YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE LIBRARY OF THE
DIVINITY SCHOOL

STUDIES

BIBLICAL AND ORIENTAL.

BY
REV. WILLIAM TURNER.

EDINBURGH:
ADAM & CHAELES BLACK.
1876.

MUEEA1 AND GIBB, PRINTEES, EDINBURGH.

PREFACE.

Of the papers gathered into this volume, two parts of
the first, and the third, all but the appendix, have already-
appeared in the Journal of Sacred Literature, and are
republished with the kind permission of the proprietors.
Some of the rest have been lying beside me for years
in a more or less finished state, and others as their
contents will indicate have been recently composed.
They will all of them, I hope, be found to furnish in
themselves a sufficient raison d'etre. I had thought,
indeed, till lately that the subject of the decipherment
of the cuneiform inscriptions is one in regard to which
all intelligent men were fully satisfied, and that no re
publication of the old papers offered in the first Essay
would ever be appropriate. The appearance of the
volume of the Speaker's Commentary containing the
exposition of Isaiah, and of the passage relating to the
subject in question animadverted on in the third part of
that Essay, has shown that I was mistaken, and reveals
a state of belief in influential quarters on the important
matter referred to which is to me unaccountable.
If the recent work of Mr. George Smith, The Chaldean
Genesis, had appeared earher, I might perhaps have been
tempted to enter anew and at large into the Nimrod

iv Preface.
question, and to extend the appendix to the third Essay
into a second part. But probably it is the better course
to wait for the production of the fresh evidence on the
subject which the author of the work referred to alleges
he has obtained. Meanwhile, I must continue to regard
as the. best-supported view that which the Essay pre
sents, and of which Mr. Smith speaks with respect though
unconvinced by the argumentation. For some of the
other papers also, especially that on Berosus, I could
have wished that the work just mentioned had appeared
earher ; as it is, I have only been able" to make a few
references to it.
It is with considerable hesitancy that I have included
in the volume the last Essay. The subject is both diffi
cult and important, and demands a Treatise rather than
an Essay ; I have not been able to make exhaustive
inquiry into all the points connected with it, while, at
the same time, I have seemed to myself to have enough
of information to show the warrantableness and the
necessity of deserting to some extent the beaten track,
and of taking up new ground. I hope the views sug
gested may at least secure the attention of competent
scholars. While the last sheets of the volume are pass
ing through the press, a new work has appeared on the
very theme of this Essay. The book is entitled, Inquiries
concerning the Structure of the Semitic Languages, Part I.
by Sir W. Martin, D.O.L. ; and this first part is occupied
with ' The Hebrew Verb.' The appearance of this work
is to me a source of interest and gratification, specially
on two accounts. In the first place, it is an indication

Preface. v
that others as well as I find the current doctrines on
the subject unsatisfactory. Thus the author says, p. 5 :
' Notwithstanding the progress thus made (viz., by
Ewald and his followers), we find that our best treatises
on Hebrew Grammar do not furnish any clear and con
sistent theory.' In the second place, I am pleased, on
glancing over the book, to find that the author has reached
results, not indeed altogether, but in some considerable
degree, coincident with my own. Thus, p. 1 1 : ' The
Forms of the Hebrew verb . . . are not tenses in the
proper sense. . . . They predicate a certain state of a
certain subject, and no more. . . . The difference be
tween' them is 'a difference in the way of conceiving
the action or condition.' On pp. 32 f, I find also some
excellent remarks on ' Hebrew narrative.'

CONTENTS.

I. The Decipherment of Cuneiform Inscriptions de
scribee and tested. — Part I.,  1
Part II., . . .... 20
Part III., . .... 44
II. Berostts, .... . . .68
III. NlMROD AND HIS DYHASTY, . 88
IV. The Geography of the Exodtjs, ... . . .114
V. The History of Job, and its Place in the Scheme of
Bevel a tion, ... . . 133
VI. The Israelitish Economy, . 180
VII. Invasions of the Land of Israel, . . .261
VIII. The Death of Judas Iscariot, 315
IX. The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb, . . 338

STUDIES: BIBLICAL AND ORIENTAL.

i.
THE DECIPHERMENT OF CUNEIFORM INSCRIP
TIONS DESCRIBED AND TESTED.
PART I.
{Reprinted from the Journal of Sacred-- Literature,
April 1864.)
It seems from various indications that considerable
scepticism still exists in many quarters in regard to the
readings furnished by Rawlinson, Hincks, Oppert, and
others, of the inscriptions from Western Asia, composed
in the cuneiform character. The removal of this scep
ticism, and the production of a rational conviction of the
general trustworthiness of these readings, is what is
specially aimed at in this paper and its successors.
In applying the epithet cuneiform, or cuneatic, to the
writing of the inscriptions in question, it is meant not
that they are all compiled in the same language, but
that they are all made up of signs formed of the same
element — the wedge, nail, arrow-head, dagger, or swallow
tail, as it has been variously called. The great peculi
arity of this kind of writing is the absence of curvature.
The tapering wedge-like form of the lines seems to he
A

2 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
a superadded elegance. Inscriptions have been found in
which the taper is wanting, and others in which it is
represented by cross-bars, like the head of a . hammer.
Evidently from its rigid and curveless character, this
form of writing 'was specially, and, it is probable, pur
posely, adapted for being inscribed either on soft brick or
stone. The taper form may have been suggested by
observing that in practice a line thicker at one end
came out more naturally than one uniformly thick.2
There are sufficient indications to show that, like the
hieroglyphical in Egypt, the cuneiform became ultimately,
if it were not at first, a sacred character, reserved for
occasions of State, royal proclamations, or dedicatory
tablets and seals. We are told that Democritus wrote
on the sacred letters of Babylon, and we find the wedge,
the primary element, lying on an altar from Babylon,
along with other sacred symbols. It is certain that
another and cursive form of writing was in use along
with the cuneiform ; and rare examples are said to have
been found of a degenerate cuneiform, corresponding to
the demotic of Egypt, and better adapted than the ordi-
1 Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii.,. pp. 179, 180. The oldest
Chaldean legends are in characters in which the taper is wanting.
Oppert, Expedition Scientifique, ii. , p. 62..
2 Layard, I.e., suggests as the means of forming the wedge, the angular
corner of a square rod ; Oppert, I.e., the double stroke of a chisel. It
may be observed,, that for the most part the narrow end of the lines is
turned in the direction in which the eye and hand of the workman would
move in forming the characters. For forming the marks on clay, move
able styles or wedge-like types were used. Such, made of stone, are often
found in the mounds of Southern Chaldea. Loftus, Chaldea, p. 235 ;
Taylor, Jour. Asiatic Soc, xv., p. 410. Compare Oppert, Expid., ii., p.
63 : ' Nous avons derauvert a Babylone des burins d'ivoire pourvus d'une
point triangulaire, dont une seule taiUe devait fournir l'element du coin.'
Chesney observes (Euphrates Exped., ii., p. 629), 'So exactly do the same
letters resemble one another, that, when repeated, slight flaws or blemishes
when they exist are found in all. '

Described and Tested. 3
nary style for daily employment.1 In regard to the origi
nation of the characters, it is now fully ascertained that,
like the Egyptian hieroglyphics, they were at first pic
torial, though, unlike the Egyptian, the pictures became
generally unrecognisable. In some cases, however, the
likeness to the object represented is still discernible ;
and it is found that in the oldest modes of writine,
the signs present the most distinct traces of pictorial
origin.2 While all the records with which we have to do have
the straight line , or wedge as their prime element, they
are not all written in the same characters. Out of this
element are formed more than one distinct alphabet or
syllabarium, each appropriated, as was a priori to be
expected, to a separate language. In the Persepolitan
inscriptions, e.g., a glance is sufficient to show that three
different sets of characters, all cuneiform, are employed
in different compartments or columns of the same tablet ;
and this threefoldness is a conspicuous feature in almost
all the Persian monuments.3 The simplest in form,
1 See Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii., pp. 164-166, 179-185 ;
Eawlinson, Jour. Asiatic Soc, x., p. 31 ; Oppert, Rapport, p. 173.
From the demotic cuneiform we must, it would seem, distinguish the
Aramaean or Phoenician writing, of which pretty numerous specimens
have been found in Assyrian and Babylonian ruins, as at Abushadr (Bun-
sen's Phil, of Hist., ii., p. 361), on Assyrian weights (Layard, Nineveh
and Babylon, p. 601), and elsewhere. Cf. Levy, Phbnizische Studien, ii.,
pp. 22 f.
2 See in genera], Hincks's paper in Report of Brit. Assoc, 1857 ; and
Oppert's Expid., ii., chap. v. pp. 59 if., where the fullest illustrations
have been given of the hieroglyphical origin of cuneiform writing. See
also Rawliuson, Herod., i., pp. 442, 444 ; Menant, Les Ecritures CunCi-
formes, pp. 167 f. ; Inscriptions Assyriennes, p. 20. The figures on the
famous black stone of Shush are doubtless hieroglyphical. See Loftus,
Chaldea, p. 419 ; cf. Chesney, Euphrates Exped., ii., p. 628.
3 The threefoldness must be understood as referring only to general
appearance. It is now proved that two at least of the alphabets (the

4 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
which has also the fewest signs, is usually called the
first or Persian kind of cuneiform ; that which is next
above it in point of complexity and number is called the
second or Median, or rather, since progress has been made
in decipherment, Scythian or Turanian, species ; and that
which is the most marked by complexity and variety is
called the third or Babylonian, It is the study of these
trilingual tablets of the Achsemenians, set up in order to
make their proclamations generally intelligible to their
subjects,1 which has opened the way for the understand
ing of the remaining stores of cuneiform hterature. We
will therefore detail the process by which these have
been deciphered, and then point out the apphcation of
the key thus obtained to the other and more important
documents of Assyria and Babylon.
The first considerable transcripts of cuneiform writing
were brought to Europe from Persepolis by Niebuhr, and
published in 1778.2 They excited much attention
among Continental scholars ; and among the earliest
inquirers, besides Niebuhr himself, who demonstrated
that the writing must be read from left to right, we
hear of Wahl, Tychsen, Miinter, and others.3 By uni-
second and third species) employed in the Persian tablets are essentially
identical, and have been derived from the hieroglyphic system. See
Oppert, Expid., ii., pp. 70 f. The same is probably true also of the
other, though it has been attempted (as by Geisler, De Literaturce
phoneticce origine atque indole, pp. 19 f.) to prove that it is allied to the
Phoenician, Indian, or Kunic characters.
1 ' Precisely as at the present day, a governor of Baghdad, who wished
to publish an edict for general information, would be obliged to employ
three languages, — the Persian, Turkish, and Arabic' — Eawlinson, Com
mentary on the Cuneiform Inscriptions, p. 3.
2 Le Brun had, however, published some fragments, afterwards used by
Lassen, in his Voyages, Amsterdam, 1718.
3 See a full account of what was done with the Persepolitan inscriptions
before Grotefend, in Mediant, Les Ecrit. Cun., pp. 19-52.

Described and Tested. 5
versal consent, the first who obtained any insight into
the meaning of the unknown characters was the lately-
deceased Grotefend, of Hanover. His first paper on the
subject was read before the Literary Society of Gottingen
in 1802. J Thereafter several papers were published by
him, chiefly in the Fundgruben des Orients (1814-1816) ;
and an account of his method of procedure was contri
buted by him as an appendix to Heeren's Ideen in 1815.
It is necessary to be the more particular in recounting the
mode, of decipherment employed by Grotefend, as it lies
at the foundation of the results whose general validity I
am now concerned to prove.
It is to be remembered that the inscriptions to be
deciphered were written in characters whose powers were
absolutely unknown, and were unaccompanied by a trans
lation into any known language. Of all the three species
of writing, letters and words were equally locked in
mystery. In such a case it is evident that progress
could be made only by making assumptions to be tested
by apphcation to the data. From the accessible inscrip
tions two were chosen, published by Niebuhr,2 in the first
or simplest kind of writing, apparently of kindred meaning,
and accompanied by duplicates in the other more com
plicated characters. These, the traveller stated, he had
found over bas-reliefs at Persepolis representing the
monarch, and this was all that was known about them.
Inasmuch, however, as Persepolis was understood, from
the Greek historians, to be the work of the dynasty over
thrown by Alexander, it was to be presumed that the
inscriptions there would refer to monarchs of that
dynasty. Grotefend now conjectured, as Tychsen and
1 It bore the title, Prozvia de cuneatis quas vocant inscriptionibus Perse-
politanis legendis et explicandis relatio.
2 Tom. ii., tab. xxiv. B. and G.

6 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
Miinter x had already done, that a word recurring several
times in both inscriptions must be the term signifying
king, or the title of the monarch to whose honour the
monument had been reared, and that the characters
accompanying this title formed the name of the king.
Thus, his fundamental assumptions were that the indi
vidual bearing the aspect of a king in the bas-relief was
named in the inscription over his head, and that the
word most frequently occurring in the inscription was
his title, or a part of it. In order to obtain an idea
of the ordinary style of such records, he compared some
inscriptions found in similar positions, written in Pehlvi,
and belonging to a later, the Sassanian, dynasty of
Persia,2 and gave the following hypothetical reading of
the two inscriptions : —
N. N. rex magnus (?) rex regum,
Filius — (regis) stirps Achsemenis (?).
The relationship between the two persons named, which
he pronounced to be that of father and son, he found
confirmed by the words of the duplicate in the second
and third species. His next step was to choose out of
the names of the Achaemenian monarchs, those which
best suited the form and circumstances of the words
which he had determined as indicating the names.
' Cyrus and Cambyses,' — I quote his words, — ' it could
not be because the two names in the cuneiform did not
begin with the same letter : it could, moreover, be
neither Cyrus nor Artaxerxes, because the first was too
short and the second too long. There remained only
Darius and Xerxes, and these fitted the characters so
1 Tychsen, De cuneatis inscriptionibus Persepolitanis lucubratio, 1798 ;
Miinter, Versuch iiber die keilformigen Inschriften zu Persepolis, 1802.
8 Deciphered not long before by De Sacy.

