible into
three classes : (a) cities of Judah proper, (b) Levitical cities
within the limits of the kingdom of Israel, and (c) Canaanite
cities within the same limits. To the first-class belong
Adoraim (called Aduruma), Aijalon (called Ayulon), and
Shoco (called Shauke), which were among the " fenced cities"
that Rehoboam fortified in anticipation of Sheshonk's attack
(2 Chron. xi. 5-10); also Gibeon (Kebeana), Alemeth (Beith-
almoth), Beth-Tappuah (Beith-Tapuh) Telem (Zalema),
* Lenormant, "Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., pp. 340,
t See the article on Shishak in Smith's " Dictionary of the
Bible." vol. iii.
} " Geschichte .(Egyptens unter den Pharaonen," pp. 660-662.

174 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Azem (Aauzamaa), and Lebaoth (Libith). To the second
class may be assigned Taanach (Ta'ankau), mentioned as a
Levitical city in Josh. xxi. 25 ; Rehob (Rehabau), mentioned
in Josh. xxi. 31 and 1 Chron. vi. 75 ; Mahanaim (Mahunema),
mentioned Josh. xxi. 38, 1 Chron. vi. 80 ; Beth-horon
(Beith-Huaron), mentioned Josh. xxi. 22, 1 Chron. vi. 68 ;
Kedemoth (Kademoth), mentioned Josh. xxi. 37, 1 Chron.
vi. 79 ; Bileam (Bilema), mentioned 1 Chron. vi. 70 ; Gol
an (Galenaa), mentioned Josh, xxi.' 27, 1 Chron. vi. 71 ;
and Anem (Anama), mentioned in 1 Chron. vi. 73. As.
belonging to the third class we can only fix positively on
Bcth-shan (Beith-shan-ra) and Megiddo (Maketu) ; but Rab-
bith, Shunem, Hapharaim, and Edrei, which are also con
tained in Sheshonk's list of his conquests, may be suspected
of having retained a Canaanite element in their population.
This list is remarkable both for what it contains and for
what it omits. The omission of most of those strongholds
towards the south, which Rehoboam fortified against Egypt,
as Hebron, Lachish, Azekah, Mareshah, Gath, Adullam, Beth-
zur, and Tekoa(2 Chron. xi. 6-10), is perhaps to be explained
by the illegibility of twelve names at the beginning of the
list, where these cities, as the first attacked, would most
probably have been mentioned. The omission of Jerusalem
might also be accounted for in the same way. ' Or the fact
may have been that Jerusalem itself was not taken. Like
Hezekiah, on the first invasion of Sennacherib (2 Kings xviii.
13-16), Rehoboam may have surrendered his treasures (1
Kings xiv. 26) to save his city from the horrors of capture.
This was, perhaps, the fulfilment of God's promise by the
mouth of Shemaiah — " I will grant them some deliverance,
and My wrath shall not be poured upon Jerusalem by the
hand of Shishak " (2 Chron. xii. 7). The Egyptian mon
arch, on receiving the treasures and the submission of
Rehoboam (ibid. ver. 8), may have consented to respect the
city. But, as he could not mention Jersusalem among his actual
conqui.sts, he supplied the place where the name would
naturally have occurred with an inscription of a peculiar
kind. The cartouche borne by one of the earlier of the ideal
figures contains the epigraph " YTJTeH MALeK," in which
Egyptologists generally recognize a boast either that the
king or the " kingdom of Judah " made submission to the
conqueror. " Yuteh Malek " is, we think, most properly read

NOTICES IN THE FIRST BOOK OF KINGS. 175
as " Judah, a kingdom." By introducing the words, Sheshonk
wished to mark that besides subduing cities and districts
and tribes, he had in one case conquered a country which
was under the government of a king.
The fact that a large proportion of the towns mentioned
as taken are in -the territories not of Rehoboam, against
whom Sheshonk " went up " (1 Kings xiv. 25), but of Jero
boam, his protege' and friend, whom his. expedition was
doubtless intended to assist, and the further fact that these
towns were chiefly Levitical or Canaanite, would seem to
show that Jeroboam, in the earlier part of his reign, had
considerable opposition to encounter within the limits of his
own kingdom. The disaffection of those Levites whose
possessions lay within his territories is sufficiently indicated
in Chronicles by the account which is there given (2 Chron.
xi. 13, 14) of a number of them leaving their possessions
and " resorting to Rehoboam throughout all their coasts,"
It is probable that such as remained were equally hostile, and
that Jeroboam used the arms of his ally to punish them. At
the same time, he was enabled by Egyptian aid to reduce a
few Canaanite cities which still maintained their indepen
dence, as Gezer had done until conquered by the Pharaoh
'who gave his daughter to Solomon (2 Kings ix. 16).
The army with which Sheshonk invaded Palestine is
more numerous than we should have anticipated, and some
corruption in the numbers may be suspected. It is com
posed, however, exactly as the monuments would have led
us to expect, almost wholly of foreign mercenaries (2 Chron.
xii. 3), Libyans, Ethiopians, and others. The Egyptian armies
at this time consisted, for the most part, of Maxyes and other
Berber tribes from the north-west, and of Ethiopians and
negroes from the south.* Sheshonk, who was himself of
foreign descent, placed far more dependence on these foreign
troops than on the native Egyptian levies.
" Asa had an army of men that bare targets and spears. . . . And
there came out against them Zerah the Ethiopian with an host of a
thousand thousand and three hundred chariots, and came unto Mare
shah. Then Asa went out against him, and they set the battle in array
in the valley of Zephathah at Mareshah. And Asa cried unto the
Lord, . . . and the Lord smote the Ethiopians before Asa and before
Judah, and the Ethiopians fled. And Asa and the people that were
with him pursued them unto Gerar ; and the Ethiopians were over
thrown, that they could not recover themselves." — 2 Chkon. xiv. 9-13.
* Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., pp.340, 341.

176 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
The Egyptians do not record unsuccessful expeditions,
and thus the monuments contain no mention of this attack
on Asa. It appears to have been provoked by Asa's rebellion,
which is glanced at in 2 Chron. xiv. 6. The Egyptian
monarch who sent or led the expedition was probably Osor-
chon (Uasarkan) IL, whose name the Hebrews contracted
into Zerach . He was, perhaps, an Ethiopian on his
mother's side. Asa's defeat of his vast army is the most
glorious victory ever obtained by a Israelite monarch, and
secured his country from any Egyptian attack for above
three centuries.

NOTICES IN THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS. 177

CHAPTER XX.
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS.
"Inthe twelfth year of Ahaz, king of Judah, began Hoshea, the
son of Elah, to reign in Samaria. . . . Against him came up Shal-
maneser, king of Assyria; and Hoshea became his servant, and gave
him presents. And the king of Assyria found conspiracy in Hoshea,
for he had sent messengers to So, king of Egypt, and brought no
present to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year; therefore
the king of Assyria shut him up, and bound him in prison." — 2 Kings
xvii. 1-4.
It is not very easy to identify the " king of Egypt "
here mentioned, as one with whom Hoshea, the son of Elah,
sought to ally himself, with any of the known Pharaohs.
" So " is a name that seems at first sight very unlike those
borne by Egyptian monarchs, which are never monosyllabic,
and in no case end in the letter o. A reference to the He
brew text removes, however, much of the difficulty, since the
word rendered by " So " in our version is found to be one
of three letters,JODall of which may be consonants. As the
Masoretic pointing, which our translators followed, is of
small authority, and in proper names of scarcely any
authority at all, we are entitled to give to each of the three
letters its consonant force, and, supplying short vowels, to
render the HebrewNIDby " Seveh." Now " Seveh " is very
near indeed to the Manethonian " Sevech-us," whom the
Sebennytic priest makes the second monarch of his twenty-
fifth dynasty ; and " Sevech-us " is a natural Greek equiva
lent of the Egyptian " Shebek " or Shabak," a name borne
by a well-known Pharaoh (the first king of the same dynasty),
which both Herodotus and Manetho render by " Sabac6s."
It has been generally allowed that So (or Seveh) must re
present one or other of these, but critics are not yet agreed
which is to be preferred of the two.* To us it seems that
both the name itself and the necessities of the chronology
» The general opinion is in favor of Shabak ; but some, like Hekek-
yan Bey ("Chronology of Siriadic Monuments," p. 106), prefer
Shabatok.

178 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
point to the first king rather than to the second ; and wa
consequently regard Hoshea as having turned in his distress
to seek the aid of the monarch whom the Egyptians knew
as Shabak, and the Greeks as Sabacos of Sabaco.*
The application implies an entire change in the con
dition of political affairs in the East, and in the relations of
state to state, from those which prevailed when Egyptian
monarchs last figured in the sacred narrative, two hundred
or two hundred and fifty years earlier. Then Egypt was an
aggressive power, bent on establishing her influence over
Palestine, and from time to time invading Asia with large
armies in the hope of making extensive conquests.} She
was the chief enemy feared by the petty kingdoms and
loosely aggregated tribes of South-western Asia, the only
power in their neighborhood that possessed large bodies of
disciplined troops and an instinct of self-aggrandizement.
But all this was now altered. Egypt, from the time of
Osarkon IL, had steadily declined in strength ; her monarchs
had been inactive and unwarlike, her policy one of absten
tion from all enterprise. The inveterate evil of distintegra-
tion with which her ill-shaped territory was naturally threat
ened, and which had from time to time shown' itself in her
history, once more made its appearance. There arose a
practice of giving appanages to the princes of the royal
house, which tended to become hereditary, and trenched on
the sovereignty of the nominal monarch. " Egypt found
herself divided into a certain number of principalities, some
of which contained only a few towns, while others extended
over several adjacent cantons. Ere long the chiefs of these
principalities were bold enough to reject the suzerainty of the
Pharaoh ; relying upon their bands of Libyan mercenaries,
they not only usurped the functions of royalty, but even the
title of king, while the legitimate reigning house, relegated
to a corner of the Delta, with difficulty preserved a remnant
of its old authority." } By the close of the twenty-second
dynasty, " Egypt" had arrived at such a point of distintegra-
tion as to find herself portioned out among nearly twenty
princes, of whom four at least assumed the cartouche and
the other emblems of royalty." §
* Herod, ii. 139; Manetho ap. Syncell. " Chronograph," p. 74, B.
t Chron xii. 3; xiv. 0.
} Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p 341.
§ Ibid., p. 342.

NOTICES IN THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS. 179
Meanwhile, as if to counterbalance the paralysis and dis
erepitude of the Egyptian state, there had arisen on the
other side of Syria and Palestine a great power, continually
increasing in strength, with the same instinct of aggrandize
ment which had formerly possessed Egypt, and with even
greater aptitudes for war and conquest. Assyria, from
about K. c 880, or a little earlier, began to press westward
upon the nations dwelling between the Euphrates and the
Mediterranean, and to threaten them with subjugation.
Asshur-nazir-pal took Carchemish, conquered Northern
Syria, and forced the Phoenician cities to make their sub
mission to him.* His son, Shalmaneser IL, engaged in
wars with Hamath, Damascus, and Samaria; defeated
Benhadad, Hazael, and Ahab ; and made Jehu take up the
position of a tributary.} The successors of these two war- '
like princes " fairly maintained the empire which they had
received," } an<J even pushed their expeditions into Philistia
and Edom. After a lull in the war-storm, which lasted from
about b. c 780 to 750, it recommenced with increased fury.
Tiglath-Pileser II. crushed the Kingdom of Damascus, and
greatly crippled that of Samaria, besides which he reduced
the Philestines and several tribes of Arabs. He was suc
ceeded by Shalmaneser IV., the monarch mentioned in 2
Kings xvii. 3.
The situation was thus the following. The petty states
of Palestine and Syria had been suffering from the attacks
of the Assyrians for a century and a half. One after another,
the greater part of them had succumbed. First they were
made tributaries; then they were absorbed into the con
quering state and became mere provinces. Hoshea found
his kingdom threatened with the fate which had befallen so
many others. He had the courage to make an effort to
save it. Casting an anxious glance over the entire political
position, he thought that he saw in the Egyptian monarch
of the time a possible deliverer. For there had been quite
recently a revolution in Egypt. The weak and indolent
native monarchs had been thrust aside, and superseded by a
stronger and fiercer foreign race from the neighboring
Ethiopia. " So," or Shabak, was one of these foreigners,
and wielded the resources of two countries, his adopted and
* "Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., p. 400.
t Ibid., pp. 102-10G.
{ Sayce " Ancient Empires of the East." p. 375.

180 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
his native one. It was reasonable to expect that he would
see the danger which menaced Egypt from the new masters
of Western Asia, and the desirability of maintaining the
barrier between his own dominions and the Assyrian, which
the still unconquered tribes and kingdoms of Syria and Pal
estine were capable of constituting. There were others
besides Samaria ripe for revolt.* It would have been a
wise policy on the part of the Egyptian monarch to have
fomented the disaffection, and supported with his full force
the movement in favor of independence which was in pro
gress. Hoshea's " messengers," under these circumstances,
sought the court of Shabak, which appears to have been
fixed at Memphis, in Lower Egypt.} It would seem that
they were received with favor, and that material aid was
promised, since Hoshea almost immediately broke into open
revolt by witholding the tribute due to his Assyrian suzerain.
With the utmost promptness Shalmaneser marched against
him, seized his person, and carried him off to Nineveh.
Shabak made no effort in his defence. The first attempt
of the people of God to " call to Egypt " (Hos. vii. 11) thus
proved a most disastrous failure : the king, who had " trusted
upon the staff of the bruised reed " (2 Kings xviii. 21), was
ruined by his misplaced confidence, and within a few years
his capital was taken (ibid. ver. 6), and his people carried
into captivity (ibid).
"And Rabshakeh said, . . . Speak ye now to Hezekiah, Thus
saith the great king, the king of Assyria, What confidence is this
wherein thou trustest ? Thou sayest — but they are but vain words —
I have counsel and strength for the war. Now on whom dost thou
trust, that thou rebellest against me ? Now, behold, thou trustest
upon the staff of this bruised reed, even upon Egypt, on which if a
man lean, it will go into his hand and pierce it : so is Pharaoh, king
of Egypt unto all that trust on him " (ch. xviii. 19-21).
"When he" (i.e. Sennacherib) "heard say of Tirhakah, king cf
Ethiopia, Behold, he is come out to fight against thee, he sent messen
gers again to Hezekiah, saying, Let not thy God in whom thou
trustest deceive thee, saying, Jerusalem shall not be delivered into
the hand of the king of Assyria" (ibid., vers. 9, 10).