Described and Tested. 7
easily that I could have no doubt that they were the
right terms.' x This choice was confirmed by the observa
tion that in the one inscription, not only the name of the
monarch himself but also that of his father was accom
panied by the royal title, while in the ,other the father's
name was without it ; which answered to the known fact
that Hystaspes, the father of Darius, was a subject.
These proper names furnished him with the powers of
more than twelve letters ; and he had thus, by ingenious
combinations, obtained a clue which it was possible, with
diligence and learning, to follow out to a full intelligence
of these records. It is, of course, to be granted that the
conclusions at which he arrived, in regard to the mean
ing of these two inscriptions, were not by themselves
demonstratively correct ; but it is also manifest that if
the powers which he had hypothetically ascribed to the
letters of the royal names and titles were false, the fact
would speedily make itself apparent in attempting to
apply them, and that the chances were as infinity to one
against an erroneous alphabet yielding everywhere a
sense intelligible and appropriate. Grotefend's con
fessedly deficient knowledge of Oriental tongues, as well
as the want of a store of materials to work upon,
hindered his progress in the work of interpretation, so
that his later writings, in this department of learning, are
of comparatively httle value.
It is unnecessary to detail minutely the successive
advances made upon the knowledge of the first or old
Persian alphabet and language, in pursuance of the
labours of Grotefend,2 by St. Martin in 1822, Rask in
1826, and Burnouf in 1836. In the last-named year
1 Heeren, Werke, x., Beilage ii., p. 346.
2 See the details in Bawlinson's memoir, Jour. Asiat. Soc, x., part i. ;
Oppert, Expid., ii., pp. 5-8 ; and Menant, Les Ecrit. Cm., pp. 61-70.

8 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
another labourer appeared in the field, whose success
eclipsed that of all his predecessors. This was Lassen
of Bonn, in whom was combined all that knowledge of
Oriental languages and peoples necessary for success in
such a study. The knowledge of Sanscrit, confined, when
Grotefend first wrote, to a few English scholars, had
now become widely diffused, and was far advanced in
fulness and accuracy ; and what was still more impor
tant in its bearing upon the present subject, the Zend,
imperfectly known to the first cuneiform discoverer by
the work of Anquetil du Perron, had been largely eluci
dated, especially by Burnouf. It was thus possible to
draw from other and cognate tongues illustrations of the
meaning and grammatical forms of the Persian writing.
Already Rask had pronounced, from the resemblance of
a case-ending, that the language of the Persian inscrip
tions was allied to the Sanscrit. Burnouf's knowledge
of the Zend enabled him to develope several of the
grammatical formations of the cuneiform. Lassen, work
ing on a larger store of inscriptions, with the requisite
amount of philological knowledge, achieved more signal
success. In his work of 1836 x he- clearly proves the
affinity of the grammatical forms with the Sanscrit and
Zend, and from the roots of these languages explains
the meaning of many cuneiform words. Moreover, in
one of the inscriptions given by Niebuhr, he found a
list of geographical names which Burnouf also in part
deciphered, which, however, in Lassen's hands, yielded
at least twelve new and more correct alphabetic readings.
Reviews of what had been accomplished were published
by Beer of Leipsic and. Jacquet of Paris about the
same time (1838). Both made some suggestions of con
sequence in regard to the alphabet. Lassen published
1 Die alt-persischen Keilinschriften.

Described and Tested. 9
again in 1839 -,1 and a still more important memoir in
1844.2 In^this work he was able to employ a larger
and more correct store of materials, furnished by Wester-
gaard, who had travelled in Persia in 1843, and by
whom not only the whole of the Persepolitan and other
neighbouring records were more accurately transcribed,
but the long inscription at Nakshi-Rustam was, for the
first time, made available to European research. Lassen
was thus enabled to construct an alphabet, the correct
ness of which has been questioned only in regard to one
or two characters, while his readings have been approved
as in the main correct, and conveying a just impression
of the sense of the original. In 1845 Holtzinann3
assailed his work with a bitterness betraying the animus
of a personal quarrel, and in 1847 Hitzig 4 attempted
to amend his interpretation of the Nakshi - Rustam
inscription. I have thus traced the course of inquiry in regard to
the first or Persian branch of the cuneiform records, as
it proceeded on the Continent, for the first fifty years
after Grotefend had opened the new path, and it appeared
that, with the materials that had been used, httle more
could be accomplished. We have now to direct our
attention to the labours of another inquirer in the same
field, who has the double merit of contributing new and
1 In the Zeitschrift fur die Kunde d. Morgenlandes, vol. iii.
a In the same periodical, vol. vi.
3 Beitr&ge zur Erklarung der persischen Keilinschriften.
4 Die Crabschrift des Darius zu Nakschi Rustam, erlautert von Dr. F.
Hitzig. Dr. Hincks in 1846 published a memoir ' On the first and second
kinds of Persepolitan writing ' in the Transactions of the Royal Irish
Academy, vol. xxi., which I have not seen, to which I believe is due the
credit of the first publication of a fundamental law in the old Persian
alphabet, discovered also, and independently, by Kawlinson and Oppert.
See the former's supplementary note, Jour. Asiatic Soc, x., p. 175 ; the
latter's Das Lautsystem des Altpersischen.

10 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
most important materials, and of elucidating these with
a learning and independence commanding general ad
miration. This is Sir Henry Rawlinson, then a major
in the Indian service, whose researches were begun, and
his first and fundamental results obtained, while resident
at Kirmanshah on the western frontier of Persia, and
whose readings, agreeing substantially with those already
obtained in Europe, must be regarded as an indepen
dent testimony to the validity of the procedure there
pursued. ' It was in the year 1855,' says Rawlinson,1 ' that I
first undertook the investigation of the cuneiform
character ; I was at that time only aware that Pro
fessor Grotefend had deciphered some of the names of
the early sovereigns of the house of Achsemenes, but
in my isolated position I could neither obtain a copy
of his alphabet, nor could I discover what particular
inscriptions he had examined. The first materials which
I submitted to analysis were the sculptured tablets at
Hamadan . . . consisting of two trilingual inscriptions.
. . . When I proceeded to compare and interline the
two inscriptions (or rather the Persian columns), I found
that the characters coincided throughout, except in cer
tain particular groups, and it was only reasonable to
suppose that the groups which were thus brought out
and individualized must represent proper names. I
further remarked that there were but three of these
distinct groups in the two inscriptions ; for the group
which occupied the second place in one inscription, and
which, from its position, suggested the idea of its repre
senting the name of the father of the king who was
there commemorated, corresponded with the group which
occupied the first place in the other inscription, and
1 Jour. Asiatic Sue, x., pp. 4 ff.

Described and Tested. 1 1
thus not only served determinately to connect the two
inscriptions together, but, assuming the groups to
represent proper names, appeared also to indicate' a
genealogical succession. The natural inference was,
that in these three groups of characters I had
obtained the proper names belonging to three succes
sive generations of the Persian monarchy; and it so
happened that the first three names of Hystaspes,
Darius, and Xerxes, which I applied at hazard to the
three groups, according to the succession, proved to
answer in all respects satisfactorily, and were, in fact,
the true identification.'
These were his commencing steps, and it is impor
tant1 to observe not only that they were made inde
pendently of Grotefend and other labourers, but that
the method pursued was somewhat different, though
1 This is important, specially in view of the additional guarantee thus
afforded of the general reliableness of the interpretations of the Grote-
fendian school. Forster so represents the matter as to give his readers the
impression that Rawlinson simply adopted Grotefend's alphabet. Thus
he says (Primeval Language, iii., p. 16), 'This attempt (viz. Grotefend's
of 1802) is the sole basis of aU that has been subsequently essayed to
wards the unravelment of the arrow-headed characters' (p. 50) — 'the
forty letters assigned by Col. Rawlinson, after Grotefend, to his Behistun
alphabet.' See also pp. 21, 25, 26. Still more distinctly (p. 180), 'the
effort has been made to take the Grotefend system of decipherment out
of the category of mere theory, by laying great stress upon the circum
stance of the same readings being arrived at simultaneously in the East
and in Europe ; altogether in forgetfulness of the obvious fact, that there
is precisely the same likelihood that the same wrong renderings should be
drawn from the same wrong alphabets, as that the same right renderings
should be deduced from the same right ones. ' A writer in The Journal
of Sacred Literature, assisted by Forster's representations, repeats the
same thing (July 1855, p. 374). The correct way of putting it is this :
two individuals enter upon an inquiry into the same unknown language
in different parts of the world, with different texts before them ; and by
methods as different as the nature of the case will admit of, they reach
identical results.

1 2 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
yielding the same results. But Rawlinson was pos
sessed of a signal and peculiar advantage for this study,
in the transcript of the great Behistun inscription,
secured by himself. This furnished him with a wide.
field of comparison for determining the powers of the
letters, and ascertaining the grammatical forms and
linguistic relations of the writing. Of the results of
his researches a portion was communicated to the Royal
Asiatic Society of London in 1839, 'in a prScis of the
contents of a large portion of the Behistun inscription,
differing in no material respects ' from the full
..analytical interpretation afterwards pubhshed. After
having become acquainted with the labours of the Con
tinental inquirers, as far as they had extended, he
presented to the same Society a memoir on the Persian
cuneiform inscriptions, published in * their Journal in
1846, embracing a full transcript, analysis, and transla
tion of the Behistun inscription, as well as a transla
tion of the other inscriptions already pubhshed, besides
important dissertations, and a vocabulary, as yet un
finished. This is undoubtedly to be reckoned the most
important work that has appeared on the first or Persian
cuneiform writing, and to it all subsequent inquirers in"
this field have been indebted. Of later works, the most
important are the treatise of Benfey J (1847), and a
series of memoirs written by Oppert 2 in the Journal
Asiatique. Such has been the course of inquiry in regard to the

1 Die permehen Keilinschriften mit Uebersetzung und Glossar, von T.
Benfey. 2 Journal Asiatique, ivm" sene, tom. xvii. -xix. ; cf. Revue Archiolo-
gique, tom. v., 1848. More lately have appeared, BoUensen, Beitrage zur
Erklarung der persischen Keilinschriften, in the Melanges Asiatiques ;
and Spiegel, Die altpersischen Keilinschriften.

Described and Tested. 1 3
first species of the trilingual inscriptions ; and so satis
factory and complete has been the elucidation of these
lately mysterious records, at least to those who have
thoroughly studied them in the method described, that
Rawlinson in 1850 could write, ' there are probably
not more than twenty words in the whole range of the
Persian cuneiform records, upon the meaning, gram
matical condition, or etymology of which, any doubt or
difference of opinion can be said at present to exist.' x
The very magnitude of the achievement provokes in
• many minds the doubt of its reality. ' The more,' says
a writer in an English Review,2 ' we consider the mar
vellous character of this discovery, the more we' feel
some mistrust and misgiving returning to our minds.
It is no less, in the first place, than the creation of a
regular alphabet of nearly forty letters out of what
appears, at first sight, confused and unmeaning lines and
angles ; and, secondly, the creation of a language out
of the words so formed from this alphabet : ' the re
construction of a lost tongue from its characters, — ¦
characters which could tell nothing of their own mean
ing, which, if once pictorial, had long lost their pictorial
significance, and for which there was no Rosetta stone to
guide the inquirer. Yet that this is no imaginary feat .
may, I think, be shown by evidence sufficient to satisfy
any unprejudiced mind.
The process of discovery, as I have shown, has been,
and from the nature of. the case could only be, a tenta
tive one ; consisting of hypothesis skilfully posited, then
modified, corrected, enlarged, till it has perfectly met
the known facts. This is admitted in every branch of
¦ Commentary on Cuneiform Inscriptions, p. 3.
2 Quarterly Review for March 1847, quoted in Vaux, Nineveh and
Persepolis, p. 458.

1 4 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
science to be a valid procedure,1 and its originally
hypothetical character no more affects our assurance of
the truth of the results, when they are found to sustain
all possible tests, than the same element can shake our
faith in the reality of the Copernican system of the
universe, or the Newtonian theory of gravitation. Now
every test that has been tried the interpretations of
Grotefend and Rawlinson1 do abide, and this I shall
briefly show: —
1. Though, when Grotefend first began his labours, no
translation of the Persian cuneiform into a known lan
guage was known to exist, yet such translations have
since been found, which, though few in number and
meagre in extent, fully confirm the results that have been
obtained. These translations are all into the hiero
glyphic writing of Egypt, and embrace only the royal
name and title. Three vases have been found bearing
the legend of Xerxes in Persian and Egyptian, 'Xerxes,
the great king ; ' and another with the name Artaxerxes
in the same double type. In all these cases the readings
of Rawlinson and Lassen perfectly correspond with those
of Wilkinson and Birch.2 This may seem but a slight
and inadequate test; others, however, are at hand.
2. By a series of ingenious conjectures and combina
tions, an alphabet, vocabulary, and grammar have been
1 Cf. Whewell on the place of Cuesses in scientific discovery, Phil, of
Inductive Sciences, ii., p. 41 (ed. 1847).
2 The first of the vases of Xerxes has long lain at Paris, and is known
as the vase of the Comte de Caylus (see Rawlinson, Jour. Asiatic Soc.,
x., p. 339) ; Grotefend, Neue Beitrage zur Erlauterung der persepol.
Keilsch., Taf. ii. A similar vase, in fragments, was found by Loftus at
Susa. (see his Chaldea and Susiana, p. 410). Another was lately dis
interred by Mr. Newton at Budrum, in Asia Minor, the ancient Halicar-
nassus, interesting as probably a gift from Xerxes to the famous Arte
misia (see Journal of Sacred Literature, Jan. 1858, p. 498). The vase
of Artaxerxes exists in the library of St. Mark's at Venice (see Rawlinson,

Described and Tested. i 5
constructed for these Persian records ; with the help of
these an intelligible and instructive sense can be elicited,
and aU the inscriptions hitherto discovered, however lono-
or short, have yielded such a sense to this key. It is to
be remembered that these documents contain no small
variety of matter. They consist of not merely short,
formal, recurrent sentences, but of at least one long
historical document, of geographical lists, invocations to
the Deity, and architectural details. Is it supposable
that any key but the true one could bring consistent
sense out of every line to which it has as yet been
applied ? x If successful in a few instances, the system
must have broken down 2 in the course of a more
extended application, unless it had been happily founded
on the truth of the language. It is true that, in a
tentative process such as can alone be here used, room
must always be left for increase of knowledge and of
conviction. The discovery of new inscriptions might
undoubtedly occasion some modification of existing views
in particular points of grammar and of interpretation,
and throw some additional rays of hght on what seems
now satisfactorily determined; but it is opposed to all
rules of probability, that such a discovery could fun
damentally overthrow or unsettle the results already
Jour. Asiatic Soc, x., p. 347 ; Lassen, Zeitschrift, vi. — last plate). A
few renderings of the Babylonian or Assyrian writing into Phoenician
have also been found, which may be noticed hereafter. Mr. Forster, I am
aware, disputes the reading of the Egyptian as well as of the Persian
legends ; but the above will weigh with those who believe that the re
searches of ChampoBion, Lepsius, etc. , have value.
1 'The clearness and consistency,' says Mr. Talbot, 'of the numerous
passages, and the long historical narratives transla'ted by Rawlinson,
afford in themselves no slight presumption that he cannot be greatly or
altogether mistaken as to the meaning of these ancient records.' — Jour.
Sac. Lit., Jan. 1856, p. 415.
3 As, e.g., the rival system of Forster breaks down.