Another act in the drama has been opened. The king-
* As Tyre, which actually revolted a year or two later; and
.math, Arpad, Simyra, and Damascus, which revolted from Sargon
B.C. 721.
t Rawlinson, " History of Ancient Egypt." vol. ii., p. 446.

NOTICES IN THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS. 181
dom of Samaria having been conquered and absorbed by the
terrible Assyrians, it is Judaea's turn to be threatened with
a siihiliar fate. Not that she is now threatened for the first
time. Before Samaria had fallen, Ahaz, the father of
Hezekiah, placed himself voluntarily under the Assyrian
suzeraintyT consenting to become the vassal of Tiglath-Pileser
(2 Kings xvi. 7-10). Hezekiah threw off the Assyrian yoke
(ch. xviii. 7) ; but it was reimposed upon him first, as it
would seem, by Sargon,* and again (about b. c. 701) by
Sennacherib (ibid., vers. 13-16). The Jewish monarch was,
however, at no time a submissive or willing vassal ; and he
had no sooner bowed his, neck to Sennacherib's yoke, than he
began to make preparations for recovering his independence.
Like his brother monarch in Samaria, he thought that he
saw. in Egypt his best ally and protector. We may gather
from Sennacherib's reproaches in this chapter, as 'well as
from passages in the prophecies of Isaiah, that a formal
embassy was sent either to Tirhakah at Napata, or to his
representative in Lower Egypt, with an offer of alliance and
a request for armed assistance, especially chariots and horse
men (ibid., vers. 23. 24). As in the former instance, the
answer received was favorable. Tirhakah was an enterpris
ing monarch 'who left a name behind him which marks him
as one of the greatest of Egypt's later kings.} He saw the
wisdom of upholding the independence of Judaea, and ac
cepting the alliance proffered by Hezekiah, probably gave
an assurance of help, should Sennacherib attempt to punish
his revolted vassal.
The occasion for fulfilling his promise soon arrived.
Sennacherib, in b. c. 700 or 699, once more proceeded into
Palestine,} and, sending a general to frighten Hezekiah into
submission (ibid., ver. 17), himself marched on towards the
south. He had received information of the alliance that
had been concluded between Judaea and Egypt (vers. 21,
24), and regarding Tirhakah as his chief enemy, pressed
forward to encounter his troops. Tirhakah, on his part, re-
* Sargon claims in his inscriptions to have conquered Jerusalem
(see Mr. Cheyne's " Isaiah," vol. i.,p. 69). Various passages of Isaiah
are thought to have reference to this conquest.
t Megasthenes, Fr. 80.
X M. Leinrmant considers that tbe embassy of Rabshakeh and de-
struc'io-i n" Sennacherib's host fell in the same year as his first inva
sion ("' Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 361) ; but it seems to
me more probable that they were separated by a short interval.

182 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
mained faithful to his ally, and put his army in motion to
meet Sennacherib (ch. xix. 9).
This boldness is quite in accordance with Tirhakah's
character. He was an enterprising prince, engaged in many
wars, and a determined opponent of the Assyrians. His
name is read on the Egyptian monuments as Tahark or
Tahrak ; and his face, which appears on them, is expressive
of strong determination. The Assyrian inscriptions tell us
that, in the later part of his life, he caried on a war for
many years with Esar-haddon and his son, Asshur-bani-pal.*
If his star ultimately paled before that of the latter, it was
not from any lack of courage, or resolution, or good faith on
his part. He struggled gallantly against the Assyrian power
for above thirty years, was never wanting to his confederates
and, if he did not quite deserve the high eulogies of the
Greeks, was at any rate, among the most distinguished
monarchs of his race and period.
"In his" (Josiah's) "days of Pharaoh-Nechoh, kiDg of Egypt,
went up against the king of Assyria to the river Euphrates; and King
Josiah went against him; and he slew him at Megiddo, when he had
seen him. . . . And the people of the laud took Jehoahaz, the son of
Josiah, and anointed him, and made him ting in his father's stead. . . .
And Pharaoh-Nechoh put him in bands at Riblah,-in the land of
Hamath, that he might not reign in Jerusalem, and put the land to
a tribute of an hundred talents of silver and a talent of gold. And
Pharaoh-Nechoh made Eliakim, the son of Josiah, king in the room
of Josiah his father, and turned his name to Jehoiakim, and took
Jehoahaz away; and he came to Egypt, and died there " (ch. xxiii.
29-34). An interval of ninety years separates this notice from the
one last considered. The position of affairs is onec more com
pletely changed. Although the present passage, taken by
itself, does not give any indication of what had occurred,
it is quite certain that, in the interval between Tirhakah's
war with Sennacherib and " Pharaoh-Necho's " invasion of
Palestine, the empire of Assyria had come to an end.
Necho was on his way " to fight against Carchemish by
Euphrates " (2 Chron. xxxv. 20) with " the house wherewith
he had war " (ibid.) ; and that house was not the old one of
the Sargonidas, wherewith Tirhakah had contended, but a
new " house " which had recently come into power, and
which held its court, not at Nineveh, but at Babylon (Isa.
" * G. Smith, " History of Asshur-bani-pal," pp. 15-47.

NOTICES IN THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS. 183
xlvi. 2). The exact year of the fall of Assyria is indeed un
certain ; * but all authorities agree that it had taken place
before the date of Necho's expedition, which was in b. c.
608. By " king of Assyria," in ver. 29, we must therefore
understand king of Babylon, just as in Ezra vi. 22 we must
understand by " king of Assyria " king of Persia. The
Babylonian monarch, Nabopolassar, had taken a share in tho
great war by which the empire of the Assyrians was brought
to an end,} and had succeeded to Assyria's right in Western
Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine. He was probably
regarded by Josiah as his suzerain, and therefore entitled
to such help as he could render him.
While these changes had taken place in Asia, in Africa
also the condition of affairs was very much altered. The
Ethiopian dynasty, after its long struggle against Assyria,
had been forced to yield, had given up the contest, and re
tired from Egypt altogether.} Assyria had for a time
held Egypt under her sway, and acting in the spirit of the
maxim, " Divide et impera," had split up the country among
no fewer than twenty princes. Of these some had been
Assyrians, but the greater part natives. A Necho (Neku),
the grandfather of the antagonist of Josiah, had held the
first place among the twenty, being assigned the governments
of Memphis and Sais, together with almost the whole of the
Western Delta. He had been succeeded after a time by his
son Psamatik, the Psammetichus of the Greeks, who had
taken advantage of the growing weakness of Assyria during
the later half of the seventh century to raise the standard
of revolt, and had succeeded, by the assistance of Gyges,
king of Lydia, and of numerous Greek and Carian merce
naries, in establishing his own independence and uniting all
Egypt under his sway. A period of great prosperity had
then set in. Psamatik I., a prudent, and at the same time
a brave and warlike, prince, raised Egypt from a state of
extreme depression to a height which she had only previously
reached under the Osirtasens, the Thothmeses, and the Rames-
sides. During the rapid decline and decay of Assyrian
power which followed upon the death of Asshur-bani-pal
(b. c. 626), he extended his sway over Philistia and Phoe
nicia, thus resuming the policy of aggression upon Asia
* The opinion of scholars varies between B. c. 625 and B. c. 610.
t " Ancient Monarchies," vol. l. pp. 499, 500.
} Lenormant, "Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., pp. 377, 378

184 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
which had been laid aside, at any rate from the time of
Sheshonk. The opportunity seemed good for re-establish
ing Egyptain influence in this quarter, now that Assyria was
approaching her end, and Babylon not yet established as her
successor. The " Pharaoh-Necho " of the present notice is undoubt
edly Neku IL, the son and successor of Psamatik I. and the
grandson of the first Neku. He succeeded his father inB. c
611 or 610, and held the throne till b. c. 595 or 594. He
left behind him a high character for courage and enterprise.
" We must see in him," says Dr. Wiedemann,* " according
to the narratives of the Greek historians, one of the most
enterprising and excellent sovereigns of all Egyptian an
tiquity." After two or three years of preparation for war,
he led his forces into Palestine by the coast road commonly
followed by his predecessors, through Philistia and Sharon
to Megiddo, on the high ground separating the plain of
Sharon from that of Esdraelon. Here, on a battle-field
celebrated alike in ancient and in modern times, he was con
fronted by Josiah, the Jewish monarch, who had recently
united under his sway the greater portion of the two king
doms of Israel and Judah.} Necho, according to the -author
of Chronicles, endeavored to avoid engaging his troops, first
by assuring him that his quarrel was not with him, but with
the royal house of Babylon (2 Chron. xxxiii. 21), and then
by urging that he had received a Divine commission to attack
his enemy. Assertions of this kind were probably not un
usual in the mouths of Egyptian-princes, who regarded them
selves as the favorites of Heaven, sons of the sun, and under
constant Divine protection. We have an example in Piankhi,
one of the Ethiopian monarchs of Egypt, who, when march
ing against the native princes that had revolted from him,
declares,} " I am born of the loins, created from the egg, of
the Deity. ... I have not acted without His knowing : He
ordained that I should [so] act." Neither argument had
any effect on the resolution of the Jewish king ; he prob
ably deemed himself bound, as faithful vassal, to bar the
way of his suzerain's enemy ; and Necho, finding him thus
resolved, was compelled to engaged his forces. The battle,
*" Geshichte .^Egyptens von Psammetich I. bis auf Alexander den
Grossen," p. 147.
t 2 Kings xxiii. 15-19; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 6-9.
X "Records of the Past," vol. ii., p. 91, 1. 69.

NOTICES IN THE SECOND BOOK OF KINGS. 185
commonly known as that of Megiddo, seems to be men
tioned by Herodotus* as the battle of Magdolum, wherein he
says that Neko (Necho) defeated the " Palestinian Syrians,"
which appears to be his name for the Jews. There is reason
to believe that the chief adversaries of the Jews on this
occasion were the Greek and Carian mercenaries in the
Egyptian service, since Necho was so pleased at their be
havior that he sent the arms which he had worn in the battle
as an offering to a Greek temple in Asia Minor.
The success of Necho in detaching Syria from the
Babylonian empire, and attaching it to his own, implied
in the narrative of Kings, and in Jer. xlvi. 2, is alluded to
in a fragment of Berosus.} Berosus, as a Babylonian,
ignores Necho's independent position, and speaks of him as
the " satrap " of the western provinces, who had caused
them to " revolt." He regards the " revolt " as extending
to Egypt, Syria, and Phoenicia, and as lasting until, in b. c.
605, Nebuchadnezzar was sent by his father to re-establish
the dominion of Babylon in the far west.
.* Herod, ii. 159.
t Beros. in the " Fragm. Hist. Gr." of C. Muller, vol. ii. Fr. 14.

186 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER XXI.
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN ISAIAH.
"The burden of Egypt. Behold,, the Lord rideth upon a swift
cloud, and shall come into Egypt; and the idols of Egypt shall be
moved at His presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst
of it. And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians; and they
shall fight every one against his brother, and every one against his
neighbor; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom. And the
spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof: and they shall seek to
the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits,
and to the wiza.ds. And the Egyptians will I give over into the hands
of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord,
the Lord of hosts  Surely the princes of Zoan are fools ; the coun
sel of the wise counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish ; how say ye
unto Pharaoh, I am the son of the wise, the son of ancient kings ?
Where are they ? where are thy wise men ? and let them tell thee
now, and let them know what the Lord hath purposed upon Egypt.
. The princes of Zoan are become fools, the princes of Noph are de
ceived ; they have also seduced Egypt, even they that are the stay of
the tribes thereof " — Isa. xix. 1-13.
It was a principal part of the mission of Isaiah during
the reign of Hezekiah to dissuade the Jews from placing
their dependence on Egypt in the struggle wherein they
were engaged, with the prophet's entire consent and appro
val, against the Assyrians. Egypt, it was revealed to him,
was no sure stay, no trustworthy ally, no powerful protector;
she would fail in time of need, either unwilling or unable
to give effectual help. (See ch.xx. 6 ; xxx. 3, 7 ; xxxi. 1-3).
Nor was this the worst. So long as king and people put
their trust in an " arm of flesh," and did not rely upon God,
God's arm was straitened, and he could not work the mirac
ulous deliverance, which he was prepared to work, 'be
cause of their unbelief." Isaiah's prophecies with respect
to Egypt are thus, almost entirely, depreciatory and denun
ciatory. He is bent on showing that she is a power on
whom no dependence can be wisely placed, in the hope that

NOTICES IN ISAIAH. 187
he may thereby prevent Hezekiah and his princes from
contracting any alliance with the Egyptian monarch.
In this first prophecy he announces two calamities as
about to befall Egypt, either of which is sufficient to render
her an utterly worthless ally. The first of these calamities
is civil war. The Egyptians are about to " fight every one
against his brother, and every one against his neighbor ;
city against city, and kingdom against kingdom." It is a
remarkable illustration of this prophecy to find, as we do,
• from an inscription of Piankhi-Merammon,* that about b. c.
735 Egypt was divided up among no fewer than twenty-
two princes, of whom four bore the title of " king," and
that a civil war raged among them for some considerable
time. Tafnekht, prince of Sais, began the disturbance by a
ssries of skilfully arranged encroachments upon his neigh
bors. During several years he laid siege successively to the
fortresses which were held by the independent military
chiefs and the petty princes of the western portion of Lower
Egypt. Once master of all the territory to the west of the
middle branch of the Nile, Tafnekht, respecting the domin
ion of the dynasty of Tanis over the Eastern Delta, pro
ceeded to mount the stream, in order to make himself master
of Central Egypt, and even with the intention of essaying
the conquest of Upper Egypt, which was in the possession
of the Ethiopian kings of Napata at this period. The
stronghold of Meri-tum, now Meydoum, the district of Lake
Mceris, the city of Heracleopolis, with its king Pefaabast, and
that of Hermopolis, with its king Osorkon, recognized his
authority as sovereign. He also made himself master of
Aphroditopolis, and, pursuing his career of success, was in
course of conquering the canton of Ouab, with its capital,
.Pa-matsets, when the chiefs of the upper and lower country
who had not yet bowed their heads to his yoke invoked the
aid of the Ethiopian monarch." } Piankhi gladly responded
to the call, and in the course of one or two campaigns suc
ceeded in despoiling Tafnekht of all his conquests, and in
restoring Egypt to tranquility. He then reigned for some
years in peace ; but at his death disturbances broke out
afresh. Bocchoris, or Bok-en-ranf, who succeeded Tafnekht
at Sais, had a reign as troubled as his predecessor's. It
, "See "Records of the Past," vol. ii., pp. 81-104; and compare
Brugsch, " Geschichte ^gyptens," pp. 682-707.
t Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii. p. 344.