1 6 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
attained. The self - consistency of these results is a
guarantee of their stability.
3. The old Persian of the inscriptions is verified by
philology, and has now obtained a place as a sister
language in the Indo-Germanic group of tongues, stand
ing in near alliance with the Sanscrit and Zend.
The alphabet, grammar, and vocabulary, wrought out
by the tentative process described, have been recognised
and acknowledged by Bopp1 and other philologers as
cognate with those already known belonging to these
languages, and as filling up a vacant space in the line
of derivation and change. Here, again, we have a
decisive assurance that the system on which the lan
guage is read is the right one. For could a false
system, a merely factitious product of conjecture, give
being to a language accurately fitting in to a set of
languages whose characteristics are already well ascer
tained, so as to be alike yet different, and in its differ
ences obeying known analogies, and restoring a deficient
link in the chain which leads up to the time when the
earth was of one speech ?
4. It does not fall within our scope to detail the
historical results obtained from the reading of the
Persian monuments. It is proper, however, to refer to
the contents of this class of inscriptions, in order
further to establish the validity of the interpretation.
These records are admitted by all to belong to the
Achaemenian line of kings ; and, as read by Rawlinson,
the longer of them emanate from, or relate to, Darius
1 See his Vergleichende Grammatik, lie Aufgabe, — passim; Miiller's
Survey of Languages, p. 32. The reception by Bopp of the results of this
school of interpreters is an unwelcome fact for M. Gobineau : ' Je suis
fache de voir figurer ce monstrueux pastiche dans la precieuse grammaire
de l'illustre M. Bopp.' — Lecture des textes Cuniiformes, p. 38.

Described and Tested. 1 7
son of Hystaspes, the successor of the pseudo-Smerdis,
and the predecessor of Xerxes, the invader of Greece ;
and they contain important historical details relating
to the commencing years of his reign. Now it happens
that of this dynasty we have previous accounts, especially
in the pages of Herodotus ; and we are thus in circum
stances to test the correctness of the interpretation, by
comparing the historical contents with what is already
recognised as authentic history. The full development
of this argument would occupy too much space. We
can only refer to such points as these, — the lineage of
Darius ; the names of his fellow-conspirators in slaying
the Magian usurper; the circumstances of the conspiracy;
the subdivisions of the empire, — as furnishing instances
of detailed agreement, exhibiting just the amount of
divergence which was to be expected in records so
different in their character as the public documents
of Persia and the picturesque and rambling narrative
of the ' father" of history.' 1 To this are to be added
the preciseness and trustworthiness, as weighed by all
previous knowledge, of the allusions to points of religious,
antiquarian, and geographical interest, — a precision and
accuracy altogether inexplicable, if the interpretation
proceeds upon' a delusive basis.2 Still more, in at least
one point this interpretation has cast decisive elucidation
1 Cf. Rawlinson's remarks in his Herodotus, vol. i., p. 69.
2 Exception may perhaps be taken to this statement in its reference to
the religious allusions of the inscriptions, which exhibit a system of
worship apparently different from that ascribed to the Persians by the
Greeks. Even if nothing could be done to reconcile the accounts (on
which, however, see Rawlinson's Herodotus, book i., app., essay v.), the
very difference is sufficient to assure an unprejudiced mind that the
decipherment is real. A got-np interpretation would assuredly not have
neglected to square itself, in so important a point as religion, with so
prominent an authority as Herodotus. B

1 8 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
on a passage of history which, as narrated by Herodotus,
had been previously misunderstood by almost all his
commentators. The historian relates that the Medes
repented of their submission to Cyrus the Persian, and
revolted from Darius, but were again reduced to subjec
tion.1 This has been commonly referred to a revolt
of the Medes during the reign of Darius Nothus,2 though
there are serious objections to such a reference both in
the terms of the passage itself, and in the known cir
cumstances of the life of Herodotus and composition
of his work. Grote 3 had been led by consideration of
these difficulties, and without being aware that there was
any confirmation of his view, to suppose that the refer
ence must be to a much earlier revolt of the Medes,
under Darius son of Hystaspes, not elsewhere mentioned
in classic hterature. And now the account of the revolt,
thus obscurely referred to by Herodotus, is found fully
given in the inscription of Behistun,4 under the hand
of Darius himself, the queller of the insurrection, —
thus, as deciphered by Rawhnson, coming in remarkably
to confirm the latest conclusions in the sphere of Grecian
history. Such are some of the tests which may be applied for
the verification of the Grotefendian system of decipher
ment; and if a system of philological doctrine thus
approved is not to be allowed to be trustworthy, merely
because it was formed originally on a basis of hypo
thesis, then the largest and the best part of human
knowledge must be equally rejected. This hypothesis
has met the problem : — Among the infinite possibilities
1 Herod, i. 130.
2 Mentioned by Xenophon, Hellenica, i. 2, 12.
3 History of Greece, vol. iv., p. 304.
4 Beh. Ins., col. ii., lines 14 f.

Described and Tested. 1 9
of human speech, to find out a system of alphabet,
grammar, and verbal roots, which shall apply to the
farrago of wedge-like lines engraved upon the stones of
Persia ; which shall draw from them a self-consistent
meaning; which shall marshal them into a language
such as was likely to be used about Persepolis and
Ecbatana in the sixth century B.C. ; and which shall
elicit from them information in all respects suitable to
the character of the monuments themselves, the cir
cumstances of the time, the individuals from whom they
profess to emanate, and, in general, the history and
relations of the Persian people. The mere statement
is enough for rational conviction.
Yet, if enough for rational conviction, this is not all
that can be said in support of our present argument.
When we proceed to consider that the language whose
meaning has been thus ascertained has been applied as
a key to the decipherment of at least other two lan
guages (that we may limit our view at present to the
Persian monuments), and has actually served the pur
pose in a considerable degree, it is evident that the
correctness of the interpretation has thus been subjected
to a further and, if possible, severer trial. The problem
which has been met and solved has to be thus enlarged :
To reconstruct one language so as through its means
to reconstruct other two. It is inconceivable that a
false hypothesis could serve to interpret the literature of
one unknown tongue : it is still more inconceivable that
the same false hypothesis could avail to unlock the stores
of three.

20 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions

THE DECIPHERMENT OF CUNEIFORM INSCRIP
TIONS DESCRIBED AND TESTED.
PART II.
{Reprinted from the Journal of Sacred Literature,
October 1864.)
In this second paper, we proceed to trace the progress
of decipherment (I.) in regard to the second and third
species of the Persian trilingual monuments, and (II.)
in regard to the more important records of Assyria and
Babylonia. I. In proceeding to use the key furnished by the first
and simplest kind of writing on the Persian tablets, for
the decipherment of the other two, it was only necessary
to assume that the inscriptions composed in the latter
were translations of those composed in the former; and
this no one who sees them occupying parallel columns
in the same engraved tablets can reasonably doubt.
Where a translation is used as a means of deciphering
a piece of unknown writing, the procedure is simple in
its nature, though usually demanding much patience and
skill in practice. The proper names occurring in the
known writing, when their equivalents are ascertained,
and carefully determined and discriminated, furnish the
readiest means of constructing the alphabet of the un-

Described and Tested. 2 1
known. This alphabet, applied to the rest of the writing,
gives the words in their forms and approximate sounds,
for which again, at first collectively, and then discri-
minatively and singly, the known writing furnishes the
approximate meaning. When, as often happens in such
researches, the proper names do not contain a complete
set of the characters employed, the powers of the
characters left undetermined must be surmised, with
more or less of evidence from variant orthographies, from
the consideration of grammatical forms and analogies,
with whatever rays of light may be furnished from other
sources, as from kindred dialects or historical traditions.
It happens that, in both the second and third species
of Persian cuneiform, the number of characters to be
determined exceeds the means of determination pre
sented in the proper names contained in the existing
inscriptions ; and this circumstance considerably lessens
the serviceableness of the key given us by the trans
lation of the first species. The second species has been
found only on the monuments of Persia,1 and only in
two instances is it unaccompanied by a translation into
the other two.2 Some attempts at its decipherment were
made by Miinter, Grotefend, and others of the earlier
inquirers. The first important work, however, on the
subject, was written by the' Danish scholar Wester-
gaard, and pubhshed in 1844.3 This work, for which
1 Dr. Hincks regards the inscriptions of Mai- Amir as presenting a more
ancient form of the same language. See On the Polyphony of the Assyria-
Babylonian Writing, p. 16.
2 The one instance occurs on the south wall of the platform at Perse
polis, the other at Behistun.
3 In the Mimoires de la Soc. Roy. des Antiquaires du Nord, 1844, pp.
271-439 ; published also in German, along with the last memoir of Lassen
referred to in our previous paper, as a separate work, with the title, Ueber
die Keilinschriften der ersten und zweiten Gattung. Bonn, 1845.

22 Decipherment of ihe Cuneiform Inscriptions
the Behistun tablets were not available, did much for the
determination of the characters, and pointed to remark
able conclusions, since fully confirmed, in regard to the
linguistic affinities of the language. Westergaard's
labours were reviewed, and, in some points, corrected
and extended by Hincks in 1846,1 DeSaulcy in 1850,2
and Holtzmann in 1851.3 A more complete work was
pubhshed in 1853, in the Journal of the Asiatic Society*
by Norris. This scholar, having been entrusted with
Rawlinson's new materials, accomplished for the second,
what Rawlinson himself had done for the first depart
ment of the Behistun and other trilingual inscriptions
of Persia, furnishing alphabet, grammar, and vocabulary,
for the language there employed. Of more recent works
on the subject, it is only necessary to mention a review
by Haug of the work of Norris, pubhshed in 1855,5
and a lengthened memoir, containing an independent
investigation of the whole field, by Mordtmann, in
1862.6 The task of translating the writings composed in the
second species, though comparatively easy after the
translation of those in the first, presented some new
and peculiar difficulties. The characters are much more
numerous than those employed in the translated tablets,
exceeding a hundred in number ; and it was therefore
to be at once concluded that they were syllabic rather
than simply alphabetic in their power. A number of
these characters it was found impossible to determine
from the proper names in the inscriptions. Moreover,
1 In the Transactions of the Irish Academy, vol. xxi. ,
2 In the Journal Asiatique, 1850.
3 In the Zeitschrift der morgenlandischen Gesellschaft, Bd. v.
4 See vol. xv. , On the Scythic Version of the Behistun Inscription.
6 In the Gott. -gel. Anzeigen, and separately.
6 In the Zeitschrift d. morg. Ges. , Bd. xvi.

Described and Tested. 23
the careful application of the only key, the Persian
version, and the transcription of the words according to
the syllabic values thus ascertained, has brought out
a language which is akin neither to the Arian nor to
the Shemitic group of tongues, and for which congeners
must be sought in the comparatively obscure and un
studied Turanian dialects of northern and north-eastern
Asia.1 This, it is manifest, greatly increases the diffi
culty of a full interpretation of the remains of this
language. At the same time, I find in this remarkable
and unexpected fact a new proof of the trustworthiness
of that system of decipherment by which it has been
elicited. For this is a circumstance which clearly shows
that that decipherment is controlled by no preconceived
theory as to what is probable or fitting. The language
of the second order of the Persian trilingual tablets had
been, by common consent, designated Median, in antici
pation that it would prove Arian in its character, and
would turn out to have been used by the Medes, well
known as an important portion of the subjects of the
Achtemenian kings, whose language is presumed to have
resembled that of the Persians. No one had conjectured
its true nature till this was pressed upon the attention
of inquirers as the result of the system we are now
speaking of; and now, when this has been clearly
demonstrated, scholars have been met by a new difficulty,
scarcely yet fully solved, to discover historically the
Turanian people by whom this language was used, and
who, it is evident from the position these inscriptions
1 This, which Westergaard and De Saulcy, as well as Rawlinson (Asiatic
Jour., x., p. 34), had surmised, has been fully estabhshed by Norris.
Oppert says : 'II n'y a aucun doute, pour toute' personne ayant quelque
peu regard^ le medo-scythiqne, que cet idiome ne sorte de la race finno-
ouralienne, qui se rattache a celle des Mongols.' — Expid. Scient., ii.,
p. 82.

24 Decipherment of the Ctmeiform Inscriptions
occupy, must have formed no unimportant or un
cultivated portion of the Persian empire. The entire
spontaneity which has marked the reproduction of this
Turanian tongue, characterised by all the leading pecu
liarities of the group to which it belongs, such as the
aggregation without cohesion of auxiliary particles, the
absence of gender in nouns, the law of collocation
whereby the subordinate or defining word precedes
the defined,1 renders of peculiar force the philological
verification of the general truth of the decipherment.
It is quite inconceivable that the characteristics of a
Turanian language should have come out of these
tablets of wedge-shaped signs merely by the apphcation
of powers to those signs derived from equivalent proper
names, and without suspicion of the nature of the lan
guage, if the reading had not proceeded upon a sound
basis. The second species of the cuneiform writings of
Persia, however curious and interesting to the student
of ethnography and history, must yield in importance
to the third species, through means of which the easiest
and most direct access is opened to an acquaintance
with the principal inscribed remains of Assyrian and
Babylonian antiquity. Unfortunately, both is this
species in itself the most difficult, and for its elucida
tion the most imperfect materials are furnished by the
trilingual monuments. The characters are still more
numerous and complicated than those of the second
species, while on the Behistun rock the tablets contain
ing the third or Babylonian version are so mutilated, that
only the latter half of all the lines is now legible. The
publication of these fragments, however, with a table
of characters and a partial analysis, by Rawlinson, in
1 As laid down, e.g., by Prichard, Researches, iv., pp. 384 f.

Described and Tested. 25
1851,1 was the earliest important step towards the com
prehension of the language. It had already, even at that
time, been sufficiently evidenced by the researches of
Grotefend, Hincks, Botta, De Saulcy, and others, in the
extant remains of the Assyrio-Babylonian language, that
these embodied a Shemitic dialect, and this was clearly
shown in the memoir referred to, while it has been fully
confirmed by other more recent publications in the same
department of cuneiform writing.2 We have thus the
same fact repeated which has been already noticed in
connection with the other kinds of trilingual writing,
viz., that a language bearing the characteristic marks of
a certain group of tongues, in this case a group well
known and with analogies easily recognisable, comes out
unforcedly by the application to those remains of the
Grptefendian system of decipherment, and thus verifies
the validity of the process by which it has. been repro
duced. As this department of the trilingual inscriptions
of Persia has been studied almost exclusively in con
nection with the records on the Assyrian and Babylonian
monuments, in which relation its chief importance hes,

1 In the Journal of the Asiatic Soc., vol. xiv. De Saulcy had published,
iD 1849, an Analyse de V Inscription de Hamadan et des Inscriptions de
Persepolis, of the third species.
2 See, e.g., De Saulcy, Traduction de V Inscription Assyrienne de Behis-
toun, in the Journal Asiatique, 1854-5, with other articles in the Revue
ArcMologique, etc. ; Oppert, in the Nakshi - Rustam inscription, in the
Zeitschrift d. morg. Ges., x., p. 136 ; and in his more recent works,
Expedition Scientifique, tom. ii., and Elements de la Grammaire Assyri
enne. It is no valid objection to the Shemitic- character of the Assyrio-
Babylonian language, urged by Renan and Schoebel (Examen Critique du
DSchiffrement des Inscriptions Cuniiformes, pp. 10 f.), that the system
of writing is altogether unlike what we elsewhere find in Shemitic
dialects. New facts are not to be refused because they are unexpected.
Rather the unexpectedness of the result is a ¦ confirmation of the truthful
ness of the system from which it emerges.

26 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
I go on to consider its bearing upon these, and the
progress made in the reading of these larger and more
interesting remains.
II. Those who believe that the right path has been
struck for the interpretation of the engraved annals of
Assyria and Babylonia cannot fail to be impressed with
the relations existing between the times in which the
various discoveries have been made ; and if our rehgious
faith extends the oversight of divine providence to the
falling of a sparrow to the ground, it may well allow
that its control is manifest here, in a matter so closely
pertaining to the elucidation and establishment of the
divine Word. It has needed almost fifty years of diligent
research on the part of many scholars to perfect the
interpretation of the Persian trilingual inscriptions ; and
just about the close of this period, when the learned
world had been furnished with the requisite key, the
Assyrian palaces are exposed to view, and a new and
vast store of wedge-shaped records is brought to light,
relating to another people and another history more
ancient and more interesting still than those of Persia,
' The wonderful thing is,' says Fergusson,1 ' that just when
the one discovery was on the eve of completion, the other
was made to complete its usefulness : had either pre
ceded the other, half of what is now known to us might
have been lost from our not knowing what we were
doing, or being careless of what is now of, so much
interest ; but the one came with the other, and together
revealed to us the records of a history that had been
lost for centuries, and so completely lost that no man
living even so much as suspected the possibility of their
existence.' It gave new interest to the third column of the
1 Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis, p. 6.

Described and Tested. 27
Persian tablets, when it was shown that the complicated
and uncouth combinations of wedges found there were
reproduced, with only slight dissimilarities, in the large,
and, in great part, recently discovered records of Babylon
and Nineveh. The hope was thus awakened of finding
in the former the desiderated key to the latter. Before
the key could be tried, however, not a httle preliminary
work had been accomplished with these Assyrio-Baby
lonian documents.1 The arrangement and comparison
of the numerous characters had been attended to, their
syllabic nature had been demonstrated, the apparent
equivalence of power in the case of many of the signs
had been pointed out, the Shemitic cast of the language
had been shown, and some important proper names, as
Nebuchadnezzar, Babel, Sargon, had been more or less
successfully determined. Sir Henry Rawhnson, as
already stated, published his transcript of the third
column of the Behistun inscription in 1851,2 and since
that time almost every year has seen new and valuable
contributions made to our knowledge of the language
and contents of the engraved monuments of the Meso-
potamian valley. It would be impossible, in any reason
able space, to give anything hke . a complete list of the
several works pubhshed in this department. Besides
Rawhnson himself, the scholars whose writings are of
1 Of those who laboured on the Assyrian and Babylonian inscriptions
before the publication of the Behistun text, the most distinguished are
Grotefend, Hincks, Loewenstern, Botta, Longperier, De Saulcy. An
account is given of these earlier labours by Menant, Ecritures Cune'i-
formes, pp. 120 f. Into the questions in regard to priority of discovery,
which have arisen among these and the other investigators, I desire not
to enter.
2 He had, in 1850, published a Commentary on the Cuneiform Inscrip
tions of Babylonia and Assyria, based on his acquaintance with the
Behistuu record.

28 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
the highest authority are Hincks, Talbot, and Oppert, the
last of whom, in the second volume of his recent Expedi
tion Scientifique en Mesopotamie, has furnished the most
regular and complete work yet published on the Assyrio-
Babylonian inscriptions. Another Frenchman, Menant,
has more recently entered the field, and has printed
some useful works. The publication of the original
texts, an essential condition of progress in this study, is
also being proceeded with, though too slowly for the
impatience of some of the investigators. The largest
and most important collection of original Assyrian
writings is possessed by the British Museum, secured
by the excavations of Layard and his successors at
Nineveh and elsewhere in the Mesopotamian valley.
From this source emanated the volume entitled,
Inscriptions in the Cuneiform Character, from Assyrian
Monuments discovered by A. H. Layard, D.C.L.,
printed in 1851, and containing an important selec
tion of documents. Another and still more valuable
publication, drawn from the same ample store, is now
going forward, edited by Sir H Rawlinson, entitled
The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia. From
France, besides numerous detached inscriptions, we have
a full edition of the inscriptions found at Khorsabad,
in Botta's Monument de NinivL Of these, a considerable
portion has been recently published in a more accessible
form, edited and translated by Oppert and M^nant.1
It was the third compartment of the Acheemenian
tablets which first introduced us to an acquaintance
with the meaning of these deeply interesting records,
and in this apphcation its aid has been of invaluable
1 Les Fastes de Sargon, rot d'AssyHe, traduits el publics d'apres le
texte Assyrian de la grande inscription des salles du palais de Khorsa
bad, 1863.

Described and Tested. 29
consequence. At the same time, the means thus fur
nished have proved inadequate to effect a full interpre-
. tation of the many and long inscriptions now possessed.
The remains of the Achaemenian writing present about
one hundred and sixty different characters, and of these
the proper names which they contain determine only
about ninety,1 while grammatical changes and inflexions
give the means of arriving at a probable opinion in
regard to about twenty more. But when we turn to
the Assyrio-Babylonian documents, we find the number
of signs to which there is no direct clue greatly multi
plied. Oppert, in 1858, gave a list of three hundred
and eighteen characters, those known as ' most in use,'
and the number now known must considerably exceed
this. What is true of the signs is true also of the
roots, of which, as was to be expected, many occur in.
the long and numerous inscriptions of Assyria and
Babylonia, which are not presented in the Achsemenian
records. But, in addition to this accidental inadequacy
of the key, difficulties of a pecuhar and formidable kind
have presented themselves to the students of these in
scriptions. It was soon ascertained that the numerous
characters had a syllabic power, and that the language
possessed a very full set of the signs requisite to express
syllables, both open and close. But, besides their pho
netic value, it was found that a non -phonetic power
also prevailed ; that some of the signs were determina
tives, indicating the class to which the word following
them belongs ; and that others of them were ideographs
or monograms, representing things, not sounds, hke our
ordinary numeral characters. And still more, along with
the recognition of these syllabic and non -phonetic
powers, Hincks and Rawlinson, at an early period of
1 See Oppert, Expdd., ii., p. 34.

30 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
the investigation, announced that they had found that
many of the signs were also polyphonetic, actually bear
ing, in different words and sometimes in the same word,
different syllabic values.1 These facts seemed to cast
the study of these records into hopeless confusion. The
difficulty of determinatives and ideographs is not, indeed,
of an insuperable kind, and a precedent may be found
for such phenomena in other alphabetic systems, specially
in that of ancient Egypt. The polyphonous power, how
ever, ascribed to many of the signs, appeared, if really
existing, to bar all certain advancement, and to reduce
the whole business of decipherment to an unguided play
Of fancy or conjecture. Serious doubt, or rather entire'
disbelief, based chiefly on this ground, has been expressed,
especially on the Continent, in regard to the whole pro
cedure and results of what has been called the British
school of interpreters.2 It is to be observed, that the
objections thus brought forward revolve round the a
priori improbabihty of the polyphony of the signs in
a language intended to be read, and possessing so great
a variety of characters as the Assyrian, and mainly pro
ceed from persons who have not themselves attempted
the decipherment of these inscriptions. But a priori
considerations, as already remarked in regard to a kindred
matter, cannot here be admitted to have any vahdity.
In the case of one of the objectors, Brandis, an attempt
1 Hincks, On the Khorsabad Inscriptions, pp. 15 f. ; Rawlinson, On the
Babylonian and Assyrian Inscriptions, in Jour. Asiatic Soc., vol. xiv.,
p. 2. It was the opinion of Loewenstern, Botta, and at one time of Raw
linson (see his Commentary, p. 4), that there existed also homophones,
i.e. characters different in form, but having the same phonetic value.
These, however, have disappeared before the more exact analysis of words
and forms. See Oppert, Expid., ii., p. 35 ; Menant, Ecritures Cunii-
formes, p. 174.
2 As by Ewald, Renan, Brandis, Schoebel,

Described and Tested. 3 1
has been made to read the inscriptions on the principle
of strictly adhering to a mono-phonetic system, but his
ill-success is manifestly so decided as to discourage all
perseverance in the path he has chosen.1
There can be no doubt that the untoward but stubborn
fact 0/ polyphony renders much more difficult and em
barrassing the task of reading these documents, and must
seriously impede their complete decipherment. At the
same time, it is not to be supposed that the polyphony
of the characters of the Assyrio-Babylonian language is
a thing unregulated and capricious, that every character
has any value, or even that every value assignable to any
polyphonetic character is indiscriminately to be suspected
wherever the character occurs. Already, by the persever
ing efforts of the students of these writings, the laws
and hmits of the polyphony affe*cting the characters are
beginning to be understood. It is found that often, by
means of the 'phonetic complement,' the writing itself
gives indications of its presence, and means of guidance
in the selection of the proper phonetic power.2 There
is also reason to beheve that the signs are not universally
polyphonous, and that a number of those most frequently
employed are not liable to be affected by this ambiguity.3
Moreover, a most important discovery made by Mr.
Layard, at Kouyunjik, has furnished new and valuable
means for surmounting the difficulties which polyphony
presents, and also for explaining the origin of this
linguistic phenomenon. Among the chambers which
1 See his work, Ueber den historischen Oewinn aus der Entzifferung
der assyrischen Inschriften, Berlin 1856.
2 See Oppert, Expid. Scient., ii., chap. 9 ; Hincks, in Jour. Sac. Lit.,
Oct. 1855, p. 155 ; Jan. 1862, p. 404 ; On Polyphony, p. 33.
3 See Menant, Observations sur les Polyphones Assyriennes, pp. 9 f. ;
Les Ecritures Cuniiformes, pp. 193 f. ; cf. Hincks, On Polyphony, p. 32.

3 2 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
he there laid open were two of comparatively small
size, forming a repository of inscribed tablets and cylin
ders. ' To the height of a foot or more from the floor
they were entirely filled with them, some entire, but the
greater part broken into many fragments. They were
of different sizes ; -the largest, tablets were flat, and
measured about 9 inches by 6\ inches ; the smaller
were slightly convex, and some were not more than an
inch long, with but one or two hnes of writing. . . .
The adjoining chambers contained similar relies, but in
smaller numbers. Many cases were filled with these
tablets before I left Assyria, and a vast number of them
have been found, I understand, since my departure. . . .
The documents that have thus been discovered at
Nineveh probably exceed all that have yet been afforded
by the monuments of Egypt.' J These ' record chambers,'
the contents of which are now in the British Museum,
have proved, says Rawlinson, ' a real treasure-house of
discovery . . . the d&bris, in fact, of the royal library.' 2
' It would seem,' remarks Oppert,3 ' that the unusual
difficulties which are now felt in the reading of the old
Chaldee monuments had already been felt by the hterati
of Nineveh in regard to their native system of writing,
and it is thus intelligible how King Sardanapalus III.,4 son
of Esarhaddon, should have resolved to institute a clay
library, which, as the inscriptions declare, might facilitate
the knowledge of religion ; ' s so that, by the fortunate
1 Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 345 f.
2 See Report of Asiatic Society, May 1853, p. 18 ; cf. Report for May
1856, p. 7.
3 Zeitschrift der morg. Ges., x., p. 288.
4 Called Asshur-bani-pal n. by Rawlinson.
5 The inscription in which the king declares the purpose of this collec
tion, is thus rendered by Oppert, Expid. Scient., ii., p. 362, cf. p. 53 :—
' Palais de Sardanapale, roi du monde, roi d'Assyrie, a qui le dieu Nebo