188 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
was, says M. Lenormant,* " an incessant struggle against the
petty princes, a continuous series of wars, first for the sub
jection of the Delta and Central Egypt, nay, even tempo
rarily of the Thebaid, and then for the preservation of his
conquests, and the maintenance with much difficulty of a
precarious dominion." In the end Bocchoris succumbed to
Shabak, the successor of Piankhi, who punished his rebel
lion, as he considered it, by burning him alive.} A third
occasion of civil war, belonging to a somewhat later date,
is mentioned by Herodotus. Psammetichus, the founder oi
the twenty-sixth dynasty, had to contend, according to this
author, } with eleven of his brother princes before he suc
ceeded in uniting all Egypt under his sceptre. Briefly, it
may be said that Egypt from about b. c. 735 to b. c 650,
suffered from a continued series of civil wars, which ren
dered her exceptionally weak, and caused her to fall an
easy prey alternately to the Ethiopians and the Assyrians.
The other, calamity prophesied is that of conquest by a
foreign king of a fierce and cruel temper. " The Egyptians
will I give over into the hands of a cruel lord ; and a fierce
king shall rule over them, saith the Lord " (ver. 4). The
Egyptian and Assyrian records show that, between the
years b. c. 750 and b. c. 650, Egypt was conquered at least
five times, and was ruled by at least eight foreign monarchs.
The first conquest — that of Piankhi Merammon — was cer
tainly not a subjection to a " fierce and cruel lord," for
Piankhi was a remarkably mild and clement prince, who
did not even punish rebellion with any severity. § Shabak,
the next conqueror after Piankhi, was cruel ; but he can
scarcely be the monarch intended, since he was accepted as
a legitimate Pharaoh ; the " princes of Zoan and Noph "
were his counselors; and, if the prophecy touches him at all
it is as the deceived, and misled Pharaoh of ver. 11, not as
the "fierce king " of ver. 4. The same may be said of his
successors, Shabatok and Tirhakah, who were closely con
nected with Noph (Napata), and were recognized as
legitimate Pharaohs. It is to an Assyrian, not to an Ethio
pian, conqueror that the prophecy must refer, and hence
doubtless the introduction of Assyria by name into the later,
« Lenormant, " Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne," vol. ii., p. 349.
t Manetho ap Syucell., "Chronograph," p. 74, B.
X Herod., ii. 152.
§ Rawlinson, "History of Ancient Egypt," vol. ii., p. 443.

NOTICES IN ISAIAH. 189
part of the prophecy, which in a certain sense balances the
earlier vers. 23-25). Two successive Assyrian monarchs
conquered Egypt, Esar-haddon and Asshur-bani-pal. Either
of the two would correspond well to the description of the
"fierce king and cruel lord." Esar-haddon, who had Manas
seh brought bafore him with a hook passed through his jaws
(2 Chron. xxxiii. 11), who broke up Egypt into twenty gov
ernments and changed the names of the towns,* who usually
executed rebels, and is said by his son to have appointed
governors over the various provinces of Egypt for the ex-
press_ purpose of slaying and plundering its people,} was
certainly a severe and harsh monarch, who might well
answer to the description of Isaiah ; and Asshur-bani-pal,
his successdr, who riveted the Assyrian yoke on the reluc
tant country, was a yet more cruel and relentless tyrant.
Asshur-bani-pal burnt alive his own brother, Saul-Mugina,
caused several of his prisoners to be chained and flayed, tore
out the tongues of others by the roots, punished many by
mutilation, and was altogether the most cruel and blood
thirsty of all the Assyrian monarchs of whom any record
has come down to us.} It is probably his conquest of Egypt
in b. c. 668-666 which Isaiah's prophecy announces, though
it is quite possible that Isaiah may have himself expected
an earher accomplishment of the prediction. §
" In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod, when Sargon, the
king of Assyria, sent him, and fought against Ashdod, and took it, at
the same time spake the Lord by Isaiah, Ihe son of Amoz, saying, Go
and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from
thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot., and the Lord
sa d, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three
yearsfor a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia, so shall
the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, And the Ethio
pians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their
buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt. And they shall be afraid
and ashamed of Ethiopia their expectation, and of Egypt their glory.
And the inhabitants of this isle shall say in that day, Behold, such is
our expectation, whither we flee for help to be delivered from the king
of Assyria: and how shall we escape ?" — Isa. xx. 1-6.
The general warning contained in Isaiah's " burden of
Egypt " failed altogether of its intended effect. In Israel
* G. Smith, " History of Asshur-bani-pal," pp. 34, 35.
t G. Smith, " History of Asshur-bani-pal," p. 16.
X See "Ancient Monarches," vol. i., p. 480.
§ As Mr. Cheyne supposes : " Comment on Isaiah," vol. i., pp. 112,
113.

190 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Hoshea, about b. c. 724, entered into alliance with Shabek
(So), and thereby provoked the ruin which fell both on him:
self and his country. The lesson was lost on Hezekiah
and his counselors, who, as the attitude of the Assyrians
became more and more threatening,.inclined more and more
to follow Hoshea's example and place themselves under the
protection of Egypt. Egypt was at this time, as already
explained, closely connected with Ethiopia, which under Pian
khi, Shabak, Shabatok, and Tirhakah, exercised the rights of
a suzerain power, permitting, however, to certain native Egyp
tian princes a delegated sovereignty. Hence the close con
nection in which we find Ethiopia and Egypt placed in the
present prophecy. In the year that the Assyrian Tartan,
or commander-in-chief, took Ashdod, having been assigned
the task by Sargon, king of Assyria, the successor of Shal
maneser IV'., and father of Sennacherib — probably the year
b. c. 714 — Isaiah was directed to renew his warning against
trust in these African powers. They had become the
" glory " and the "expectation " of his countrymen, whither
they were ready to "flee for help " (vers. 5, 6). In order to
impress the Jews with the folly of their vain hopes, Isaiah
was instructed to announce a coming victory of Assyria
over combined Egypt and Ethiopia, the result of which
would be a great removal of captives, belonging to both
nations, from the banks of the Nile to those of the Tigris,
to the great "shame " of the conquered and the great glory
of the conquerors. To arrest the attention of his nation,
he was to take the garb of a prisoner himself, and to go
barefoot and " naked." i. e., clad in a single scant tunic, for
three years, at the end of which time his prophecy would
be accomplished. The prophecy seems to have had its first
accomplishment when, in b. c. 711, Ashdod revolted from
Assyria, under promise of support from the Ethiopian
Pharaoh of the period, and was captured, with its garrison,
which is likely to have consisted in part of Egyptians and
Ethiopians. We are expressly told that the prisoners were
on this occasion transported into Assyria, their place being
supplied by captives taken in some of Sargon's eastern
wars.* Ten years later, in the reign of Sennacherib, there was
another occasion of collision between Assyria and Egypt in
* "Ancient Monarchies," vol. i., p. 440.

NOTICES IN ISAIAH. 191
a war provoked by the revolt of Ekron. In the battle of
Eltekeh (b. c. 701) both Ethiopians and Egyptians are ex
pressly declared to have been engaged, and many prisoners
of both nations to have been taken.* These were, no doubt,
carried off by the conqueror.
Later, in the wars of Esar-haddon and Asshur-bani-pal
with Tirhakah, there must have been numerous occasions
of a similar kind.} The entire course of the struggle be
tween Assyria on the one hand and Ethiopia and Egypt on
the other was adverse to the latter peoples until the strength
of Assyria collapsed at home, and she (about b. c. 650) with
drew, her forces from Egypt to the defence of her own
territory. " Woe to the rebellious children, saith the Lord, that take counsel,
but not of Me; and that cover with a covering, but not of My Spirit,
that they may add sin to sin, that walk to go down into Egypt, and
have not asked-at My mouth, to strengthen themselves in the strength
of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt ! Therefore shall the
strength of Pharaoh be your shame, and the trust in the shadow of
Egypt your confusion. For his princes were at Zoan, and his ambas
sadors came to Hanes. They were all ashamed of a people that could
not profit them, nor be a help nor profit, but a shame and also a re
proach. The burden of the beasts of the south : into the, land of
trouble and anguish, from whence come the young and old lion, the
viper and fiery flying serpent, they will carry their riches upon the
shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of
camels, to a people that shall not profit them. For the Egyptians
shall help in vain, and to no purpose ; therefore have I cried concern
ing this, Their strength is to sit still." — Isa. xxx. 1-7.
"Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help ; and stay on
horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many ; and in horse
men, because they arc very strong; but they look not unto the Holy
One of Israel, neither seek the Lord ! . . . Now the Egyptians are
men, and not God, and their horses flesh, and not spirit. When tlie
Lord shall stretch out His hand, both he that helpeth shall fall, and
he that is helper shall fall down, and they all shall fall together. For
thus hath the Lord spoken unto me. Like as the lion and the young
lion roaring on his prey, when a multitude of shepherds is called forth
against him, he will not be afraid of their voice nor abase himself for
the noise of them ; so shall the Lord of hosts come down to fight for
Mount Zion and for the hill thereof. As birds flying, so will the Lord
cf hosts defend Jerusalem ; . . . He will preserve it."— Isa. xxxi. 1-5.
Matters have now progressed a stage. Isaiah's warnings
are not only unheeded, but set at nought. Alarmed at the
* "Records of the Past," vol. i., pp. 36, 37.
- 1 See Mr. George Smith's " History of Asshur-bani pal," pp. 16,
19, 23, 54, etc.

192 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
advances that Sennacherib has made and is making, con
vinced, not perhaps without reason, that the policy of As
syria is to leave him the mere shadow of independence, Hez
ekiah has taken the final plunge. Declining to ask counsel
of God's prophet (ver. 1), he has sent ambassadors of high
rank (ver. 4), accompanied by a train of camels and asses,
laden with rich presents (ver. 6), to the court of the vassal
Pharaoh to whom is committed the government of Lower
Egypt. " His " (i. e., Hezekiah's) " princes are at Zoan "
(Tanis) ; " his ambassadors have come to Hanes." He has
made application for a force of chariots and cavalry (ch.
xxxvi. 9). He has probably sent a prayer to the Ethiopian
suzerain of the country, requesting him to move to his relief.
The thing is done, and cannot be undone ; and it remains
only for the prophet to make a declaration, first, that it has
been done against God's will (vers. 1, 9, 12), and secondly,
that it will be of no avail — nothing will come of it — the
Egyptians will give no effectual help (vers. 5, 7). The his
torical chapters of Isaiah, especially chapters xxxvi. and
xxxvii., are the sequel to this intimation. They show that
Hezekiah received no help at all from the subordinate
Pharaoh, who was probably Shabatok, and that though
Tirhakah did move on his behalf (ch. xxxvii. 9), yet that he
neither engaged the forces of Sennacherib, nor seriously
troubled him. The relief of Hezekiah, and the relief of
Egypt itself — whose subjection to Assyria was thereby de
ferred for a generation — came from another quarter. When
Hezekiah gave up his trust in any arm of flesh, and made
his appeal to God, spreading before Him the blasphemous
letter of Sennacherib (ibid., vers. 14-20), then Isaiah was
commissioned to assure him of a miraculous deliverance.
" Then" ("that night," 2 Kings xix. 35) "the angel of the
Lord went forth, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an
hundred and fourscore and five thousand : and when they
arose early in the morning, behold, they were all dead corpses "
(Isa. xxxvii. 36). The deliverance itself, and its miraculous,
or at any rate its marvelous character, was acknowledged
by the Egyptians, no less than by the Israelites. "When,
two hundred and fifty years afterwards, Herodotus visited
Egypt, he was informed that " Sennacherib, king of the Arabi
ans and Assyrians, having marched a great army into Egypt,
was met at Pelusium by the Egyptian monarch. As the two
hosts lay there opposite one another, there came in the night

NOTICES IN ISIAIAH. 193
a number of field-mice, which devoured all the quivers and
bow strings of the enemy, and ate the thongs by which they
managed their shields. Next morning they commenced their
flight, and great multitudes fell, as they had no arms with
which to defend themselves." *
" Iii that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language
of Canaan, and swear to the Lord of hosts ; one shall be called the
city of destruction. In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in
the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to
the Lord. And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the Lord
ol hosts in the land of Egypt : for they shall cry unto the Lord be
cause of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great
one, and he shall deliver them. And the Lord shall be known to
Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord in fhat day, and shall
do sacrifice and oblation; yea they shall vow a vow unto the Lord,
and perform it. And the Lord shall smite Egypt: He shall smite and
heal it; and they shall return even to the Lord, and He shall be en
treated of them, and He shall heal them." — Isa. xix. 1S-22.
This prophecy has been called a mere expression of
Isaiah's earnest wish for the conversion of Egypt to the wor
ship of the true God,} but it is at any rate a wish which had
a remarkable fulfilment. About the year b.c. 170, Onias, the
son of Onias III., the high-priest, quitted Palestine, and sought
refuge with Ptolemy Philometor,who readily protected him on
account of the hostility between the two royal houses of Egypt
and of Syria. While a refugee at his court, Onias, regarding
the position of his brethren in Palestine, oppressed by Antio
chus Epiphanes, as well-nigh hopeless, conceived the idea of
founding and maintaining a temple in Egypt itself, which
should be free from the corruptions then creeping in at Jerusa
lem and should be a rallying-point to the Jewish nation, should
the temple on Mount Zion be destroyed or made a heathen
fane. Under these circumstances he made appeal to Ptolemy
and his wife Cleopatra for the grant of a site. " In the dis
trict of Heliopolis, a part of Egypt already consecrated by
the memory of Moses (Gen. xli. 45), he had observed a
spot where a sanctuary of Bubastis (Pasht),a goddess of the
country, was languishing among the thousand other Egyp
tian sanctuaries. This place he requested for himself, and it
was reported that Ptolemy granted it with the jesting re
mark that he wondered how Onias could think of making a
* Herod, ii. 141.
* Stanley, " Lectures on the Jewish Church," Am. Ed., vol. iii.,
p. 223.