Described and Tested. 33
preservation and recovery of these relics, we have been
put in possession of the very means used by the later
Assyrians to illustrate their own written language. Of
the linguistic portion of these tablets (I borrow again
from Oppert), ' some are syllabaria, and explain short
syllables by simple signs (e.g. kai by ha. al., lip by
H. ip., muk by mu. uk.), and append in a third
column the Assyrian name of the object for which
the syllable stands when used ideographically (e.g.
the character at is explained by abu, father; sis
by aku, brother; gal by rabu, great). Others explain
the verbal monograms, whose existence was before
unsuspected (e.g. si by nadan, give), and then follow
the additions which si requires in order to become
iddin, inaddin, ittaddin (iftaal), isaddin (saphel), ist-
addin (istaphel). Others give the signification of
several complex groups of characters, and that in a
way which it would be impossible to demonstrate a
priori (e.g. ut. kip. rat. ki., of which ut. means day or
sun ; ki., city or land : kip. rat., parts of the world, is
to be read Sippara, the city of the sun; but if the
word river stands before this group, the whole is to be
read Purat, i.e. the Euphrates). These are the most
important tablets. Others still are dictionaries of
synonymes : one, e.g., explains verbal roots by other
roots, — sarab, burn, by kavar ; kavar, by kalu. But the
most interesting are the Scythic- Assyrian dictionaries,
which give us the solution of the whole of this remark-
et'la d&esse Tasmit ont donne des oreilles pour ecouter, et des yeux pour
voir, ce qui est la base du gouvernement. lis ont revele aux rois mes
pred&esseurs les regies de cette dcriture cuneiforme. Dans la piete envers
Nebo, le dieu qui joint les earacteres un a un, contrairement a leur valeur
phonetique, je les ai ecrites, je les ai signees, et je les ai rangees, puis
je les ai placees au milieu de mon palais pour l'instruction de mes
sujets. ' C

34 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
able phenomenon.' J This solution may be briefly stated
thus :¦ — The cuneiform characters, as was shown in our
former paper, are a degenerate kind of hieroglyphics,
or representations of natural objects; and the inventors
of these hieroglyphics were a people belonging to the
Turanian or Allophylian stock, who spoke a language
akin to that occurring in the bilingual tablets of Sar-
danapalus or Asshur-bani-pal, and also that of the second
column of the Achsemenian inscriptions. But from its in
ventors the cuneiform syllabarium passed to other peoples,
who adopted, perhaps with modifications, the characters,
but adopted also, to a great extent at least, the values
they originally possessed, while attaching to them other
values derived from their own vocabulary. 'As there
was but one picture-alphabet,' says Rawlinson, ' common
to the whole aggregate of tribes, each character had neces
sarily as many phonetic values as there were distinct
names for the object which it represented.'2 Thus, among
the Assyrians, while the sign representing a fish had the
power of nun, the Assyrian name, it had also the sound
of ha, because the Turanian name began with this syllable.
The sign for father, in Assyrian ab, bears also the power
of at, from the original language.3 There have been dis
tinguished six languages, more or less different from one
another and used by different peoples, which are known
to have employed the one cuneiform system of writing.4
1 See specimens of these bilingual tablets in Oppert, Expid. Scient., ii.,
p. 96 ; Hincks, in Zeitschrift der morg. Ges., x., 516 f.
2 See Rawlinson's Herodotus, l, p. 444 ; cf. Oppert, Expid., ii., p.
69 : — ' N'oublions pas non plus que plusieurs idiomes s'ecrivent avec le
meme systeme graphique que nous nommons anarien. Chez tous 'ces
peuples, les memes signes ont la meme valeur ideographique, et partout
ce meme caractere indique egalement le meme son syllabique. '
3 See further details in Oppert, Expid., ii., pp. 78 f.
1 From this enumeration the Arian or Old Persian cuneiform is ex-

Described and Tested. 35
1. The Turanian dialect found in the bilingual tablets
of Nineveh (the Casdo-Scythic of Oppert).
2. The Turanian dialect of the second column of the
Persian inscriptions (the Medo-Scythic of Oppert).
3. The Susianian found in the ante - Achsemenian
monuments of Susiana.
4. The Armenian, on the rocks of Van and elsewhere
in Armenia. 5. The Assyrian, from Nineveh and elsewhere in Assyria.
6. The Babylonian, from Babylon and elsewhere in
Chaldea ; of the last the writing in the third column of
the Persian inscriptions is a derivation.1
Further investigation and discovery may doubtless
modify and correct the views thus set forth in outline,
but the doctrine seems to rest on a sufficient basis of
evidence, that the cuneiform syllabic signs, in passing
from those by whom they were first employed into the
hands of other races, retained their original phonetic
value and designated the same original idea, while
gathering around them other values, mainly from the
sounds expressive of that idea in the mouths of those
by whom they were adopted. It remains to determine
more precisely the geographical and ethnical relations
of the remarkable people to whom so many tribes of the
ancient world were indebted for the vehicle of literary
expression, — of whom it can be said to be as yet only
dimly ascertained that they used a language of Turanian
character, and that they at a very early period were
seated about the head of the Persian Gulf.2 It remains
eluded. If derived from the original hieroglyphical syllabarium, it is
too purely alphabetic in its character to be ranked along with those men
tioned in the text.
1 Cf. Oppert, Zeitschrift der morg. Ges., x., 804 ; Expid., ii., 69.
* Norris, in 1853, expressed his conviction, from the study of the

36 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
also to ascertain how far the borrowing of the phonetic
powers of the signs along with the signs themselves
extended; whether it is found, as most seem to think,
in all the derivative systems of writing, or whether, as
Hincks holds, it marks only the Assyrio-Babylonian
system.1 These and many other points of interest
await the progress of discovery. Meanwhile, as has
been shown, the suspicious and suspected fact of the
polyphony of the characters of the inscriptions of Assyria
and Babylon has had both its reality estabhshed and
its origin explained. All legitimate grounds of distrust
in reference to the interpretations of those students of
these inscriptions who receive this fact are removed, and,
at the same time, the means are found in the linguistic
tablets of Nineveh, of a full and certain comprehension
of their meaning. .
Meanwhile, though the right path has been struck
and no inconsiderable progress has been made in the
work of interpretation, the labour of years will be re
quired to perfect the reading of those large stores of
cuneiform writing now accessible. Hitherto the Assyrian
and Babylonian records have attracted, on several
grounds, the principal share of the attention of the
small band of scholars who have applied themselves
to this department of study ; those of Susiana and
second Persian tablets, that ' the syllabarium was originally contrived
for a Scythic language ' (Jour. Asiatic Soc., xv., 52. See Rawlinson, in
Athenceum, Dec. 1855, and cf. the Herodotus, i., p. 442, n.). He would
call the language of the inventors of the Syllabarium Akkadian, applying
to them the term Aklcad, frequently applied in the Assyrian inscriptions
to a people of Southern Babylonia. Hincks, who is undecided iu regard
to the affinities of this ancient tongue, prefers the name Akkadian as in
volving no theory as to its cognation. See The Personal Pronouns in
their most Ancient Forms, p. 3 ; cf. On Polyphony, p. 18. See in general
Oppert, Expid. Sclent., ii., chap. vi.
1 See Hincks, On Polyphony, p. 10.

Described and Tested. 37
Armenia remain, so far as is known to the public, in
all but their original obscurity, and a clue to their
vocabulary is still to be discovered; yet the sure results
already obtained fully reward all the labour and talent
that have been devoted to the work of decipherment.
In ethnography, in philology, in ancient geography and
history, in pohtical and religious antiquities, they present
a great mass of new facts, opening up new fields of
speculation, and setting up new landmarks, correcting
many accepted views, and guiding into a more remote
past the steps of philosophical research. Along with
kindred and contemporaneous discoveries in the field
of Egyptian antiquity, they must eventually, lead to a
great enlargement and re-shaping of current doctrines
in regard to the hfe art and rehgion of the ancient
world, and of this not a few pledges ¦ have already been
secured. The veil of myth cast by time upon the early
history of mankind is being lifted off, and names and
facts which had assumed among later peoples a fabulous
magnitude and a false position are being restored to
their true place and proportions. The mirage which
has so long haunted these desert regions will, we trust,
be by and by dissipated, and the true features of the
landscape come to view. In the department of human
history, our science has made some steps of marked
advance towards that beginning at which it can never
cease to aim, and which, if it do not refuse the light
which revelation offers, it may in this department
possibly reach.
I conclude this paper, like its predecessor, by appeal
ing to a few tests by which the renderings given by
Rawlinson, Hincks, etc., of the Assyrio-Babylonian
cuneiform may be verified. At the same time, I may
here, in passing, obviate an objection of a general kind

38 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
brought forward, with much confidence, against the
validity of all such renderings. The late Sir G. C.
Lewis x has laid down the doctrine, that when the tradi
tion of a language has been lost it cannot be recovered ;
and as he has expressly applied this doctrine to cast
discredit on the interpretations of the Egyptologers, we
may be sure that he would equally have applied it to
the efforts of that school of interpreters with which we
have here to do. It is surprising that this author
should have allowed himself to be imposed upon by a
transparent ambiguity, the want of distinguishing be
tween loss absolute and loss partial. His reasoning
is applicable only where the loss of tradition is absolute,
and where no reminiscence of the language remains,
either in proper names, or in the vocabulary of sister
and daughter dialects. But in this sense, the loss re
ferred to cannot be predicated either of the language of
ancient Egypt, or of those of ancient Persia and Meso
potamia. In another less absolute sense, it is true of
Sanskrit, Greek, Hebrew, and other ancient tongues now
famiharly read.
Of considerations confirmatory of the truth of the
results already obtained— 1. I may urge, what has been
already urged in regard to the Persian monuments, that
such tests as exist of these results fully establish their
general correctness. A few meagre bilingual legends
have been found containing scraps of cuneiform writing
with its equivalent in Phoenician characters, and these,
so far as they go, furnish satisfactory confirmation. Such
are the legends upon the Nineveh weights discovered by
Layard.2' Similar legends have been found on bricks
] In his Historical Survey of the Astronomy of the Ancients, p. 378.
2 See his Nineveh and Babylon, p. 601 ; Norris, Jour. Asiatic Soc,
xvi., pp. 215 f.

Described and Tested. 39
from Babylon.1 Last year, Sir H. Rawlinson wrote : ' I
have found that a considerable number of these tablets
(" contract " tablets in the British Museum) have a
memorandum in the cursive PhcEnician character
scratched upon their margin, intended, as it would seem,
to assist the Nineveh librarian in the arrangement of
the documents. These Phcenician legends are rude, and
in many cases nearly illegible, but wherever I have been
able to read them, I have found them to give the same
names as are inscribed in the cuneiform character in the
body- of the tablet ; the much-desired test of bilingual
writing being thus at length obtained.' 2 In some cases,
the rendering of the epigraphs on the Nineveh bas-
reliefs is found strikingly verified by the sculptural
representations : as in the scene of torture from Kou-
yunjik, where the writing declares that ' these men hav
ing spoken blasphemy against Asshur, the great god of
the Assyrians, their tongues were pulled out,' 8 — in agree-
1 See Fresnel, in Journal Asiatique, Juin 1853, p. 518 ; cf. Levy,
Phonizische Studien, ii., p. 23. The name of the parricidal son of Sen
nacherib, the Sharezer of Isaiah xxxvii. 38, is read by Oppert, from the
cuneiform, Asar-sarr-usur. The hilt of his sword made of copper has
been found at Khorsabad, bearing the legend in Phoenician "iXIDTDK,
as M. Lenormant at once read it, when the relic was submitted to the
Academie by M. Place. See Jour. Asiat., Fev. -Mar. 1857, p. 142.
2 See Athenaeum, February 1863, p. 229.
3 See Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 456 f. Another instance, p. 152.
Of a rock tablet, near Korkhar in Armenia, containing a figure of Tiglath
Pileser i., Mr. Rawlinson says (Ane. Monarchies, ii., p. 331, n.), 'This
monument, the earliest Assyrian sculpture which is known to exist, is
mentioned by Asshur-idanni-pal, the father of the Black Obelisk king,
in his great inscription, and it was mainly in consequence of this men
tion, that Mr. John Taylor, being requested by Sir H. Rawlinson to
explore the sources of the Tigris, -discovered in 1862 the actual tablet, —
a circumstance which may seem to clear away any lingering doubts that
still exist in any quarter as to the actual decipherment of the Assyrian
inscriptions. '

40 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
ment with the picture. We can here also use the tests
already employed in another connection, and appeal, on
the one hand, to the unforced emergence of many of
the roots and forms of the Shemitic group of tongues
from Assyrian and Babylonian documents ; 1 and on the
other hand, to the verifications which history affords.
These are often very striking, and altogether inexplicable
if the decipherment is arbitrary or deceptive. Thus
Berosus relates that Nebuchadnezzar built one of the
great structures of Babylon in fifteen days ; 2 and the
same statement is now read on his extant inscriptions
in reference to his palace. Berosus further informs us
that the Chaldeans used a pecuhar numerical nomen
clature, calculating by Sossi, Sari, and 'Neri, and this
nomenclature re-appears in the cuneiform monuments'.
It is unnecessary to multiply such facts.3 The general
consistency of the readings from the newly-discovered
documents with admitted history is acknowledged by all,
and is daily receiving fresh illustration. This agreement
is specially remarkable in the field of Jewish history;
and if there are any to whom the cuneiform records and
the Hebrew Scriptures are ahke doubtful, they will- find
in their singular coincidence of statement a fact which
ought to arrest their attention, which cannot be the
result of chance, which certainly has not been the result
of design on the part of the writers or decipherers on
either side, and which only the hypothesis of truth on
both sides can rationally account for.
2. The results obtained have accrued from the labour
of independent and rival investigators. ' There is a
1 See Oppert's Grammaire Assyrienne, passim.
2 See Berosi Fragmenta, ed. Richter, p. 66 ; Rawlinson's Herodotus,
ii., p. 587; Talbot in Jour. Sac. Lit., January 1856, p. 418.
3 Cf. Bunsen, Philosophy of History, i., pp. 199 f.

Described and Tested. 4 1
short proof which should suffice to inspire confidence
in the general truth of these discoveries and results, and
that is, that not only one laborious and indefatigable
mind has applied itself, with all the aids that extensive
learning and keen sagacity can supply, to the careful and
gradual ascertainment of each separate letter and word,
but that kindred spirits of energy, knowledge, and zeal,
from Grotefend to Rawhnson and Hincks, have been
sedulously engaged in the same task during a succession
of years, and in places wide apart ; and that the con
clusions at which they have arrived in the progressive
stages of research, by their separate and independent
operations, are generally accordant' x The manifold
partial discrepancies in the results of the leading cunei
form scholars prove their mutual independence, and their
mutual* jealousies often displayed, not without occasional
acerbity of expression, give us equally the assurance
that there is no collusion or compact to deceive ; while
agreement and disagreement ahke prove the truth of the
basis on which their operations proceed. The objection
that these different inquirers, though mutually indepen
dent and even jealous, yet go upon the same principles,
and start from the same point, and that therefore it
is to be expected they should reach the same results,
is irrelevant. What if they found no other point to
start from, no other road to take ? The way of truth
in this study may be narrow, but it is not the less truth
that several unprejudiced and rival students agree to
tread it together. Of the amount and character of the
agreement and difference actually existing in the results
of these independent researches, the public have been
afforded the means of judging by a competitive trial,
instituted some time ago, between the four leading
1 Report of the Royal Asiatic Society, 1854, p. xvi.

42 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
investigators, Rawlinson, Hincks, Talbot, and Oppert,
in rendering a text previously unread.1 ' Upon the
whole,' says the late Professor H. H. Wilson, one of
the judges in this trial, ' the result of this experiment,
than which a fairer test could scarcely be devised,
may be considered as establishing almost definitely the
correctness of the valuation of the characters of these
inscriptions. ... It is somewhat different with respect
to the words of the language. The almost invariable
concurrence of the translators in the general sense of the
several paragraphs shows that they are agreed to give
the same interpretation to a very considerable portion —
if not the larger portion — of the vocabulary. At the
same time, the differences prove that much remains to
be effected before the sense of every term can be con
fidently read.' This is a calm and just verdict. It
is, at the same time, to be remembered that great pro
gress has been made in the study since this trial was
instituted, and a greater convergence of opinion on the
part of cuneiform scholars might now be reasonably
anticipated. 3. Nothing but the true system of interpretation
could bring out self-consistent results in such a field of
research. I have already urged their self-consistency
in proof of the correctness of the translations from the
Persian inscriptions ; but the same fact may be much
more strongly urged here. For here the number and
variety of the extant inscriptions are greatly enlarged.
They have been gathered from many different locahties
over a wide region ; they have been found in many
different situations, on slabs, on rocks, on statues, on
cylinders, on bricks ; they have evidently emanated from
1 See Inscription of Tiglath Pileser I., London, 1857. (Published also
in Jour. Asiatic Soc, xviii., pp. 150-219.)

Described and Tested. 43
many different individuals and different peoples, and as
evidently are to be dated from very different periods
of time. This variety and multiplicity of the docu
ments concur with the number and independence of the
interpreters to give us a full guarantee of the general
truth of the renderings. It is impossible for us to
believe that a decipherment proceeding contemporane
ously from several individuals, and agreeing to reduce
these very numerous and multifarious records to one and
the same self - consistent historical scheme (differences
in detail not here coming into account), — a scheme
which embraces the affairs of nations hitherto all but
entirely unknown, and which stretches through many
centuries covered heretofore with the mist of fable, — can
be the result either of chance or of deception.

44 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions

THE DECIPHERMENT OF CUNEIFORM INSCRIP
TIONS DESCRIBED AND TESTED.
PART III.
Since the foregoing papers were written, the subject of
cuneiform hterature and research has become compara
tively well known and largely popular ; and were it not
that indications continue ever and anon to present them
selves, even in influential quarters, of the existence of
serious doubt regarding the r.eality and value of the dis
coveries here detailed, I should have hesitated as to the
propriety of reprinting the above essay. In this appendix
I do not intend, nor is it needful, to give more than a
hasty sketch of what has been accomplished on this field
in recent years. It is the trustworthiness and the im
portance of the results obtained upon which the following
remarks are meant chiefly to bear.
Little comparatively has been done in the way of ex
cavation in the mounds and the discovery of original
records, since the days of Botta, Layard, and Place, in
Assyria ; and of Loftus, Taylor, and Oppert, in Babylonia.
Some explorations, attended with happy results, were
conducted by Mr. George Smith in 1873-74, chiefly in
the mounds at Nimrud and Kouyunjik;1 and the same
1 See his Assyrian Discoveries.

Described and Tested. 45
gentleman, it is understood, has been since also engaged
in the same work. The success which marked his recent
brief expedition only serves to confirm the strong con
viction of all the original explorers, that vast treasures
still await the day of their resurrection, buried in the
' ruinous heaps ' of Western Asia.
In the way of arranging, printing, and rendering acces
sible to students the inscriptions already gathered, and
at present stored in the British Museum and other public
collections, much important work has been accomplished.
Especially valuable is what has been done in this line by
the authorities of the institution just named, under the
editorship of Sir Henry Rawhnson and others, in a splendid
work already extending to several volumes.1 Still more
gratifying is the progress recently made in the interpre
tation of these records, and in rendering their contents
accessible to the general pubhc. The list of Assyrian
scholars has been enlarged by several new names. Hincks
and Norris, indeed, have been removed by death, but in
their room are to be counted Smith, Sayce, Haigh, Bos-
cawen, Rodwell, and others, in England; Lenormant in
France ; Schrader, Olshausen, and Delitzsch in Germany.
Of the many works connected with the subject before us
which have recently appeared, may be noticed, as among
the most important — in philology, the Assyrian Dictionary
of Norris, and the Grammars of Oppert, of Menant, of
Sayce, and of Schrader ; in interpretation, Oppert's Les
inscriptions de Dowrsarkayan (Khorsabad) ; Menant's An
nates des wis d'Assyrie, and his Babylone et la ChakUe ;
Smith's History of Assurbanipal, his Assyrian Dis
coveries, and his Assyrian Eponym Canon, besides
numerous scattered essays by various Assyriologers,
1 The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, vols, i.-iv. M. Lenor-
mant's Choix des textes Cuniiformes should also be mentioned.

46 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
especially in the Transactions of the Society of Biblical
Archaeology ; J while of general . historical investigation
may be noticed as specially important, the writings of
Sayce and Lenormant.
The researches and publications just spoken of all relate
to those cuneiform records composed in the language, be
longing to the Shemitic stock, known as the Assyrian or
the Assyrio-Babylonian, comprising the 5 th and 6 th men
tioned in the list given above (p. 35) from Oppert. Of
the other languages represented in the inscriptions, there
are at least two for which something has been done. The
Armenian inscriptions have engaged, to some extent, the
attention of Lenormant,2 though with results indecisive
and uncertain. Greater success has been achieved in the
study of the first named in the above list, the Casdo-
Scythic of Oppert. To this dialect a great amount of
earnest study has recently been given. The most impor
tant of the extant remains of the language are found,
accompanied by Assyrian translations, on the terra-cotta
tablets recovered from the ruined library of Assurbanipal
at Nineveh. It is, however, also found by itself in a
large number of the oldest records recovered from the
ruined cities of Southern Babylonia. The translations on
the Nineveh tablets have furnished a welcome clue to
its interpretation ; and now the Turanian or Mongolian
character of the language has been largely illustrated,3
even a grammar has been drawn up, many of the vocables
definitely ascertained, and considerable portions of the
1 The Records of the Past, edited by Dr. Birch, is a useful collection of
translations, chiefly from Egyptian and Assyrian.
2 Lettres Assyriologiques, i., pp. 124f.
3 This is disputed by M. Halevy, in Journal Asiatique, 1874, and in a
separate pamphlet, La pretendue Langue d'Accad. est-elle Touranienne ?
On this see Schrader, Zeitsch. d. morg. Ges., xxix., pp. 1 ff. — also
Academy, Nov. 1875, p. 533.

Described and Tested. 47
records composed in it translated and pubhshed.1 The
recovery of this new language and literature, to which
the name Akkadian, after the example of Hincks, is now
generally applied,2 on the understanding that it was the
tongue of the Akkad, a people often mentioned in the
inscriptions as settled in Southern Babylonia, is one of
the most interesting, as it is one of the most unanticipated,
of the results ehcited by these investigations, and is likely
to prove one of the most pregnant in regard to further
historical and linguistic discoveries.
To those who have followed with any care the course
of Assyriological research to the point at which it now
stands, it is an occasion of surprise that any earnest
scholars, especially such as are interested in the eluci
dation of the Shemitic group of languages, should enter
tain doubt as to the soundness of the basis on which these
decipherments proceed, and the general trustworthiness of
the results obtained. The number of sceptics is un
questionably diminishing, just as the number of students
is increasing, yet it appears that some of distinguished
name hold fast to their doubts, as Renan in France, and
Noldeke and others in Germany; and in England, an indi
cation that there exist learned men who withhold credit
from the process and its results has quite recently ap
peared. In the Speaker's Commentary (fifth volume), the
author of the Commentary on the Book of Isaiah, the Rev.
Dr. Kay, thus writes (apropos of the 20th chapter, and the
1 Of those distinguished in this department are to be mentioned Sayce,
in Journal of Philology, 1870, and Trans. Bib. Archceology, vol. i., p. 294 ;
Grivel, in Revue de la Suisse Catholique, 1871, and especially Lenormant,
Etudes Accadiennes.
2 Oppert, however, prefers the name Sumirien, regarding it as the
tongue not of the Akkad, but of the Sumir, a people often conjoined with
the other in the inscriptions. On this point, see Lenormant, op. cit., iii.,
p. 59.

48 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
mention there of Sargon, king of Assyria) : ' After a
minute examination of some of the works of the best
Assyriologists (as M. Oppert, M. Mdnant, Mr. Norris, and.
Mr. Smith), the present writer is satisfied that the whole
process of decipherment has not yet got beyond the tentative
stage. In particular, as regards the names of Assyrian
kings, they have not been, properly speaking, discovered in
the inscriptions, but rather read into them. They were
found because it was assumed that they occurred there —
"parcequ' on avait des raisons de croire qu'ils se retrou-
' vaient dans un groupe donneV' Results so obtained must
undergo much patient verification before they cease to be
hypothetical. For the present (and probably for a long
time to come), the decipherment cannot be held to furnish
the materials of authentic history.' J That the process of
decipherment was, as it behoved to be, tentative at first,
has been already explained ; that in regard to not a few
points, especiaUy of lexicography, it is tentative still, is
of course true ; but that the interpretations as a whole
have not been sufficiently verified to warrant their use
' as materials for authentic history,' is a statement httle
less than monstrous. They have been verified by philo
logy, by history, and by such inscriptions of a bilingual
kind as have been found ; and it is hard to conceive
what other more adequate kind of verification is possible.
The scepticism thus indicated renders necessary a few
more words on these sources of verification.
Since I previously wrote on this subject, some addi
tional and rather more considerable bilingual records have
1 Speaker's Commentary, vol. v., p. 143. It is well for the abiding
value of this work that all the collaborateurs are not of the same mind in
this matter as Dr. Kay. In the same volume the Dean of Canterbury, one
of our most distinguished Shemitic scholars, makes good use of the works
of G. Smith and other Assyriologists.

Described and Tested. 49
been found. Of these, the most important are a series of
clay tablets in the British Museum, bearing legends in
Assyrian and in Phoenician or Aramaean.1 They are for
the most part ' registry' tablets concerning the conveyance
of property, and the Phoenician is found in a ' docket '
upon the margin, ' evidently inscribed while the clay was
yet soft.' The latter can, for the most part, be read with
certainty ; and so far as the illustration given extends,
it serves in every case to confirm the reading drawn in
dependently from the cuneiform.2 ' The corresponding
legends,' says Schrader, ' cover one another, even to the
pronunciation of the proper names.' 3
In regard to the philological test, let it again be con
sidered that these decipherments have brought out from
the Assyrian and Babylonian records a language which
corresponds alike in its grammar and in its vocables with
the other well-known languages of the Shemitic stock,
allying itself more prominently with the Hebrew and the
1 See Sir H. Rawlinson in Jour. Asiatic Soc, vol. i. (new ser.), pp. 187 ff.
In connection with the confirmation afforded by these tablets, Sir Henry
says : ' It can hardly, indeed, be necessary for me to vindicate at any
length the preliminary stages of cuneiform inquiry, now that the Institute
of France, the first critical body in the world, has conferred its biennial
prize, of 20,000 francs, on Monsieur Oppert, for his Assyrian decipher
ments, thereby guaranteeing in the face of Europe the authenticity and
value of our labours, and putting to shame the continued scepticism
of England.' Similar tablets were found by Smith, Ass. Discoveries,
p. 424.
2 Cf. Schrader, Die assyrisch-babylonischen Keilinschriften, pp. 167 f.
3 Onomatopoetic words are recognisable by all, and these occur in the
deciphered cuneiform. Thus kuku is a bird, ' probably the cuckoo '
(Talbot). Laklak is the stork, ' so named from the clattering of its biU. '
' The stork is called in Kurdish Ugh Ugh ; in Bucharian and another lan
guage lagh lagh (see Burness' Travels, ii., 148 of the German trans.) ; so
also in Tartarian (see Klaproth's Tour in Caucasus, ii., 275) ; in Persian,
leg leg j Arabic, leg leg ex sono quern rostro crepitante edit ; Hindi, laka
laka; Albanian, x&ixs. See Bochart's Hierozoicon, iii., 88.' — Talbot, from
Zeitsch. fur d. Kunde d. Morgenlandes, iv., 31.
D

50 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
Arabic. This simple fact is sufficient to show that the
interpretation cannot be a random or an arbitrary one. It
is true that the system of writing is entirely different
from those employed in these other languages, but this
circumstance appears to me rather to confirm than to
invahdate the trustworthiness of the readings. These
readings have, in the first instance, been elicited by pain
fully applying to the mass of cuneiform signs the values
derived from the proper names occurring on the Persian
tablets, and with no forecasting of the nature or the forms
of the language which they concealed ; and that, notwith
standing the un-Shemitic character of the writing, the
language itself should turn out in the hands of the de
cipherers to be Shemitic, and suitable, therefore, to what
is otherwise known in regard to the ethnic affinities of
these nations, is surely a very decisive vindication of the
course pursued. To carry out this argument into detail
would simply be to transcribe some of the extant Assyrian
grammars and vocabularies. I shall confine myself to
two or three points which appear to have special import
ance. E.g., it is interesting, and should be convincing,
that not a few of the rarer words and airal; \eyo/j,eva of
the Hebrew Scriptures find their congeners in Assyrian.
Thus >"OK occurs only in Job ix. '26, and evidently means
some kind of ship or boat ; abatu, a ship, is found on the
Deluge tablets and elsewhere in Assyrian. Tax, in Gen.
xlix. 24, Isa. i. 24, is a name applied to the Most High ;
abari, in Assyrian, means the gods or the celestials. DJK
is a somewhat rare word, meaning a pool, or a water-
plant ; in Assyrian, agammi has the sense of reeds, or a
marsh where reeds grow. pin occurs occasionally in the
sense of gold ; khurassu is found in Assyrian with the
same meaning. There is an obscure Chaldee adverb in
Ezra vii. 23, N'nn'iK, rendered in our version, diligently,