194 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
sanctuary out of a spot which, though inhabited by sacred
animals, was yet in the Judasan sense polluted, for the
animals were among those reckoned unclean by the Judaeans.
In the sanctuary itself was placed an altar resembling that
at Jerusalem. Instead of the seven-lighted candle-stick,
which seems to have been regarded as too holy to be imitated,
a single golden lamp was suspended in it by a golden chain.
The sacred house was built somewhat in the form of a tower"
— the general style of the building being apparently not
Jewish, but Egyptian* — " the fore-court was enclosed with
a wall of brick and gates of stone, and the whole of the forti
fied little town, with the district which gathered round the
temple, was probably called Oneion."}
This temple continued to exist from b. c. 170 to b. c.
73, when it was destroyed by the Romans. It was greatly
venerated by the bulk of the Egyptian Jews, who brought
thither their sacrifices and their offerings. Jews flocked to
the towns in its neighborhood ; and it may well be, though
the actual fact cannot be proved, that then at least " five
cities in the land of Egypt spoke" ( Hebrew) " the language
of Canaan," one of them being Ir-ha-kheres, " the city of the
sun," the ancient Heliopolis.} At the same time the great
synagogue of Alexandria, at the extreme " border " of the
land, where it was most commonly approached by strangers,
stood " as a pillar " (ch. xix. 19) " for a sign and for a wit
ness unto the Lord of hosts," showing that Jehovah was
worshiped in the land openly, and with the goodwill of the
Government, and indicating that Egypt; — so long Jehovah's'
enemy — had been at least partially, converted to His ser-

* Stanley, "Lectures on the Jewish Church,"^"!. Ed., vol. iii..
p. 222. . '
t Ewald, " History of Israel," vol. v., p. 356, E. T. Compare
Joseph, "Ant. Jud.," xiii. 3, § 2.
X See Mr. R S. Poole's article on IR-HA-HERES in Smith's " Diet.
of the Bible," vol. i. p. 870.

NOTICES TN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 190

CHAPTER XXII.
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL.
The prophecies of Jeremiah have suffered greatly by dis
arrangement ; and the historical notices which they contain,
more especially those that concern Egypt, are wholly out of
their proper chronological order. We propose, therefore, to
follow the actual order of time rather than that of Jeremiah's
chapters according to our translators' arrangement,* and we
consequently commence with one of the latest of his notices,
namely, that contained in the earlier portion of his forty-
sixth chapter : —
" The word of the Lord' which came to Jeremiah the prophet
against the Gentiles, against Egypt, against the army of Pharaoh-
Necho, king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates in Carche
mish, which Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, smote in the fourth
year of Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, king of Judah. Order ye the
buckler and shield, and draw near to battle. Harness the horses ; and
get up, ye horsemen, and stand forth with your helmets; furbish the
spears, and put on the brigandines. Wherefore have I seen them dis
mayed and turned away back ? and their mighty ont s are beaten down,
and are fled apace, and look not back : for fear was round about, saith
the Lord. Let not the swift flee away, nor the mighty man escape;
they shall stumble and fall towards the north, by the river Euphrates.
Who is this that cometh up as a flood, whose waters are moved as the
rivers ? Egypt riseth up like a flood, and his waters are moved like
the rivers, and he saith, I will go up and cover the earth ; I will de
stroy the city and the inhabitants thereof. Come up, ye horses, and
rage, ye chariots; and let the mighty men come forth; the Ethiopians
anil the Libyans, that handle the shield ; and the Lydians, that handle
and, bend the bow. For this is the day of the Lord God of hosts, a
day of vengeance, that he may avenge him of his adversaries ; and
the sword shall devour, and it shall be satiate and made drunk with
their blood; for the Lord God of hosts hath a sacrifice in the north
country by the river Euphrates. Go up into Gilead, and take balm,
O virgin, the daughter of Egypt; in vain shalt thou use many medi
cines: for thou shalt not be cured. The nations have heard of thy
shame, and thy cry hath filled the land; for the mighty man hath
* Our translators follow the Hebrew. The Septuagint arrange
ment is quite different.

196 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
stumbled against the mighty, and they are fallen both together." —
Jer. xlvi. 1-12.
In this passage we have the fullest account that has come
down to us of one of the most important among the " decisive
battles of the world," The contending powers are Egypt and
Babylon, the contending princes Neko (Pharaoh Necho),
the son of Psamatik I., and Nebuchadnezzar, the son of
Nabopolassar — the founder of the second empire of the
Chaldaeans. We have already seen* how Neko, having (in
b. c. 608) defeated Josiah, king of Judah, at Megiddo, on the
border of the great plain of Esdraelon, pressed forward to
meet the " house with which he had war at Carchemish by
Euphrates" (2 Chron. xxxv. 20). Complete success for the
time attended his expedition. He made himself master of
the whole tract of territory intervening between the " river
of Egypt " (Wady-el-Arish) on the one hand and the river
Euphrates on the other (2 Kings xxiv. 7). Syria in its widest
extent, Phcenicia, Philistia, and Judaea submitted to him'. It ,
seemed as if the days' of the Thothmeses and Amenhoteps
were about to return, and Egypt to be once more the predom
inant power in the Eastern world, the " lady of nations," the
sovereign at one and the same time of Africa and of Asia.
Had Babylon acquiesced in the loss of territory, her prestige
would have been gone, and her empire would probably have
soon crumbled into dust. Egypt and Media would have
stood face to face as the two rivals for supremacy; and
possibly the entire course of the world's later history might
have been changed.
But Nabopolassar appreciated aright the importance of
the crisis, and before Egypt had had time to consolidate her
power in the newly conquered provinces, resolved on making
a great effort to recover them. In the year b. c. 605 — three
years after Neko's great success — having collected his troops
and made his preparations, he sent his son and heir, Nebu
chadnezzar, at the head of a large army, to reconquer the lost
territory. Nebuchadnezzar marched upon Carchemish, the
strong frontier fortress near the Euphrates, which had origin
ally been the capital of the early Hittite kingdom, and the
site of which is now marked by the ruins called " Jerablus "
or " Jerabus."* Here he found Neko encamped at the head
See p. 271.
t Sayce, ' ' Ancient Empires of the East, " American Edition, p. 214.

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 197
of a considerable force, in part, no doubt, Egyptians, but
mainly Ethiopians, Libyans, and Greco-Carians from Asia
Minor, perhaps the " Lydians " of Jeremiah (ver. ) 9.* Th»
battle poetically described by Jeremiah was fought. The
Egyptian force of foot, horse, and chariots was completely
defeated ; a great carnage took place (ver. 10) ; and the few
survivors fled away iii dismay (ver.5), evacuating province
after province, and retiring within their own frontier.
Nebuchadnezzar followed on their traces, at least as far south
as Jerusalem, where he received the submission of Jehoiakim
(2 Kings xxiv. 1), and from which he carried off a portion
of the temple treasures (Dan. i. 1). He would probably have
.gone further and invaded Egypt had not news reached him
(late in b. c. 605) of his father's decease, which necessitated
his own immediate return to his capital. Accompanied by
a small force lightly equiped, he crossed the desert by way
of Damascus and Tadmor, while the heavy armed troops, the
baggage, and the prisoners made their way to Babylon by
the usual but circuitous route, down the valley of the
Orontes, across Northern Syria to Carchemish, and then
along the banks of the Euphrates.
We have one profane account of this expedition, enter
ing far less into details than Jeremiah, but in complete
accord with his statements, and supplying various points of
interest, which have been worked into the above narrative.
The Babylonian historian, Berosus,} as quoted by Josephus,
says, speaking of Nebuchadnezzar: "When his father,
Nobopolassar, heard that the satrap appointed to govern
Egypt, and the districts of Coelesyria and Phoenicia, had re
volted from him, as he was not himself able any longer to
endure hardships, he assigned a certain portion of his army
to his son, Nebuchadnezzar, who was in the flower of his
youth, and sent him against the rebel. And when Nebu
chadnezzar had fallen in with him, and engaged him in
battle, he defeated him, and from this beginning proceeded
to bring the country under his own rule. Now it chanced
that his father, Nabopolassar, just at this time fell sick, and
departed this life, having reigned one-and-twenty years.
* " Lud " in the Hebrew Scriptures ordinarily designates an Afri
can people (see Gen. x. 13; 1 Chron. i. 11; Isa. lxvi. 19; Ezek. xxx.
5). But here the "Lydians " may be meant. Gyges had furnished
the original Greco-Carian force.
t Fr. 14 in the Fr. Hist. Gr. ' of C. Muller, vol: n., p. o06.

198 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Nebuchadnezzar shortly after heard of his father's decease,
and, having arranged the affairs of Egypt and the other
countries, and appointed certain of his friends to conduct to
Babylon the captives which he had taken from the Jews, the
Phoenicians, the Syrians, and the parts about Egypt, together
with the heavy-armed troops and the baggage, started him
self with a very small escort, and, traveling by the way of
the wilderness, reached Babylon.
" The word of the Lord that came to Jeremiah the prophet against
the Philistines, before that Pharaoh smote Gaza. Thus saith the
Lord, Behold, waters rise up out of the north, and shall be an over
flowing flood, and shall overflow the laud, and all that is therein; the
city arid them that dwell therein ; then the men shall cry, and all the-
inhabitants of the land shall howl. At the noise of the stamping of
the hoofs of his strong horses, at the rushing of his chariots, and at
the rumbling of his wheels, the fathers shall not look back to their
children for feebleness of hands ; because of the day that cometh to
spoil all the Philistines, and to cut off from Tyrus and Zidon every
helper that remaineth ; for the Lord will spoil the Philistines, the
remnant of the country of Caphtor. Baldness is come upon Gaza ;
Ashkelon is cut off with the remnant of their valley : how long wilt
thou cut thyself ? O thou sword of the Lord, how long will it be ere
thou be quiet ? Put up thyself into thy scabbard ; rest and be still.
How on it be quiet, seeing the Lord hath given it a charge against
Ashkelon, and against the sea-shore ? There hath he appointed it."
J eb. xlvii. 1-7.
We are, first of all, informed here that a certain pro
phecy was delivered, " before that Pharaoh smote Gaza."
In this statement it is implied that, at some date in the min
istry of Jeremiah, the strong Philistine town of Gaza (Jud.
xvi. 1-3) was taken by a king of Egypt. Now the kings of
Egypt, contemporary with Jeremiah's ministry would seem
to have been Psamatik I., Neko, Pasmatik IL, and Uaphra
or " Pharaoh-Hophra." Does it appear from profane sources
that Gaza was besieged and taken by any one of these mon
archs ?
This question may be answered in the affirmative. Hero
dotus tells us that after the battle of Magdolum (Megiddo),
Neko took "Kadytis," a large city in Syria.* This Kadytis
he afterwards describes as lying upon the coast between
Phoenicia and Lake Serbonis.} It was at one time identified
with Jerusalem, because the Arabs called that city " Al Kods "
— " the Holy "; and more recently it has been conjectured
* Herod., ii. 159. t Ibid., iii. 5.

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 199
to represent the Hittite city of " Cadesh " on the Orontes ; *
but its position on or near the sea militates against both
these hypotheses. Gaza is called " Gazetu " in the hiero-
glyphical inscriptions of Egypt,} and " Khazitu " in the
cuneiform inscriptions of Assyria, of which forms " Kadytis "
is a fair rendering. Hence recent editors of Herodotus
regard it as " plain" that the Kadytis, which he says that
Neko took, was Gaza. }
It is doubtful whether the remainder of the prophecy
refers in any way to Egypt. The " waters that rise up out
of the north " are usually taken by the commentators for the
army of Nebuchadnezzar, either when he invaded Syria after
the battle of Carchemish (b. c. 605), or subsequently when
he advanced to the sieges o"f Jerusalem and Tyre (b. c. 598).
The description in ver. 3 would suit a Babylonian army as
well as an Egyptian, and the characteristic of " noise " seems
to belong to Babylon especially (chs. iv. 29 ; viii. 16 ; Ezek.
xxvi. 10). There is not, however, any distinct evidence that
Nebuchadnezzar at any time led a hostile expedition into
Philistia, while we know of Neko that he did so ; and as his
expedition seems to have been made on his return from
Carchemish, his army would on this occasion have " risen up
out of the north " (ver. 2). The note of time in ver. 1 is also
more apposite if Neko's expedition is intended, since the
prophet would then have inserted the date, in order to draw
• attention to the fact that his prophecy of a great invasion
of Philistia was delivered before the event.
" And King Zedekiah, the son of Josiah, reigned instead of Coniah,
the son of Jehoiakim. . . . Then Plunaoh's army was come forth out
of Egypt; and when the Chaldaeans that beseiged Jerusalem heard
tidings of them, they departed from Jerusalem. Then came the word
of the Lord unto the prophet Jeremiah, saying, Thus saith the Lord,
the God of Israel, Thus shall ye say unto the king of Judah, that sent
you to inquire of me, Behold, Pharaoh's army, which is come forth to
help you, shall return to Egypt into their own land. And the Chal
deans shall come again, and fight against this city, and take it, and
burn it with fire."— Jer. xxxvii. 1-10.
"He (Zedekiah) rebelled against him (Nebuchadnezzar) in send
ing him ambassadors into Egypt, that they might give him horses and
much people. Shall he prosper ? Shall he escape that doeth such
things ? Or shall lie break the covenant, and be delivered ? As I
* Lenormant. "Manuel d'Histoire Ancienne." vol. ii., p. 391.
f "Records of the Past," vol. ii., p. 115; Brugsch, "Geschichte
jE-ryptens," p. 295.
"i Sayce, " Ancient Empires," American Edition, p. 55:

200 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
live, saith the Lord, surely in the place where the king dwelleth that
made him king, whose oath he despised, even with him in the midst
of Babylon he shall die. Neither shall Pharaoh with his mighty army
and great company make for him in the war, by casting mounts and
building forts, to cut off many persons." — Ezek. xvii. 15-17.
The Pharaoh contemporary with the later years of Zede
kiah, the last king of Judah, who reigned from b. c. 595 to
b. c. 586, was undoubtedly Ua-ap-ra,* whom the Greeks called
" Apries," } and whom Jeremiah in one place speaks of as
" Pharaoh-Hophra " (ch. xliv. 30). Apries ascended the throne
in b. c. 591, and reigned alone nineteen years (to b. c. 572),
after which he was for six yearsmore joint-king with Amasis.}
It would seem that very soon after his accession Zedekiah
made overtures to him for an "alliance (Ezek. xvii. 15),
transferring to him the allegiance which he owed to Babylon,
and making a request for a large body of troops, horse and
foot (ibid). It is in accordance with the bold and aggressive
character assigned to Apries by the Greeks§ to find that he
at once accepted Zedekiah's offer, and prepared to bear his
part in the war. " Pharaoh's army went forth out of Egypt "
(Jer. xxxvii. 5) with the object of "helping " Zedekiah (ibid.
ver. 7) ; and the movement was so far successful that the
army of the Chaldaeans, which had commenced the siege of
Jerusalem, " broke up from before it for fear of Pharoah's
army" (ibid. ver. 11). Nebuchadnezzar, who was directing
the siege, marched away to encounter the Egyptians, and
either terrified them into a retreat, or actually engaged and
defeated them. || The foundation was thus laid of that enmity
between the two kings which, later in Egyptian history, is
found to have had very important consequences. Apries,
for the time, submitted, and led his army back within his
own frontier, leaving the unfortunate Jewish monarch to his
fate. " Then came the word of the Lord unto Jeremiah in Tahpanhes,
saying, Take great stones in thine hand, and hide them in the clay in
the brick-kiln, which is at the entry of Pharaoh's house in Taphanhes,
* Brugsch ("Geschichte CEgyptens," p. 734) gives the name as
"Uah-ab-ra," Birch ("Egypt from the Earliest Times," p. ISO) as
" Uah-hap-ra." t Herod., ii., 161; Diod. Sic, i. 68. Manetho, however, calls him
" Uaphris." } Wiedemann, " Geschichte CEgyptens," p. 121.
§ Herod, 1. s. c. ; Diod. Sic. 1. s. c.
U So Josephus, "Ant. Jud.," x. 1, § 3.