Described and Tested. 51
and by Gesenius, recte. It probably contains the cunei
form term zida, meaning the right hand. In Gen. xxi. 33,
?B>N means a tree or grove (elsewhere the word is applied
to a particular kind of tree) ; in Assyrian, the same word
appears in the adverbial form, ashlish, like a tree. In
1 Sam. ii. 36, the word nniJK occurs, rendered a piece of
silver; in Assyrian, agartn has the sense of valuable, or
precious. In Hebrew, "i3N means a husbandman; agar, in
Assyrian, is a field. ?DD is a rare word, meaning image ;
samulli, with the same meaning, occurs in Assyrian.
i"Hy occurs, Job xxviii. 8, with the sense, to pass away; in
Assyrian, edu, means corruption. In Ezra iv. 12, SWK
means foundations, and in Isa. xvi. 7, CB^B'N has the same
sense ; ussha is a common word in Assyrian with the same
meaning. The word E^EO- is used in Scripture both of
the Egyptian scribes and of the Babylonian wise men,
Gen. xii. 8, etc., Dan. i. 20, etc. ; khartannum in Assyrian
means a sacred scribe. In like manner, rare Chaldee
words find their, congeners in the cuneiform. lj., ffMD
Buxtorf renders hirundo ; and sinunta, swallow, occurs
in Assyrian. Ni??N means a she-camel ; and anakati, she-
camels; 'in Assyrian.
Such rapprochements in the lexicography might be mul
tiplied indefinitely ; let me present a similar slight selec
tion from the grammar, again limiting our view to some
of the irregularities and rarer phenomena of the Hebrew.
The word 0)12, water, occurs in a reduplicated form,
'W ; the same word in Assyrian is also reduplicated, mami.
The common word &$, man, has for its ordinary plural
CWJN, and HtSfc, woman, D'B'J indicating an older form
with n. The Assyrian for men is nisi.1 The Hebrew
numeral "&$ W'J>, eleven, has hitherto proved inexplicable,
the former of these two words being without known ana-
1 E>J and CEW are found in Chaldee. See Buxtorf, s. v. EOS.

5 2 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
logue. Now, however, it is found that one of the Assyrian
words for one is istin, so that the Hebrew phrase referred
to really means one and ten, and falls into the ordinary
analogy of the numeral series. Again, there exists in Hebrew
a number of adverbs ending in am, as DOi1, during the day,
D|n; gratis, or in vain, DJDN, truly, etc. The termination
in these words has often been suspected to represent
an obsolete case-formation, found in the remains of the
Himyaritic dialect, and preserved also in the vulgar Arabic,
in which the m has been changed into n. This conjec
ture is confirmed by the Assyrian, in which the case-
terminations have a final m. Again, the relative pro
noun in Hebrew, usually "ib>'k, sometimes appears as
simple E>, variously pointed ; sa, in Assyrian, is the com
mon form. The word DW, bone or body, is not unfre-
quently employed, especially in Rabbinic Hebrew, in a
pronominal sense (= self), as "OXJJ, I myself.1 It is
interesting to find that the reflexive pronoun in Assyrian,
ramanu, is also derived from a part of the body, the
bowels. Again, the verbal forms commencing with ? in
the Chaldee of the Bible, as well as of the Talmud, as
„ "?.!$, are somewhat difficult of explanation; in Assyrian
one of the regular verbal moods, the precative, commences
with I. I mention only another fact of this kind. In the
Aramaean, one of the verbal conjugations with a causa
tive sense prefixes B> to the root. This conjugation has
left only some traces in Hebrew, but it appears in Assyrian
as perhaps the commonest of all.
Another verification already referred to may here
deserve a few more sentences. I have mentioned above
that the Chaldean records of the Nineveh tablets and of the
inscriptions of Southern Babylonia, have recently, through
the help of the Assyrian translations, with which for the
1 See Gesenius and Buxtorf, s. v.

Described and Tested. 53
most part they are accompanied, begun to yield their
secret and to become intelligible. Just as the old Persian,
once tentatively deciphered, was verified by serving as key
to unlock the Assyrian, so the Assyrian thus mastered has
at once been put to use to open up the mystery of the
other and still more obscure tongue, with which it stands
in juxtaposition ; and that this tongue, in the face of all
preconceived ideas in regard to the ethnic character of
the people of Southern Chaldea, should have proved of a
Turanian or agglutinative type, is only a fresh corrobora
tion of the trustworthiness of the process employed. But
this is not all. In explaining these old Chaldean or Ak
kadian records, the Assyrian has itself received explanation.
If one thing more than another has tended to cast discredit
upon the Assyrian language and the readings from it
published by its students, it is the cumbrous, obscure, and
thoroughly un-Shemitic system of writing in which it is
couched. Especially have its ideograms and polyphonous
characters been a stumbling-block in the way of its more
general acceptance. Now, however, through the hght shed
upon the whole subject of cuneiform literature by the
study of the Akkadian, the occasion thus afforded of scruple
and objection is being gradually and surely removed. It
is beginning to be understood that, just as the Japanese
borrowed from China their system of writing, and forced
it into adaptation to their own language, so was it with
the Assyrians in relation to the Akkadian cuneiform
alphabet. Along with the consecrated names of their
gods and of other objects, they borrowed the consecrated
characters in which these names were expressed among
their predecessors, while to the same characters became
attached the new names by which among themselves
these objects were designated. And it may be expected
that as research proceeds, every value belonging to every

54 Decipherment of the Cuneifor-m Inscriptions
character will be discovered and accounted for. Now
evidently in thus explaining itself, the Assyrian as
deciphered verifies itself. By patient ingenuity the
puzzle of its awkward and inconvenient system of writing
has been opened, and of course the more complicated the
problem, and the more unlikely a priori the solution, so
much the more convincing is the proof that the procedure
is legitimate and the result correct. That no tours de
force has been employed is sufficiently evinced by the
very surprise with which the result is generally con
templated, and that not least by those through whose
researches it has been achieved.
I mentioned another class of tests by which these
interpretations may be tried and verified, viz. the histori
cal ; but here, again, and even more than under the
preceding branch, perplexity arises simply from the super
abundance of the relevant facts. It is true that to a
large extent the historical data presented by the Assyrian
records as now read are new, and even unexpected and
strange, going far beyond the hmits of our previous infor
mation, and which we are without the means of controlling.
In many points, however, these new data come within the
range of previous historical relations, and 'thus some means
of trial and comparison are afforded. The extensive lists
of geographical and personal names occurring in the records
present the most convenient subject for comparison with
the data of such books as the Bible, Herodotus, Manetho,
etc., and every one at all conversant with the facts of the
case knows that the comparison confirms throughout the
readings given from the cuneiform. These newly recovered
records, when they take us to Media, e.g., set their narra
tions in a nomenclature recognisably Median ; when we
are transferred to Asia Minor, at once Lydian and Cilician
names appear ; when we are carried over the sea to Cyprus,

Described and Tested. 55
the names assume the well-known Greek aspect ; crossing
to Egypt, again the character of the account vouches for its
reahty and trustworthiness ; while in Palestine and Syria
generally we find ourselves amid the familiar persons and
places which the Bible sets before us. It is too much to
suppose that so much of recognisable historical and geo
graphical nomenclature and description regarding all these
various regions should have been read out of these records
if the proceeding were deceptive and unsound. That
there is really no vital mistake or fallaciousness in the
process is illustrated and confirmed by the circumstance
that statements of unknown facts in the inscriptions have
been verified by actual and independent discovery. I
have referred above (p. 39, n.) to the discovery of Assyrian
bas-reliefs at the very place where they are stated in an
inscription to have been sculptured, and as the result of
search guided by the reading of the original record. In
like manner, Mr. Smith tells us1 that he was directed in
his researches at Kouyunjik by information derived from an
Assyrian source. It is even more striking to find an eclipse
recorded in these old records, which modern science has
exactly verified,2 and to learn that exclamations used by
magicians in the Middle Ages and incomprehensible then,
are now easily explicable as simple Assyrian words.3
I will mention one other confirmatory fact, similar to
that referred to in a preceding part of this essay, where
a circumstance almost unknown to history, the revolt of
the provinces of the Persian Empire during the first years
of Darius Hystaspis, has been brought out into clear
light by the decipherment of the Behistun inscription.
In the book of the prophet Nahum,4 mention is made of
1 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 139. 2 Id. Ass. Canon, p. 82.
3 Lenormant, Manual of Ane. Hist., i., p. 448.
4 Chap. iii. 8-10.

5 6 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
the sack of an Egyptian city called No-Amon, described
as situated upon the waters, — an event which the refer
ence shows to , have been recent when the oracle was
delivered, not long before the destruction of Nineveh. It
had been concluded by the majority of interpreters1 that
the passage must relate to a conquest of Thebes, the
capital of Upper Egypt, by the arms of Assyria ; though
all but the slightest notice of such an event about the
period referred to has disappeared from the pages of secular
history.2 Now, however, in the Assyrian annals, the
history of this conquest is fully given. First, Esarhaddon,
son of Sennacherib, speaks of himself as King of Egypt,
Pathros, and Cush, indicating that under this sovereign
the Nile valley had been overrun and added to the empire
of Assyria.3 Then, Assurbanipal, the Sardanapalus of the
Greeks, son of Esarhaddon, is known from his annals to
, have twice led an expedition into Egypt; and on the
second occasion to have besieged and sacked the city
Niha, the Niu of native Egyptian sources, the No or
No-Amon of the Bible, and the Thebse of the Greeks and
Romans.4 ' That city,' says the Assyrian king, ' the whole
of it they took and swept like a storm.' Thus we have
another instance in which an obscure historical reference
elsewhere is both vindicated and explained by the new
1 See Strauss, Nahumi Vaticinium, pp. 98 f.
2 The only notice, so far as I know, of a conquest of Egypt at this time
by the Assyrian power to be found in any Greek writer, is that given in
the fragments of Abydenus : ' Axerdis autem iEgyptum partesque Syria;
inferioris in suam potestatem redegit.' Cf. Movers, Das Phon. Alterthum,
ii., p. 449.
3 See Talbot, Jour. Sac. Lit., 1859, p. 60 ; Oppert, Les Rapports de
I'Egypte et VAssyrie, p. 40.
4 This important incident was first discovered and announced by Sir H.
Rawlinson, Athenceum, Aug. 1860. Cf. Hincks, Zeitsch. d. cegypt.
Sprache, 1866, p. 1 ; Oppert, op. cit., pp. 87, 95 f. ; Smith's Assurbanipal,
p. 55.

Described and Tested. 57
and full information elicited by these decipherments
from the cuneiform records.
In the passage above quoted, it is to the reading of
Assyrian proper names that Dr. Kay takes most decided
exception, and that there exists a peculiar difficulty in
this department is acknowledged by all the students of
cuneiform literature ; but it is not to be supposed that
when they read in a certain name to a certain group of
characters, they do so at random, and without reasons
which have the appearance at least of probability. It is
Dr. Oppert from whom Dr. Kay quotes, and in the sequel
of the words quoted the French scholar says : ' Mais
partout ou nous n'avons pas d'indices en-dehors des inscrip
tions cun^iformes, et lorsque les tablettes de Ninive' nous
font defaut, il ne reste plus qu'a confesser notre incerti
tude.' x Sir H. Rawlinson writes to the same effect :
'The weak point in cuneiform decipherment, and that which
from its prominence has especially tended to discredit the
science, is the difficulty of reading proper names. ¦ Now
I have never attempted to conceal this defect ; on the
contrary, I have repeatedly explained that as Assyrian
proper names are usually composed of the name of a god,
represented by an arbitrary monogram, and of one or two
other elements, expressed by the primitive Turanian roots,
it requires a very large induction, and, if possible, col
lateral illustration, to ascertain how such compounds were
pronounced in vernacular Assyrian. I should have been
quite content, for my own part, in all such doubtful cases,
to have indicated the names by mere signs (x, y, z, and
so forth).' 2 These scholars, evidently, cannot be charged
with being not sufficiently alive to the danger of mistake,
and of attempting to impose upon the world uncertain
1 Expedition en Misopotamie, ii., 106.
2 Jour. Asiatic Soc, vol. i. (new ser.), p. 187.