NOTICES IN JEREMIAH AND EZEKIEL. 201
In the sight of the men of Judah; and say unto them, Thus saith the
Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, Behold, I will send and take Nebu
chadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant, and will set his throne
upon these stones that I have hid ; and he shall spread his royal pavi
lion over them. And when he cometh, he shall smite the land of
Egypt, and deliver such as are for death to death; and such as are for
captivity to" captivity ; and such as are for the sword to the. sword,
And I will kindle a fire in the house of the gods of E^ypt ; and lie
shall burn them, and carry them away captives; and he shall array
himself with the land of Egypt, as a shepherd putteth on his garment;
and he shal go forth from thence in peace. He shall break also the
images of Beth-shemesh, that is in the land of Egypt ; and the houses
of the gods of the Egyptians shall he burn with fire." — Jer. xliii.
8-13. "The word that the Lord spake to Jeremiah the prophet how
Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, should come and smite the land
of Egypt. Declare ye in Egypt, and publish in Migdol, and publish
in Noph and in Tahpanhes; say ye, Stand fast, and prepare thee ; f<-r
the sword shall devour round about thee. Why are thy valiant men
swept away ? They stood not because the Lord did drive them. 11 e
made many to fall; yea, one fell upon another; and they said Arise,
and let us go again to our own people and to the land of our nativity
from the oppressing sword. They did cry there, Pharaoh, king of
Egypt, is but a noise; he hath passed the time appointed. . . . O
thou daughter dwelling im Egypt, furnish thyself to go into captivity;
for Noph shall be waste and desolate without an inhabitant. Egypt
is like a very fair heifer; but destruction cometh ; it cometh out of
the north. Also her hired men are in the midst of her like fatted
bullocks; for they also are turned back and are fled away together;
they did not stand, because the day of their calamity was. come upon
them, and the time of their visitation. . . . The Lord of hosts, the
Hod of Israel saith, Behold, I will punish the multitude of No, and
-Pharaoh, and Egypt, with their gods, and their kings; even Pharaoh,
and all them that trust in him; and I will deliver them into the hand
of those that seek their lives, and into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar,
king of Babylon, and into the hand of his servants: and afterward it
shall be inhabited, as in the days of old, saith the Lord."— Jer. xlvi.
13-26. On the fact of there having been at least one invasion of
Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar subsequently to his capture of
Jerusalem in b. c. 586, it is only necessary to refer the reader
to Chapter VII. of this work. It was there shown that two
wholly independent documents, one Egyptian, the other
Babylonian, prove the invasion to have taken place, while
•• tlie Egyptian one, though seeking to minimize the success
of the invaders, necessarily implies an occupation of the
whole of Egypt. The general Hor, who is " governor of tho
reo-ions of the south," admits that the Asiatics penetrated to
the extreme southern border of Egypt (comp. Ezek. xxix. 10;
xxx. . 6), and claims credit for not having " let them advance-

202 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
quite into Nubia." * His account of his careful restoration
of the temple of Kneph at Elephantine } indicates that it
had suffered damage at the hands of the invaders, and is a
comment on the expression " the houses of the gods of the
Egyptians shall he burn with fire " (Jer. xliii. 13). The repre
sentation of the army by which Egypt was defended as one
of " hired" men (ibid. xlvi. 21), who said one to another, when
they were defeated, " Arise, and let us go again to our own
people and to the land of our nativity from the oppressing
sword" (ibid. ver. 16), accords well with all that we know
of the Egyptian military force of the time, which consisted,
not of native soldiers, but of foreign mercenaries, Ethiopians,
Libyans, Carians, and Greeks.} The date of the expedition,
Nebuchadnezzar's thirty-seventh year, § or b. c. 568, falls
exactly into the time when Apries and Amasis were joint-
kings of Egypt, and explains the apparent discrepancy be
tween the two documents, one of which speaks of Apries as
king, while the other certainly did not name Apries, and
probably named Amasis. || The conjoint reign would even
seem to be indicated by the mention of " kings " in ch.
xlvi. 25.
" I will give Pharaoh-Hophra, king of Egypt, into the hand of his
enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his life, as I gave Zede
kiah, king of Judah, into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Baby
lon, his enemy, and that sought his life." — Jer. xl. 30.
There would seem to be no doubt that this prophecy was
fulfilled to the letter, and that Pharaoh-Hophra (Ua-apra)
fell into the power of his enemies and suffered a violent death.
But it is not altogether clear who these enemies were, or
how his death was brought about. Herodotus relates IT that
the reverses which befell him arose out of an unsuccessful
expedition against Cyrene, in which Apries was thought to
have intentionally sacrificed the lives of some thousands of
his soldiers. A mutiny followed, and Amasis, having been
* " Records of the Past," vol. vi. p. 83.
t Ibid., p. 82, lines 25, 36, 40.
X Herod., ii. 163; Jer. xlvi. 9, etc.
§ " Transactions of Society of Biblical Archaeology," vol. vii., p.
II The name is partially obliterated, but evidently ended in -su-
The Egyptian name of Aamasis, Ashmes, terminated in s. That of
Apries, Ua-ap-ra, contained no s.
IT Herod, ii., 161- 163.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 203
sent to put it down, was induced to place himself at its head.
The result was a civil war, in which the rebel chief was suc
cessful. Apries fell into his hands, and was at first treated
with kindness, allowed to inhabit the royal palace * and (we
must suppose) to retain the title of king. But after six
years, during "which both monarchs reigned, but Amasis
alone governed, dissatisfaction with this condition of things
showed itself among the Egyptians, who persuaded Amasis
to allow them to put Apries to death. The story is not
intrinsically, very probable ; and it is contradicted by Jose
phus, who ascribes the execution of Apries to Nebuchad
nezzar.} That monarch may not improbably have borne
Apries a grudge on account of the aid which he gave to Zed
ekiah, and also of his aggressions upon the Phoenician cities,}
and, though the adversary with whom he contended in the
field may have been Amasis, he may yet have let his main
vengeance fall upon Apries, whoni he no doubt looked on as
a rebel, as he had looked npon Neko.§ Amasis may have
obtained easier terms of peace by the surrender of his fellow-
king, or may even have been allowed to retain the throne
in consequence of his complaisance. Most probably he ac
cepted the position of a vassal monarch, a position which he
may have retained until Nabonidus was threatened by Cyrus
(b. c. 547), or even until the fall of Babylon in b. c. 538.
During this period Egypt was a " base kingdom " (Ezek.
xxix. 14), " the basest of the kingdoms " (ibid. ver. 15), if its
former exaltation was kept in view,
t* Herod., ii„ 169. t " Ant. Jud." x. 9, § 7.
1 .Herod., ii. 161; Diod. Sic , i. 68. § Berosus, Fr. 14.

204 EGYPT AND BABYLON.

CHAPTER XXIII.
NOTICES OF EGYPT IN DANTEX.
The notices of Egypt in the Book of Daniel have the
peculiarity that they are absolutely and entirely prophetical.
Daniel is not individually brought into any contact with
Egypt ; nor does Egypt play any part in the stirring events
of the time wherein he lives. Egypt has, in fact, fallen to
the rank of a very second-rate power after the battle of Car
chemish (b. c. 605), and counted for little in the political
struggles of the time, which had for their locality the great
Iranian plateau, together with the broad valley of the Tigris
and the Euphrates. Daniel, who was contemporary, as he
tells us (chs. i.-vi.), with Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Darius
the Mede, and Cyrus the Great, must have died about b. c:
534, or at any rate before b. c. 529 — the year of Cyrus'
decease. His notices of Egypt belong to a date more than
two centuries later. It is given him to see in vision a sort
of sketch of the history of the world from his own time to
the coming of the Kingdom of the Messiah ; and in this
" Apocalyptic Vision," or rather series of visions, the future
of Egypt is placed before him, in some detail, during a space
of some century and a half, from about b. c. 323 to about
b.c. 168.
It is scarcely necessary to say that the genuineness and
authenticity of the entire' Book of Daniel have been fiercely
assailed, both in remote times and in our own day. But the
arguments of the assailants have never been regarded as of
any weight by the Church ; and the Book has maintained
its place in the Canon through all ecclesiastical ages and
throughout Christendom. It is impossible in a volume like
the present to enter into this great controversy, which has
employed the pens of more than twenty critics of repute
during the present century, and which cannot be said to

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 205
have been set at rest even by the admirable labors of Aubcr-
len, Hengstenberg, and Pusey. We shall here, of necessity,
assume the genuineness and authenticity of the Book, and
especially of the chapter (ch. xi.) which bears upon the his
tory of Egypt ; we shall regard it, not as a vaticinium post
eoentum — the composition of a nameless author in the time
of Antiochus Epiphanes — but as the genuine utterance of
Daniel himself in the years to which he assigns it — " the
first year of Darius the Mede " (ch. xi. 1), or b. c. 538-7.
As the prophecy is too long to be conveniently treated as a
whole, we shall break it up into portions, and endeavor to
show how far its various parts are confirmed or • illustrated
by profane authors.
"Now I will shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up
ye,t three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they
all; and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against
the realm of Grecia. And amighty king shall stand up, that shall rule
with great dominion, and do according to his will, and when he shall
stand up, his kingdom shall he broken, and shall be divided toward
the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to
the dominion which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be plucked up,
even for others beside those." — Dan. xi. 2-4.
This first section of the prophecy has no direct bearing
upon Egypt. Its object is to bridge the interval between
the date of the vision and the point at which the history of
Egypt is to be taken up. The date of the vision is b. c.
538-7, the first year of Darius the Mede in Babylon, and the
first of Cyrus (by whom Darius had been set up) in Persia.
Egyptian history is to be taken up from b. c. 323, at which
point, after a long period of subjection to Persia, Egypt be
came once more an independent and important kingdom.
What are to be the main events, the great land-marks, of
the interval ? The angel who speaks to Daniel thus enume
rates them. (1) There will be three kings in Persia, followed
by a fourth richer and stronger than any of them, who will
lead a great expedition into Greece. (2) A mighty king will
stand up, greater apparently then even the Persian kings,
who will " rule with great dominion, and do according to
his will." (3) After this king has " stood up " for a while,
his kingdom will be broken, " divided toward the four winds
of heaven," not descending to his posterity, either as a
whole, or in any of its fragments, but falling into the hands
of " others beside those," i.e., of persons not his descend-

206 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
ants. Now, profane history relates * that three kings ruled
in Persia after Cyrus< the Great, viz., Cambyses (from n. c.
529 to b. c 522), Bardes or Smerdis during seven months of
b. c. 522, and Darius, the son of Hystaspes (from b. c. 521 to
b. c. 486) ; and that these were then followed by Xerxes, the
son of Darius, } under whom Persia was at the height of its
power and prosperity, until in his fifth year he " stirred up
all against the realm of Grecia," and made that great expedi
tion, which still remains one of the most marvelous events
in the world's entire history. This expedition fell into b. c.
480, and was followed by a gradual diminution of Persian
power, and by wars of no great moment, until, in b. c. 335,
a " mighty king " stood up, viz., Alexander the Great, who
ruled a greater dominion than had been held by any previous
monarch, since it reached from the Adriatic to the Sutlej,
and from the Danube to Syene. The wide sovereignty and
autocratic pride of Alexander are well expressed by the
words " that shall rule with great dominion and do accord7
ing to his will " (ver. 3) ; for Alexander brooked no restraint,
and was practically a more absolute despot than any Persian
king had ever been. At his death, as is well known, his
kingdom was " broken up." Though he left behind him an
illegitimate son, Hercules, and had also a posthumous child
by Roxana, called Alexander, yet neither of these ever suc
ceeded to any portion of his dominious. These fell at first -
to the ten generals, Ptolemy, Pithon, Antigonus, Eumenes,
Leonnatus, Lysimachus, Menander, Asander, Philotas, Lao-
medon, and ultimately to Ptolemy, Seleucus, Antipater,
Antigonus, Eumenes, Clitus, and Cassander.
" And the king of the south shall be strong, and one of his princes
[and he] shall be strong above him, and havedominion; his dominion
shall be a great dominion. And in the end of years they shall join
themselves together; for the king's daughter of the south shall come
to the king of the north to make an agreement; but she shall not
retain the power of the arm ; neither shall he stand, nor his arm ;
but she shall be given up and they that brought her, and he that be
gat her, and he that strengthened her in these times." (Dan. xi 5, 6. )
That the King of Egypt is meant by " the King of the
South " might be presumed from the fact that Egypt formed
* See especially Herod., ii. 1; iii. 67, 88, confirmed by the Behis-
tun inscription.
t Herod., vii. 4 et seqq.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 207
the most southern portion of the dominions of Alexander ; *
but it is placed beyond dispute or cavil by the mention oi
Egypt as the country to which the King of the South carried
his captives, in verse 8. Profane history shows us that,
after the death of Alexander (b. c. 323), Ptolemy Lagi, who
had governed Egypt as Alexander's lieutenant, from its con
quest (b. c. 332) assumed the regal authority, and after a
little time the regal name, in that country, and ruled it from
b. c. 323 to b. c. 283— a space of forty years.} He is justly
characterized as " strong," since he was able to enlarge his
original territories by the addition of Phoenicia, Palestine,
Cyprus, and the Cyrenaica ; and, though he was sometimes
defeated, he was upon the whole one of the most warlike
and successful of the princes among whom Alexander's
kingdom was partitioned. Another, however, of the princes
is truly said to have been " strong above him." The Syrian
was undoubtedly the greatest of the kingdoms into which
the Macedonian monarchy became broken up ; and Seleucus
Nicator, its first ruler, was a more powerful sovereign than
Ptolemy Lagi. Seleucus ruled from the Mediterranean to
the Indus and from the Jaxartes to the Indian Ocean, having
thus a territory five or six times as large as that of Ptolemy.
His dominion was emphatically " a great dominion." It
was the representative in Western Asia of the Great Mon
archy which had existed in that region from the time of
Nimrod, and exceeded in dimensions every such monarchy
except the Persian. Seleucus and Ptolemy Lagi maintained
on the whole friendly relations ; and the struggle between
the kings of the north and of the south was deferred to the
reigns of their successors.
"Daniel's statement that " in the end of years " the kings
of the north and of the south " shall join themselves together "
implies a previous rupture and struggle, which is found to
have taken place in the reigns of Ptolemy II. (Philadelphus)
and Antiochus Soter. A permanent jealousy, and many
occasional causes of quarrel, set the two powers in hostility
the one to the other ; and in b. c. 269 Antiochus made an ex-
* The mouths of the Indus are about parallel with the most southern
• portion of Egypt, but though visited by Alexander, they can hardly
be regarded as within his permanent dominions.
t Grote, " History of Greece," vol. viii., p. 533; Heeren, " Manuel
of Ancient History," p. 249.

208 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
pedition against Egypt, which resulted in complete failure.*
leaving a stain on the Syrian arms which it was regarded as
necessary to efface. Antiochus II. (Theus) consequently re
newed the war in b. c. 260, arid a long contest followed with
out any very decided advantage to either side, until, in b. c.
250, negotiations for peace were set on foot — the two kings
"associated themselves" (marginal rendering), and in- the
following year (b. c. 269) it was arranged that Ptolemy II.
should give his daughter, Berenice, in marriage to Antiochus
Theus, who repudiated his previous wife, Laodice, in order
to make way for her.} The wedding took place ; and thus
" the king's daughter of the south came to the king of the
north to make (i. e., cement) an agreement " (verse 6). But
the well-meant attempt at peace failed. In b. c. 247, on the
death of Ptolemy IL, Antiochus Theus repudiated his
Egyptian wife, and recalled Laodic6, who shortly poisoned
her husband, and caused Berenice also to be put to death. }
Thus the princess " did not retain the power of the arm "
(i. e., the secular authority) ; neither did her husband retain
his power, or " stand." The attempted arrangement entirely
fell through. Berenice herself and her son (" he whom she
brought forth," marginal rendering) suffered death ; and the
entire party, concerned in the transaction were discredited
and placed under a cloud.
" But out of a branch of her roots shall one stand up in his estate,
which shall come with an army, and shall enter Into the fortress of
the king of the south, and shall deal against them, and shall prevail;
and shall also carry captives into Egypt their gods, with their princes,
and with their precious vessels of silver and of gold; and he shall con
tinue more years than the king of the north." (Dan. xi. 7, 8.)
There are some errors of translation in this passage which
require to be removed before its statement can be properly
compared with those of profane historians. Modern criticism
thus renders the passage : § " But a branch of her roots shall
rise up in his place, which shall come against the host, and
enter into the strong places of the king of the north, and
shall deal against them, and shall prevail ; and shall also
carry captive into Egypt their gods, with their images, and
* Heeren, p. 236; Smith, " Diet, of Greek and Boman Biography,"
vol. iii., p. 586.
t Hieronym. ed. Dan. xi. 6; Polyb. v, 18, § 10; Athen. "Deipn."
ii., p. 45. X Heeren. 1. s. c.
§ See the " Speaker's Commentary," vol. vi., pp. 374, 375.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. -209
with their precious vessels of silver and of gold, and [then]
-lor some years he shall stand aloof from the king of the
north." History tells us that a branch from the same roots
as Berenice, her brother Ptolemy Euergetes, in the year after
her murder (b. c. 245), made war upon Seleucus II. (Callini
cus), the son of Antiochus Theus and Laodice, who was im
plicated in the bloody deed, and, having invaded Syria, made
himself master of various " strong places " in the country,
as especially of Seleucia near Antioch, a most important
city.* He " prevailed " in the wars most completely, captur
ing Antioch, and reducing to temporary subjection the
whole of the Eastern provinces — Mesopotamia, Babylonia,
Susiana, Media, and Persia.} He stated in an inscription
which he set up at Adule, that among the treasures which he
carried off from Asia were holy relics (lepd) removed from
Egypt by the Persians,} and no doubt, together with these,
he would, like other conquerors, include in his booty the
" gods and images " of the defeated nations. After the war
had lasted four years, Euergetes " stood aloof " from the
king of the north, consenting, on account of some internal
troubles in his own dominions, to conclude a truce with
Callinicus for ten years.
"But his sons shall be stirred up, and shall assemble a multitude
of great forces; and one shall certainly come, and overflow, and pass
through; then shall he return, and be stirred up, even to his fortress.
And the king of the south shall be moved with choler, and shall come
forth and fight with him, even with the king of the north : and he
shall set forth a great multitude ; but the multitude shall be given in
to his hand. And when he hath taken away the multitude, his heart
shall be lifted up; and he shall cast down many ten thousands; but
he shall not be strengthened by it." (Dan. xi. 10-12.)
The construction of the Hebrew is such as to render it
uncertain, whose sons are intended in the opening clause of
this pas'sage, whether those of the king of the north or of the
south. The nexus, however, of the clause with those that
follow makes it tolerably clear that the attack this time is
on the part of the northern monarch, against whom the
king of the south " comes forth, moved with choler " (verse
11), anxious to repel what he regards as an unprovoked as
sault. Now Callinicus had two sons, who reigned one after
* Polyb., v. 58, § 11.
t See the "Inscription of Adule," quoted by Clinton ("Fasti
Hellinici," vol. iii., page 333, note). 1 Ibid.

2l0 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
the other — Seleucus HI. (Ceraunus) from b. c. 226 to 223,
and Antiochus III. (the Great) from b. c. 223 to 187. Of
these the elder, Seleucus, is said by Jerome * to have invaded
Egypt in combination with his brother, Antiochus, and to
have waged a war with Euergetes ; but the silence of pro
fane historians throws some doubt on this statement. " One "
of the sons, however, Antiochus the Great, most " certainly,"
" came, and overflowed, and passed through ". the territories
of Egypt, attacking Ptolemy Philopator, the son of Euergetes
with great vigor in b. c, 219, and in b. c. 218 repeatedly de
feating his forces, and conquering the greater part of Pales
tine, including Samaria and Gilead.} From these conquests
he " returned " for the winter to " his fortress " of Ptolemals,}
whence he made great efforts to have everything in readi
ness for a further attack upon his adversary in the ensuing
year. In the spring he set forth on his march southward,,
passed through Gaza, and encamped at Raphia (now Refah),
a small town near the coast, on the road to Egypt. § Mean
while Philopator, " moved with choler," had quitted Alex
andria, at the head of an army of 75,000 men, supported by
seventy-three elephants, and had marched to Pelusium,
whence, after resting a few days, he proceeded along the
coast to Rhinocolura, and thence toward Raphia, where he
encamped over against the army of Antiochus. The Syrian
forces were somewhat less numerous than his own, amount
ing to only 68,000, but they were stronger in cavalry and in
elephants. After some unimportant skirmishing, the two
hosts engaged each other ; and though the Syrian right de
feated the Egyptian left, and the Asiatic elephants of Antio
chus proved greatly superior to the African ones of his
adversary, yet the battle resulted in a decisive victory for
the Egyptian, who slew ten thousand of the enemy, and took
above four thousand prisoners. || The Syrian "multitude"
was thus " given into Ptolemy's hand," and a portion of it
" taken away " into Egypt. His victory naturally " lifted
up " Ptolemy's " heart ; " he was greatly elated, and is said
after the battle to have " abandoned himself to a life of'
licentiousness." IT No real advantage resulted to him from
his having " cast down many ten thousands ; " the Syrian
kingdom remained more powerful than his own, and was
* " Comment, in Dan.," xi. 10. + Polyb.; v. 59-70.
X Ibid., v. 71, § 11. § Ibid., v. 80, § 4.
II Polyb., v. 81-86. T Speaker's Commentary," vol. vi., p. 376.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 211
certain to revenge the defeat of Raphia when a favorable
opportunity offered.
" The king of the north shall return, and shall set forth a multi
tude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after certain
years With a great army and with much riches. And in those times
shall there many stand up against the king of the south ; also the
robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision;
but they shall fall. So the king of the north shall come and cast up
a mount and take the most fenced cities, and the arms of the south
shall not withstand, neither his chosen people, neither shall there be
any strength to withstand. But he that cometh against him shall do
according to his own will, and none shall stand before him ; and he
shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.
He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole king
dom, and upright ones with him ; thus shall he do ; and he shall give
him the daughter of women, corrupting her; but she shall not stand
oh his side, neither be for him." (Dan. xi. 13-17.)
In b. c. 204, thirteen years after the battle of Raphia,
Antiochus the Great " returned " to the attack upon Egypt.
Having made alliance with Philip III. of Macedon,* he in
vaded Caele-Syria and Palestine with a great army,} and with
the good will of the inhabitants, whom the cruelties and ex
actions of Philopator had disgusted, occupied the entire region
to the borders of Egypt — " the robbers (rather "captains")
of the Jewish people joining with him to establish the vision."
A turn in the war subjected these rebels to the vengeance of
Ptolemy, who recovered Jerusalem in b. c. 200, and took
severe measures against the inhabitants.} Two years later
. Antiochus once more gathered his forces, and marched south
ward. One after another the strongholds of Syria and
Palestine fell into his hands. " The arms of the south " were
not able to " withstand " him.§ At Panias, near the sources
of the Jordan, he entirely defeated Scopas, the chief general
of the Egyptian monarch ; || after which he besieged him in
Sidon, which he took, and a little later re-took Jerusalem.
' He then " completely established himself in Palestine," oc
cupying the glorious land," which was no doubt "consumed"
by having to furnish supplies for his army. But he did not
press forward into Egypt. He " set his face " to estabhsh
* Polyb. xv. 20; Liv. xxxi. 14.
t Smith, " Diet, of the Bible," vol. i., p. 74.
X Joseph., " Ant. Jud.," xii. 3, § 3.
§Appian, "Syriaca," § 1; Liv. xxxiii. 19.
|| Polyb., xvi. 18, § 2; 39, § 3; Joseph. 1. s. c.

212 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
"equal conditions" (verse 17, marginal rendering). He ar
ranged a marriage between his daughter, Cleopatra, and
Ptolemy Epiphanes, who had succeeded his father, Philopa
tor, pledging himself to give over Cade-Syria and Palestine
to Egypt as her dowry.* He had no intention, however, of
fulfilling this part of the contract. The provinces were not
made over ; and Epypt was rather exasperated than amelio
rated by the transaction. Cleopatra herself , instead of main
taining her father's interests, opposed them. Declining to
" stand on his side," or " be for him," she maintained her
husband's rights, and joined with him in looking to Rome
for their vindication and establishment.
* Polyb., xxviii. 17, § 7; Appian, "Syriaca," § 4.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 213

CHAPTER XXIV.
FUETHEE NOTICES OF EGYPT IN DANIEL.
" After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take
many: but a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered
by him to cease ; without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn
upon him. Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his owh
land; but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found. Then shall
stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom ;
but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in
battle." (Daniel, ch. xi., verses 18-20.)
In the prophetical Books of the Old Testament, and
even in some of the historical ones (Gen. x. 5; Esth. x. 1),
the expression translated " the isles " or " the islands,"
designates primarily the shores and isles of European Greece
— the " maritime tracts " which invited the colonist and the
conqueror to brave the terrors of the deep, and journey
westward from Asia in search of " fresh woods and pastures
new " Antiochus the Great, shortly after concluding his
peace with Philopator, undertook an aggressive movement
in this direction.* Crossing the Hellespont in b. c. 197, he
took possession of the Chersonese with its city of Lysimachia.
Five years later, having made alliance with the OEtolians,
he moved into central Greece, landing at Demetrias, and
soon afterwards making himself master of Chalcis, thereby
throwing out a challenge to the Romans, which they were
not slow to accept. Rome could not allow the establish
ment of an Asiatic power in Europe ; and her " prince "
for the time being, the consul M. Acilius Glabrio, soon
" caused the reproach " which Antiochus had " offered " the
Romans, " to cease," turning it back upon Antiochus him
self } by the decisive victory of Thermopylae.} Antiochus
*See Liv. xxxv. 23, 43; Polyb. xviii. 32.
t This seems to be the true meaning of the last clause of verse 18.
(See "Speaker's Commentary," vol. vi., p. 379.)
X Liv. xxxvi. 18, 19.

214 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
was forced to quit Greece in haste, * and " turned his face
toward the fort " (i. e. the various strongholds) " of his
own land," whither he retreated in the autumn of b. c. 191.
But Rome followed up her advantage. The Roman admiral,
^Emilius, swept the fleet of Antiochus from the sea.} Her
generals, the two Scipios, Asiaticus and Africanus, invaded
Asia in force; and in b. c. 190 was fought the great battle
of Magnesia,} which at once and forever established the
predominance of the Roman arms over those of the Syrian
kingdom, and made Rome arbiter of the destinies of the
East. At Magnesia Antiochus " stumbled and fell " with a
fall from which there was ,no recovery, either for himself or
for his kingdom. It did not suit Rome at once to enter into
possession ; but from the date of the Magnesian defeat Syria
lay at her mercy and was practically her vassal. Shortly
afterwards (b. c. 187) Antiochus " was not found." He
made an expedition into the Eastern provinces,§ to collect
money for the payment of the Roman war contribution, and
never returned from it. Rumor said that his exactions
provoked a tumult in the distant Elymais, and that he fell
a victim to the fury of the plundered people. || He was
succeeded by his son, Seleucus IV. (Philopator), who seems
to be called " a raiser of taxes " on account of the burdens
which the weight of the Roman indemnity compelled him
to lay on his subjects, and "the glory of the kingdom " in
derision. IT He was a weak and undistinguished monarch,
whose short reign of eleven years was wholly uneventful.
His treasurer, fleliodorus, murdered him treacherously in
cold blood,** not having any grievance against him, but
simply in the hope of succeeding to his dominions. Thus he
was " destroyed, not in anger, nor in battle," by an ambi
tious subject.
" And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall
not give the honor of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably,
and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. And with the arms of a flood
* Ibid., xxxvi. 21. t Ibid., xxxvii. 30.
X Polyb. xxi. 13; xxii. 8; Liv. xxxvii. 42; Appian, " Syriaca,"
§33-37. § Prophyr. ap. Euseb. "Chron. Can." I. 40, § 12.
II Justin, xxxii. 2; Strab. xvi., p. 744.
IT Our version gives "in the glory of the kingdom;" but the word
" in " is wanting in t >e original.
** Appian. '• Syriaca," § 45.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 215
shall they be overflown before him; yea, also the prince of the cove
nant. And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully;
for he shall eohie up, and shall become strong with a small people.
He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province;
and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers'
fathers: he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches;
yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strongholds, even
for a time," (Dan. xi. 21-24.)
Antiochus Epiphanes, who succeeded his brother, Seleu
cus IV., is almost certainly intended by the " vile person "
of this passage. He was a man of an extraordinary char
acter. Dean Stanley calls him one of those strange characters
in whom an eccentricity touching insanity on the left and
genius on the right combined with absolute power and law
less passion to produce a portentous result, thus bearing
out the two names by which he was known — Epiphanes —
" the Brilliant," and Epimanes — " the Madman." * He was
" a fantastic creature, without dignity or self-control, who
caricatured the manners and dress of the august Roman
magistrates, startled young revelers by bursting in on them
with pipe and horn, tumbled with the bathers on the slippery
marble pavement, and in the procession which he organized
at Daphn6, appeared riding in and out on a hack pony,
playing the part of chief waiter, mountebank, and jester." }
He was not the legitimate heir to the throne ; and " the
honor of the kingdom " was in no way formally conferred on
him. Nor did he establish himself by force of arms. On
the contrary, he " came in peaceably," under the auspices
of Eumenes of Pergamos,} and " obtained the kingdom " by
bribes, cajolery, and " flatteries." He courted the favor of
the Syrian lower classes, of Rome, and of the Hellenizing
party among the Jews. At a later date " with the arms of
a flood" he " overflowed," and carried all before him, sweep
ing through Csele-Syria and Palestine into Egypt,§ and
receiving the submission of Jason, |[ the High-Priest of the
Jews, or "prince of the covenant," who "made a league "
with him, engaging to support his interests in Judaea, and
to pay him an annual tribute of 440 silver talents. Anti
ochus, however, after this league, " worked deceitfully,"
transferring the, High Priesthood from Jason to his brother
?Stanley, "Lectures on the Jewish Church," Am. Ed., vol. iii.,
p. 254. t Ibid. X Appian, 1. s. c.
. § 1 Mac. i. 17; Appian, " Syriaca," § 66. II 2 Mac. iv. 7-10.

216 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Menelaus on receipt of a bribe, and forcing Jason to become
a fugitive from his country.* After this he was able,
through the support of Menelaus, to ''become strong " in
Palestme, without maintaining there more than a " small "
army. He entered peaceably upon the " fattest places of
the province," his authority being generally recognized
throughout the fertile tract between Syria Proper and
Egypt, though it belonged of right to Ptolemy. That he
maintained his influence in the tract by means of a lavish
expenditure of money, though not distinctly stated by, pro*
fane historians, is probable enough, since it was certainly
the method by which he soon afterwards maintained; it in
Egypt.} " And he shall stir up his power and his courage against thB king
of the south with a great army; and the king of the south shall be
stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army ; but he shall
not stand; for they shall forecast devices against him. Tea, they that
feed of the portion of his meat shall destroy him, and his army shall
overflow; and many shall fall down slain. And both these kings'
hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one 'table;
but it shall not prosper; for yet the end. shall be at the time appoint
ed." (Dan. xi. 25-27.)
Epiphanes invaded Egypt several times during the
earlier portion of his reign. The, prophetic vision vouch
safed to Daniel did not very clearly distinguish between
the several attacks. If the present passage is to be assigned
to any particular year, it must be to b. c, 171, when Epiph
anes " entered Egypt with a great multitude, with chariots,
and elephants, and horsemen, and with a great navy "
(1 Mac. i. 17). Egypt was then under the sovereignty Of
Ptolemy VI. (Philometor), who, however, was still a minor,
under the tutelage of Eulaeus and Lennaeus, who received
the royal authority as regents.} These chiefs collected as
large a force as they could to resist the Assyrian monarch ;
but the result of the battle which took place near Pelusium,§
was the complete defeat of the Egyptians, and the tempo
rary subjection of the larger part of Egypt to the authority
of Antiochus. Ptolemy Philometor fell into his enemy's
hands, but was honorably treated, the policy of Antiochus
being to cajole Philometor into believing that he was' his
* 2 Mac. iv. 23-26. t Polyb. xxviii. 17.
X Polyb. xxviii. 17; Hieronym. ed. Dan. xi.
§ Liv. xliv. 19 ; Polyb. xxvii. 17.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 217
friend, bent on supporting his authority against that of his
brother, Physcon, who had a strong party in the country,
especially at Alexandria. We have no full account, in any
profane writer, of the history of the period ; but it is quite
possible that the loss of the battle of Pelusium was owing to
treachery on the part of some of Philometor's ministers
(verse 26) ; and it is certain that in the intercourse between
him and Epiphanes each king was trying to deceive and
over-reach the other (verse 27). Nothing decisive was
accomplished, however, as yet ; " the end " was reserved for
" the timeapointed " (ibid.).
"Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his
heart shall be against the holy covenant ; and he shall do exploits;
and return to his own land. At the time appointed he shall return,
and come toward the south ; but it shall not be as the former, or as
the latter" (rather " it shall not be at the latter time as the former").
" Eor the ships of Chittim shall come against him; therefore he shall
be grieved and return, and have indignation against the holy cov
enant. (Dan. xi. 28-30. )
That Epiphanes on his first invasion of Egypt obtained
a considerable booty, which he carried off into Syria, is con
firmed by the First Book of Maccabees (i. 19). That on his
return, or soon after, his "heart was against the holy cove
nant " appears both from 1 Mac. i. 20-24 and from 2 Mac. v.
11-21. That after one or two years, he "returned, and once
more came toward the south," is also certain, as likewise
that he did not fare this time so well as previously, since,
though success attended his arms, he was " compelled by the
ambassadors of various northern kingdoms," supported by
the " ships of Chittim " — i. e., the fleets of Rome and Rhodes,
to surrender against his will almost all the advantages that
he had gained. * This time he returned from Egypt in ex
treme ill temper, and vented his spleen on the Jews by
renewed attacks and oppressions.
" And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at
him; and the king of the north shall come against him," (i.e., against
the king of the south,) "like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with
horsemen, and with many ships, and he shall enter into the countries,
and shall overflow and pass over. And he shall enter also into the
glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown ; but these
,shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of
the children of Ammon. He shall stretch forth also his hand upon
* Ewald, " History of the Jews," vol. v., p. 297.

218 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
the countries ; and the land of Egypt shall not escape. But he shall
have, power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the
precious things of Egypt; and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall
be at his steps. But tidings out of the east and out of the north shall
trouble him; therefore shall he go forth with great fury to destroy,
and utterly to make away many. And he shall plant the tabernacle
of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he
shall come to his end, and none shall help him." (Dan. xi. 40-45):
The closing scene of the war between the kings of the
north and of the south — Epiphanes and the brothers Philo
metor and Physcon — came in b. c. 168. Epiphanes having
withdrawn into Syria for the winter, leaving his supposed
ally, Philometor, at Memphis, and his open enemy, Physcon,
in Alexandria, was staggered by the information, that, dur
ing his absence, the hostile brothers had made up their dif
ferences, and that Physcon had agreed to receive Philometor
into Alexandria,* at which place the reconciled enemies were
now holding their courts conjointly. An embassy, which
met Epiphanes, at Rhinocolura, politely suggested to him,
that the end for which he had been waging war — the estab
lishment of Philometor's authority — was accomplished, and
that nothing remained for him but to sheath his sword and
return home. This was felt by Antiochus as a deadly blow
struck at his schemes— a " push " on the part of the " king
of the south," which required to be met by the promptest
and most energetic measures. He at once broke up his camp,
and marched into Egypt as an open enemy. With the speed
of a " whirlwind," he advanced upon Pelusium, " with char
iots, and with horsemen, and with many ships " (verse 40) ;
thence, in a more leisurely fashion, he proceeded to march
upon Alexandria. Egypt generally submitted to him. The
" treasures of gold and silver," and " all the precious things
of Egypt " were placed at his disposal by the inhabitants —
contingents of Egyptian troops were pressed into his service,}
and "the Libyans and the Ethiopians," long employed as
auxiliaries by the monarchs of Egypt, whether native or for
eign, were (as a matter of course) " at his steps " (verse 43).
He was drawing near Alexandria with the intention of renew
ing the siege, and with an almost certain prospect of re
ducing the place within a few months, when an unexpected
obstacle was interposed. The prophetic vision speaks of
" tidings out of the east and out of the north." The " tidings "
* Livy, xiv, 11. \ Ibid., xiv. 12.

NOTICES IN DANIEL. 219
told of the near approach of a small body of Romans. These
proved to be ambassadors. At their head was a man, who
has left an imperishable name in history, C. Popillius Lcenas!
This bold and haughty envoy, approaching with his small
retinue, tbe master of countless legion held out to him a
small tablet, containing a short senatorial decree. " Read
this," he said, " at once." The cautious Greek cast his eye
over the document, and perceived that it was a positive com
mand to him to desist from hostilities against those who were
" the friends of the Roman people." Unwilling to see the
prize of victory snatched from his grasp at the moment of
success, and hoping to temporize, Antiochus replied, that he
would consult his friends on the senatorial proposals and let
the envoys have an answer. Popillius had a wand in his
hand, the emblem of the ambassadorial office. Hastily tracing
with it a circle on the sand round Antiochus, " Consult," he
said,- " and give your answer before you overstep this line."
The Syrian monarch was so astonished and so dismayed that
he replied, with the utmost meekness, " I will do as the
Senate decrees." * Thus were baffled and confounded the
ambitious designs of the "great king," who regarded him
self as the successor of Cyrus, Darius, and Xerxes, and the
living representative of Alexander the Great. A brief
sentence uttered by a Roman civilian brought a great war
to an end and prohibited its renewal.
Epiphanes retired from Egypt in greater dudgeon than
ever, " deeply grieved and groaning in spirit," as Polybius
says,} and sought a species of consolation in increased seve
rity towards the Jews. It was now that he accomplished
his last acts of impiety and cruelty" upon that unfortunate
people, sending against them "Apollonius, that detestable
ringleader, with an army of two and twenty thousand, com
manding him to slay all those who were in their best age,
and to sell the women and the younger sort " (2 Mac. v. 24),
and soon afterwards polluting the temple in Jerusalem, and
wholly forbidding the exercise of the Jewish religion. It was ,
this issue to the wars between the "kings of the north and of
the south " that gave to them their great importance in the
theocratic history, and rendered them a fitting subject for so
long a prophecy as that which we have been considering.
* Polyb. -xxix. 11, § 1-6; Liv. xiv. 12.
* papwdfisvor piv Kal aikvuv xxix. 11, § 8.

220 EGYPT AND BABYLON.
Their entire result was, to bring out, more strongly than it
had ever been brought out before", the Roman influence over
the affairs of the East, to intensify the antagonism between
Rome and Syria, to place Egypt under a permanent Roman
protectorate, and make Rome the natural ally and defender
of every petty nationality which had any inclination to assert
itself against Syria, and could do so with the least hope of
success. The close connection between the Roman and Jew
ish people, which, beginning with the embassy of Judas Mac-
cabajus in b. c. 161 (1 Mac. viii. 17-32) terminated in the
destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in a. d. 70, was the con
sequence of the Syro-Egyptian struggle, and especially of
the war between Epiphanes and Philometor, which there
fore worthily occupies a very considerable space in the pro
phetical synopsis of Daniel.
The ultimate fates of Egypt and Babylon, as represented
to us in Scripture, offer a remarkable contrast. Babylon is
to " become heaps " (Jer. li. 37) ; to be " wholly desolate "
(ib. 1. 13) ; " not to be inhabited " (Isa. xiii. 20) Egypt is to
be a " base kingdom " (Ezek. xxix. 14) " the basest of the
kingdoms " (ib. verse 15) ; but still to remain a kingdom.
It is not " to exalt itself any more above the nations ; " it is
to be " deminished " it is no more to have " any rule over
the nations " (ib.), or to be " the confidence of the house of
Israel." But it is to maintain a certain position among the
powers of the earth, a certain separateness, a certain low con
sideration. Now this is exactly what has been the general
position of Egypt from her conquest by Cambyses to the pres
ent day. Under the Persians she was a sort of outlying
kingdom, rather than an ordinary satrapy. She frequently
revolted and established a temporary independence, but was
soon coerced into subjection. During the earlier portion of
the Ptolemaic period, she rose to considerable influence and
prosperity ; but still she was never more than a second-rate
power. Syria always, and Macedonia sometimes, was supe
rior to her in extent of dominion, power and importance (Dan.
xi. 5). Rome made her a province, but a province with a
certain separateness, under regulations which were peculiar.*
Under the Mohammedans, whether Arabs, Saracens or Turks,
she has still for the most part been secondary, either an
actual dependency on some greater state, or at any rate over-
* Tacit "Ann."ii. 59.

NOTICES* IN DANIEL. 221
shadowed by rivals of superior dignity. A veil hangs over
the future ; but, so far as human sagacity can forecast, there
seems to be little likelihood of any vital change in her posi
tion. With peculiar characteristics and an isolated position,
she must almost of necessity maintain her separate and dis
tinct individuality, even though she become a dependency on
a European power. On the other hand, she has exhibited
under recent circumstances no elements of greatness, and
remains emphatically " a base kingdom " — if not even " the
basest of the kingdoms." there seems to be no elements
put of which her revival and reconstitution as a great king
dom could be possible.

THE END.

INDEX. N

Abydenus, Greek historian  12
Amilius, Eoman general  214
defeat of Antiochus  214
Agriculture of Babylon  96
Ahura-Mazda, Medo-Persian god  94
Akkadian language  34
Akkerkuf , remarkable ruin  9
Alexander the Great, despotism of  206
division of his dominions  206
Amasis, Egyptian monarch  ,  66
Amestris, wife of Xerxes  93
Amram, mound of,  52
Auepu, identity with Potiphar  120
Anna, illustrious scribe  119
Antiochus II (Theus,)  208
Antiochus the Great, invasion of Egypt  210
invades Csele-Syria and Palestine  211
concludes peace with Philopator  212
aggressive tnovenient toward Greece  213
death  214
Antiochus Epiphanes, character  215
succeeds Seleucus IV  215
invades Egypt  216
severity toward the Jews  219
Apepi, the last shepherd king  125
monotheistic impulse  127
Apollonius, leader in army of Antiochus  219
proceeds against the Jews  219
Apries, Egyptian monarch  64
Pharaoh of Egypt  200
ally of Zedekiah  200
reverses and mutiny  202
Arabia, spices of  72
Aromatics in worship of gods  i  117
Ashdod revolts from Assyria  190
Asia, Western, idolatry  104
Asses, use in Egypt  124
Asshur-bani-pal, Assyrian monarch  183
tyranny and cruelty  189
t Assyria, relations with Babylonia  16
growing power  179
struggle with Egypt and Ethiopia  191
Assyrian Court, transfer to Babylon  18
treatment of captives  19
Empire, end in 7th cent. B.C  ".  21
conquests of Egypt  189

INDEX. 223
Assyrians, early contact with Greeks  38
AstibaTas, Median king  24
Babel, origin of name  11
tower of native records  .*  12
Babylon, subjection to Elam  ,  13
first notice in Kings  15
temple of Merodach  ,   23
rising power  27
astronomical calendar  33
learned class  34
governmental system  39
intercourse with Greeks  39
divine origin of kings  39
enormous size.  50
the " hanging garden b "  54
commercial character  69
building — stone used  70
reign of Darius  88
gTeat wealth  96
scattered Scripture notices  96
great size  98
destruction prophesied  105
ultimate fate  220
Babylonia, ancient cities   7
early cities  8
relations toward Syria  16
importation of metals  71
cultivation of the vine  72
exports  73
grain products  75
laud and water traffic  75-78
liberty allowed to women  ,  102
free use of wine  103
Babylonian kingdom, early  8
documents, primitive  10
religion  22
expeditions against Jerusalem   24
kingdom, civil organization  36
seals  71
court, general character  100
punishments  101
Batn, identity with Joseph  120
Bel Merodi'ich, great temples of  ' °°
Belshazzar, identity of  79
rewards Daniel  °^
defence of Babylon  •  • *
Belus, son of Libya (or Africa)  1^
Berenice, daughter of Ptolemy II  208
Berosus, account of Nebuchadnezzar  1J7
Birs-Nimrad  »
Bocchoris, successor of Tafrekht  l°<
Boken-en-ranf. See Bocchoris.
Bread, Egyptian term for food  164
Brick-making in Egypt  •  1*7
Brugsch, Dr., Egyptologist  iJJ
views of Exodus  151
C. Popilius Lcenas, Roman envoy  219
presente decree to Antiochus  219
Callinicus. See Seleucus II  209

224 „ INDEX.
Cambyses marries his sister  .-.  92
Camels in the desert  '.  117
Carchemish, decisive battle of  26,190
Carian mercenaries in Egyptian service  185
Carpets of Babylon  74
Chabas, M., quoted  144
Chaldsean, application of-term  34
Chariot force of Egyptians  148
Cleopatra, marriage with Ptolemy  212
Clothing worn by Uabylouians  72
Cyrus, attack upon Babylon  82
assumes Babylonian Sovereignty  88
connection with Darius  89
Daniel, account of Babylon . . ,  32
interprets writing upon the wall  86
Book of, authenticity  204
Darius the Median  88
etymology of the name  89
trammeled by Medo-Persian law  93
Ebony imported by Babylon  72
Egypt fails to recover Asiiitiu doniinion  27
agreat campaign in  63
invaded from the north  65
notices in Genesis  113
agricultural products . ,  116
domesticated animals  116
state-granaries  116
traffic in slaves  118
in time of Joseph  123
as described in Genesis  124
shepherd kings  125
residence of pyramid kings  126
obelisk and Fayoum period  126
introduction of the horse  127
in the time of Joseph  128
in Abraham's time  129
notices in Exodus  132
oppression and exodus of Israelites  132
number of Israelites  135
employment of forced labor  144
construction of store-cities  146
political effect of the Exodus  149
accord between Scriptuie and fact  159
climate   159
cultivated products  160
abundance of water  ...i  168
agricultural customs  165
cultivation of fruit  166
stock-raising  166
matrimonial alliances with Ethiopia  169
refuge for political exiles  171
menaced by Western Asia  180
series of civil wars  187,188
prophecies of Daniel  205
and Syria, matrimonial alliance  208
temporary subjection to Antiochus  216
ultimate fate  220
Egyptian Monarchy, antiquity  115
reception of foreigners  ,  115

INDEX. 225
noble life of  liy
women, licentiousness  119
monarchs, native, jealousy.  129
tradition of the Exodus  "" 137
Egyptians, ethnology of  ................. 143
military organization in Pharaoh's time..! .......... ....'..'. 147
Elamitic conquest of Babylon  -iq
Eitekeh, battle of, (b. c.7oi)  ;  !!!!!!!!!!!'.!!!!!!!!!! 119
Embalming among Egyptians  !!!!!!!!!!!!! 117
Euna. See Anna.
Epiphanes. See Antiochus Epiphanes  216
Ezar-haddon- Assyrian monarch  189
policy toward Babylonia  . ! ! ! 18
character and rule  20
Ethiopia, matrimonial alliances with Egypt  !!..!!...!..!!...!.! 61fi
Ethiopian primitive identity with Egyptians  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 134
dynasty ends in Egypt  !!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 183
Eunuchs at Babylonian court. . "  !  !...!!..!!..!!!!!! 37
Evil-Merodach, son of Nebuchadnezzar  !.!.!.!.!.!.!!.!!!.!!!.!. 29
Exodus, date of  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!...!!!!!.!!! 133
geographical problems  !!!!!!!!!!.!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 150
Ezekiel, prophecies of  [ \  g3
Fish, abundant ir, Egypt  [m\ ' ifi4
Flax for manufacture  [\ 161
Furnaces used by Egyptians  !!..!...!.!.!!! !!!!!!! 162
Gaza, city in Syria  .!!..! ! 199
Genesis, notices of Egypt  .!!!.!!!.  !!!!!!!!!! 113
Gerrha, Babylonian settlement  ..!!..!!..!!!  78-
Gezer, conquest by Pharaoh  !!!!!!!!!!!  170
Goshen, eastern portion of Delta  !!!!!!!!!  128
"the land of Rameses".....'.!!.'!!.'!.'!.'!!!!!!!.'!!!.'."!!!.'!!!! 131
Greece invaded by Antiochus  !...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 213
Greek mercenaries in Egyptian service  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 185
Greeks in Babylon....  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.. 39
Hebrews, identity with the Aperu  !!!!.!!!!!  ! . . . 145
Hezekiah, miraculous deliverance  192
alarmed at advances of Sennacherib  192
Hieroduli, sacred slaves  118
Hittites, masters of Syria  138
Hor, restoration of temple of Rneph  202
Horses in Egypt  124-127
Hoshea seeks aid of Shabak  178
Hyksos, an Asiatic people  123
period, religious views  126
monarchs, residence. .'.  t  126
Inscription, Egyptian, in the Louvre  ." 64
Inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar  64-66
Isaiah, mission of  180
prophecies regarding Egypt  186
Israelites, oppression and exodus  132
ordinary food  163
Jacob, family and dependants  130
Jason, High Priest of the Jews  215
submission to Antiochus  215
Jeremiah describes battle of Carchemish  26
disarrangement of prophecies  195
Jeroboam's flight to Shishak  171
Jerusalem, Babylonian expeditions against  24
destruction by Babyloniaus  27

226 INDEX.
Jews, position hi BsiDylcn  33
Joseph, time of visit to Egypt  123
history of  ISO
Josephus, account of Nebuchadnezzar  44
Kasr mound  53
Katheuotheism defined  44
Kadytis, city in Syria. See Gaza
Khetam, Egyptian term for fortress  153
Khufu (Cheops) builder of great pyramid  164
Klunzinger, naturalist, quoted  156
Lenormant, M., account of Menephthah  142
Libyan war, monument account  143
Magdolum. See Megiddo  185
Magic in Babylon and Assyria  33
Magicians in Babylon  34
Magnesia, battle of (B. C. 190)  214
Makhir, dream deity of Assyrians  35
Manasseh, capture and reinstatement  18
Manetho, tradition of the Exodus  137
Manufactures of Babylon  73
Medo-Persian government  39
law, inviolability  92
religion  94
Megiddo, battle of  185
Meranon, King of Ethiopia  10
Menephthah 1, Pharaoh of Exodus  140
Menzaleh, lake in Egypt  153
Merodach-Baladan, reign of  16
exile and death  16
records of Assyrian monuments  17
alliance with Hezekiah  :  17
Mesopotamia, geographical position  7
Migdol, generic for watch-tower  155
Mills for grinding grain  162
Mizraim, origin of name  113
Monotheism in Egypt.  126
" Mummy wheat "  162
Music at Babylonia court  33
Musical instruments in Babylon  37
"Nabatpsean Agriculture"  9
Nabonidus, dream of  35
deserts his capital  82
Nanarus'! the story of  37
Nebuchadnezzar, reign of  21
chronological discrepancies  21
expedition against the Jews  21-22
holy vessels at Jerusalem  22
his exceptional religion  22
temple at Babylon  23
" Standard Inscription "  23
expedition against Jehoiakim  24
conflict with Necho  26
capture of Jewish people  28
descendants of  30
successors of  30
character of his court  33
character  41-49
mixed character of religion  43-46
Constructive works  58

INDEX. ill
siege of Tyre  Cl-64
wars  G6-li:t
invasion of Egypt  200
Necho, king of Egypt  25
detaches Kyriafrom Babylonia  185
NekuU, son of Psamatik 1  184
leads forces into Palestine  184
Nes-Hor, Egyptian official  64
Nile, middle, inhabitants of  .%  10
valley, rainfall  160
water of  163
Nimrod, Babylonian monarch  7
Cushite origin  7-10
i identity of  9
Nineveh, the Assyrian capital  18
Obelisk period, monarchs of  126
Oneion, temple of  194
Onias seeks refuge with Ptolemy Philometor  193
Ornaments, personal  161
Palestine and Syria, commercial relations  170
Parsondas, story of  100
Pelusium, battle of  216
Pentateuch, genealogies  134
Per-ao, title of Egyptian monarch  115
Persians, royal judges  92
Pharaoh of Joseph, the  125
of the Exodus, character of.  141
Pharaoh-Necho, See Neku II.
Philopator defence agaiust Antiochus  210
Physcon, brother of Philometor  217
Pianklii-Merammon, inscription of  187
Piahairoth, meaning and location  154-158
Pithom, ancient Egyptian city  147
Polyhistor, Alexander, Greek writer  12
Prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel  60
Psamatik I, king of Egypt  183
Ptolemy succeeds Alexander in Egypt  207
Ptolemy Euergetes, war upon Seleucus II  20!)
Punt, Expedition to  •  118
Pyramid kings of Egypt  126
"Rameses the Great"  137-139
constructive works  139
employment of forced labor  139-144
Rameses, geographical position  152
Raphia (Refah), Syrian defeat at   210
Roman protectorate over Egypt  220
Rome resents Antioch us'c invasion of Greece. •••.¦•••¦  213
demands withdrawal of Antiochus from Egypt  219
Sahr-el-Nirarud  -J
Saneha, the story of  l*J
Sargon, king of Assyria  IJ"
Saul-Mugina, punishment of  101
Scopas, Egyptian general  £»
Seleucus, dominion of  ¦¦  ¦  £"/
Seleucus II, warwith Ptolemy Euergetes  M)
Seleucus IV, sou of Antioch un  -sw
Sennacherib, recovery of Babylon  iii
expedition into Palestine  181
Serbonis, Lake  aB5

228 INDEX.
Seti I, Egyptian monarch  138
war with Turaman and Semitic races  138
Seven Spheres, restoration  48
Sheshonk I, fonuder of Bubastite line  172
Palestinian expedition   172
addition to Great Temple of Kaniak. !  173
Shinar, geographical position  .>< 
Shora, celebrated Egyptian plant  156
Slaves, Egyptian traffic. . . .*  118
value of  118
Spices imported by Babylonia  72
Store-cities, construction of  146
Storms, severe, in Egypt  160
Succoth, rendezvous of Israelites  152
Superstition of Babylonia Kings  48
Susiania, the ancient  10
" Sutech," god of Apepi  .126
Syria, Egyptian expeditions  168
commercial relations with Palestine  .".  170
submission to Neko  196
and Egypt, matrimonial alliance  208
Syro-Egyptian struggle  216
Tafnekht, prince of Sais  187
sieges in Lower Egypt  187
Tahark or Tahrak, See Tirhakah
Tanis, ancient Egyptian town  126
Tel-el-Maskoutah, ancient city at  146
Tel-Nimrud. See Akkerkuf
" The Two Brothers " a story  119
Thermopylae, battle of  213
Thukut, an Egyptian district  152
Transportation of conquered nations  ,  28
Turhakah, king of Egypt,"  181
Tyre, war against  60
Ur, theships of  78
Vine culture in Egypt  166
Wady-el-arish, " river of Egypt"  196
Walking-stick of Egyptians  162
War-chariots in Babylonia . . :  103
Wheat, mummy  161
Wine, varieties used in Babylon  72
free use in Babylonia  103
Woman of Babylon  '.  102
Egyptian, licentiousness  119
Woods, curious, in Babylon  69
Xerxes, anecdote of  93
Yapur-Shapu  56
Yam-Suph, name applied to Red Sea  156
Zedekiah, last King of Judah  200
Zendavesta, the  94