58 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
readings as if they were certain. Let us glance for a
moment at the nature and extent of this acknowledged
difficulty. In the first place, it should be clearly under
stood that it is found only in native names, or in names
of which an Assyrian god forms an element. All other
proper names are written, not in monograms, but in
phonetic characters, which constantly recur, and the value
of which is as certainly determined as that of the letters
of the Greek alphabet. 'This uncertainty,' continues
Rawlinson, ' does not in the least affect the authenticity
of the translation of historical inscriptions, which are
written for the most part phonetically, and the grammar
of which can be analysed with as much confidence as any
portion of the Hebrew Scriptures.' Now, in the second
place, this certainty in regard to the general meaning of a
historical narrative very often is of itself sufficient to
impart to the student perfect assurance as to the name of
the king who is the prominent actor. Suppose, e.g., that
we take the deciphered account of the Assyrian expedition
against Judah and the neighbouring countries in the days
of Hezekiah, and that we put a blank, or an x, for the
name of the Assyrian king, would this affect in the least
our certainty that the king was Sennacherib, or render
preposterous our using the narrative for the purposes of
history ? The truth is, that no other name, of all known
to us, can be made to fit the circumstances but just that
which the Bible gives us, and we would be perfectly war
ranted, even were the native pronunciation utterly un-
ascertainable, to read this name into the narrative. But,
thirdly, to .say that even with regard to these native
names the process is merely tentative and untrustworthy
is a mere mis-statement. A number of them are found
written occasionally in simple and perfectly unmistakeable
phonetic characters. This indeed may be said to be the

Described and Tested. 59
case with the name in connection with which Dr. Kay
makes his depreciatory comment. According to one of
the forms in which the name Sargon appears in the
original, the last two characters are phonetically read gi.
na, and the preceding characters form the well-known
ideogram representing the royal title sar, so that the
whole, according to the most natural construction, is to
be read Sargina. The case is similar with the names
Nebuchadnezzar and Nabunahid, — the writing varies be
tween the ideogrammatic and the phonetic. So is it
with not a few native names of places and peoples, as
Nineveh, Babel, Akkad, Sumir, etc. Then, fourthly, the
variant orthographies found in these and other proper
names, along with the transliterations on the Persian
tablets, and still more the bilingual tablets rescued from
the palaces of Nineveh, furnish the means of determining
with almost perfect confidence the ordinary pronunciation
of most of the ideograms employed in these proper names.
Thus a certain ideogram occupies the place of the syllables
usur in the name Nabukuduriusur (i.e. Nebuchadnezzar),
and by this phonetic spelling the power of the ¦ ideo
gram is determined, not for that name only, but for
the large number of other names in which it occurs.1
And when the same ideogram appears on a tablet of a
hnguistic kind, from the dibris of Assurbanipal's library,
with the same explanatory phonetic characters set over
against it, the evidence is irresistible that this is the
true reading.
I have been at pains to assure myself and others in
regard to the system of decipherment inaugurated by
Grotefend and Rawlinson, and the general correctness of
1 See on this whole matter, Menant, Les noms propres Assyriens ; and
Schrader, Die ass.-bab. Keilinschriften, pp. 117 f., id. die Basis der
Entzifferung der ass-bab. Keilinschriften, in Zeitsch. d. morg. Ges., xxiii.

60 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
the translations offered by the competent scholars who are
devoting themselves to this field of study, from conviction
of the great importance which belongs to these newly-
opened sources of historical information. If the discovery
be, as I have attempted to demonstrate, a real one, then
it is no less than the resurrection from their graves of a
buried literature and a buried history, and all who are
interested in ascertaining the facts of the world's early
days and the laws of human progress must acknowledge
the signal value of these researches. I look at them
chiefly in their bearing upon the historical credibility and
correct interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures, and in
this relation their importance can hardly be overrated.
Of the two divisions of the sacred volume, the Old
Testament is that which has drawn forth in largest
measure unfavourable criticism, and of which we are
furthest from the full comprehension. Its history, re
markable even if denuded of the miraculous element, is
at the same time so interwoven with prodigy, that it
ought to be recognised as the most reasonable procedure
either to receive the whole with unquestioning faith, or
to reject the whole as a tissue of uncertainties and fables.
Not a few who receive the New Testament as a revelation
from God, find nothing in the Old but uncertified Jewish
traditions. Large scope has been allowed to such sceptical
views by the almost entire absence, till lately, of inde
pendent and authentic records wherewith to test the
veracity of Old Testament Scripture. The work of
Herodotus, the oldest extant of the historians of Greece,
dates about the probable age of Malachi, and his allusions
to matters bearing on Jewish history are but scanty.
Berosus, the native historian of Babylon, and Manetho of
Egypt, are known by a few fragments, invaluable indeed,
but lamentably scanty. The native records of the Phoe-

Described and Tested. , 61
nician states have mostly perished. What remains of
these ancient historical writings, and of a few others that
might be named, may be shown to coincide when fairly
interpreted with the statements of the Old Testament.1
But even when all had been received as true which was
thus confirmed, there remained a wide field for the play
of unbelief. Nor has it been content with this. It has
sometimes ventured to call in question what rested upon
a general coincidence of testimony. It has said — Per
haps these old historians, including the Jewish, only
embody in their common statements some vague Eastern
traditions. Perhaps Assyria, with its long duration of
empire and its mighty metropolis, and Babylon with its
wonderful edifices and ancient renown, were but the
current myths of the Orient when these writings were
composed, resting, it may be, on some meagre basis of
indiscernible fact, but swollen out into proportions ridicu
lously beyond reality. By the discoveries which are
above described and indicated, this style • of speculation
is conclusively quenched, and the margin left for unbelief
immensely contracted. We can now refer to records that
run parallel for many centuries with the writings of
Jewish historians and prophets, records of unquestionable
authority, pertaining to nations with whom the Israelitish
people were more vitally related than with any other.
And from the ordeal of comparison with these new sources
of historic proof, from the severe test of the public monu
ments and royal records of Assyria, Babylon, and Persia,
the Bible comes forth not only unscathed, but with the
lustre of its veracity greatly brightened. Much that
might before have appeared somewhat mythical must now
1 Ctesias cannot come into account in estimating the credibility of
Scripture, till his consistency with the other secular sources has been
evinced.

62 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
be accepted as the simple truth. The Jewish writers, it
is found, give no exaggerated representation of the power
and splendour of Nineveh and Babylon. If the concur
rent testimony of Berosus, Abydenus, and Herodotus did
not suffice, to make the Bible credible, the very slabs on
which Sargon and Sennacherib commemorated their con
quests cannot be questioned. And since statements
before rejected are thus put beyond doubt, the general
trustworthiness of the Book in which they occur is greatly
confirmed. It has stood all tests hitherto applied ; should
it not be received as true till the contrary be proved ?
Is it not the mere licentiousness of unbelief to continue
doubting till every detail shall have been independently
established ?
In carrying out this process of proof, it is not necessary
to start with any theory of inspiration. The Old Testa
ment writings are primarily to be dealt with as any other
ancient work of an historical character. The book must
be ascertained' to be veracious before it can be known
intelligently that it is, and in what sense it is, inspired.
The inspiration we. ascribe to it ought to be the inspira
tion which itself claims ; and that we may allow what in
this respect it claims, we must learn to regard it as a
truth-speaking witness. We are, indeed, often assured
even by those who hold the Bible to be a divine revela
tion in a sense higher than that in which the writings of
Plato or Dante may be said to be so, that assurance of its
historical accuracy is not essential to belief in its inspira
tion, and that the Most High could reveal Himself to men
so as to meet the wants of human hfe through means of
a book clogged with errors such as the human mind is
competent to detect. It is not for us to dogmatise as to
what God could do, and our faith in Christ and Christi
anity need not be linked to any theory as to the mode

Described and Tested. 63
of inspiration. Yet it does seem hard to believe that a
revelation by means of historical events could be ade
quately or efficiently set forth to the world otherwise
than by a record historically trustworthy. And if even
this be credible, it is still legitimate and dutiful patiently
to inquire whether and to what extent error may be
detected in the record, and to attach our faith to its un
disproved statements. Now many errors have been
alleged, errors both of self-contradiction and of contradic
tion of the facts of human science ; but whether any such
can be proved is as yet exceedingly open to dispute. It
is certain that, in cases in which they are alleged to be
self-evident, the allegation proceeds upon a radical mis
understanding as to the nature of the language which the
Bible employs. Thus, to take a single illustrative instance,
we hear of ' the palpable contradictions disclosed by
astronomical discovery with the letter of Scripture.' x
Where these contradictions lie I cannot make out. The
Bible indeed speaks of the sun rising and setting, which
everybody does every day ; it speaks of the four corners
of the earth, and we also speak of north, south, east, and
west. Do we then every day utter error and falsehood ?
Are our so-called scientific facts to dictate our ordinary
language, and override those sensible impressions by which
human feeling and judgment are primarily controlled ?
Is there not a truth of sense as well as a truth of science ? 2
1 B. Powell, in Essays and Reviews, p. 129 ; cf. ib., p. 207.
* I commend to the consideration of those who cavil at the words of
Scripture, some sentences from Dr. WheweB, Philosophy of the Inductive
Sciences, i., p. 39 (ed. 1847) : 'Is it not often difficult to say whether a
special part of our knowledge is a Fact or a Theory ? ' ' Is it a Fact or a Theory
that the stars revolve round the pole ? Is it a Fact or a Theory that the
earth is a globe revolving on its axis ? Is it a Fact or a Theory that the
earth travels in an ellipse round the sun ?' etc., p. 40. 'A true Theory is a
Fact, a Fact is a familiar Theory. That which is a Fact under one aspect is

64 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
and ' if the Hebrew records, the basis of religious faith,
manifestly countenance the opinion of the earth's immo
bility and certain other views of the universe very incom
patible with those propounded by Copernicus,' are these
not the very views which nature and our own eyesight
teach us to entertain ? Why should we not claim for
the Book in which God has spoken to men, the just right
assumed by every historian, every poet, every popular
writer, nay, every scientific author when not propounding
scientific facts, to speak in that language which is alone
instinctively adopted, alone universally intelligible, and
to represent nature as nature seems ? The question then
is, Is the Bible, regarded as a book written by men for
men in those modes of speech which sensible impres
sion dictates to all, when interpreted by a fair exegesis,
a book whose statements are strictly accurate ? And over
and above all other and older materials for the settlement
of this question, we have now the aid furnished by con
temporary monuments and records, which, so far as they
have been examined, concur in testifying that a strict
verbal truthfulness characterises the Old Testament Scrip
tures. There are undoubtedly corruptions in their text,
and current interpretations may be disproved ; but apart
from these sources of error, they have in no instance been
convicted of intended misrepresentation, or even of casual
incorrectness; and in many instances, in matters of chrono
logical geographical and historical interest, wherever in
deed it has been possible to test them, their minute accuracy
has been irrefragably estabhshed.
It may be asked, Has evidence been furnished in these
a Theory under another.' See also J. S. Mill (Logic, i., p. 302, 4th ed.) :
'All educated persons . . . believe . . . that it is the earth and not the sun
which moves ; but there are probably few who habitually conceive the
phenomenon otherwise than as the ascent or descent of the sun.'

Described and Tested. 6 5
inscriptions and monuments of the trustworthiness of the
miraculous narratives which the Old Testament contains %
The reply is twofold. If the miracles referred to are
such as had a special connection with the Israelitish
people, and were wrought in their sight and in their
behalf, then such evidence we do not expect, and such, if
found, would be less worthy of credit than the testimony
borne by the Bible . itself. He, by whose power these
miracles were wrought, has provided fitting witnesses, and
their witness-bearing is incapable of being improved. It
is only believers in one living personal all-wise Gocl
who can bear satisfactory testimony to such works. The
miracles of polytheists are as worthless as they are com
mon. Coleridge, when asked if he believed in apparitions,
rephed that he had seen too many himself to beheve in
them. Idolaters have too many prodigies of their own,
to be capable of appreciating such as spring from a higher
source and bear a richer meaning. The Christian apolo
gist, if he is wise, will not show any solicitude to obtain
the testimony of heathens to the wonders wrought by
Jehovah for His people, or seem desirous of assimilating
the miracles of revelation to those of Herodotus and
Livy. Of the Jewish signs there may indeed be furnished
indirect corroboration in the facts obtained from these
independent sources, — corroboration arising from the im
probability that the history of the Jewish people, espe
cially at certain conjunctures, could have been what we
know it was, save under a system of special divine inter
position. Of such confirmation of the Bible narrative, we
are not without some striking examples in these Eastern
records. If, however, under the name of miracle be in
cluded whatever in the appearances or operations of
nature differs from that order at present estabhshed in
nature's works, another reply must be given. Every
E

66 Decipherment of the Cuneiform Inscriptions
Theist admits that the present system of the world has
not been of infinite duration ; x and if the order now
estabhshed has emerged from a state different from itself,
and if, at the same time, our historical records shall
enable us to go back to the time when that order was in
process of formation, then we may anticipate among the
origines thus attained indications of what appears to us
supernatural,— traces of miracles, if -we will call them so,
of a universal character, affecting not one nation but all
nations, and leaving their impress more or less distinctly
upon all national traditions. In the early narratives of
the Old Testament, we find simple and sober statements
in regard to the. nature of that commencement with which
the hfe of the world began ; and the more of reliable in
formation we obtain as to. the primeval state and 'early
traditions, of other peoples, the more we may expect to
find the- truthfulness of these statements corroborated.
Such corroboration, in no, small amount, has already been
brought from other quarters, and it has received consider
able increase from those investigations with which we are
now engaged.
In regard toithe bearing of these discoveries on the
interpretation of the Old Testament, it is not necessary to
say more than a few words. It is evidently important
that another .has been added to 'the comparatively small
group of known Shemitic languages, and a new tongue
1 "We are reminded by. Powell (Assays and Reviews, , -p. ^ 113.),, that there
are very various shades. of opinion in regard to the .nature and degree of
theism. True, there is a sense in which Spinoza and Hegel were theists,
as there is a sense (perhaps) in which Holyoake is (see Trial of Theism,
pp.. 48,, 116), and Powell himself claimed '.the name,, though speaking with
complacency of 'the rejection of the idea of "creation"' (I.e. p. 129).
But it is necessary to use ordinary words in their ordinary sense. A god
who has not called the worlds into being (Heb. xi. 3) will not be generally
allowed to be God.

Described and Tested. 67
recovered, which is sister to the Hebrew and Arama?an
of the Jewish records. There has thus been brought
within our reach a new and presumably a fertile source for
the illustration of grammatical forms and phrases, and for
the determination of the meaning of the words, and even
the few specimens given above are sufficient to show that
results of value are beginning to be obtained. Still more
important than the interpretation of the words is the
interpretation of the facts of Scripture ; and it is unneces
sary to dwell iipon the obvious truth that every consider
able increase in our knowledge of contemporaneous and
related facts, must be greatly helpful in enabling us to
set those of revelation in their true hght, and in guiding
to a full comprehension of their significance.

68 Berosus.

II.
BEROSUS.
After the conquests of Alexander of Macedon had joined
eastern Europe with western Asia and the north-east of
Africa into one great imperial system, thus laying fully
open to Grecian curiosity the treasures of ancient know
ledge and art preserved in these other regions, a number
of persons, natives of the newly-subjected portions of the
empire, and acquainted with their several literary works,
addressed themselves to the task of satisfying this curiosity
by composing in the language of their conquerors histories
of their respective countries. They doubtless gloried in
the wisdom of their fathers, and in the hterature and
science of their native lands ; and patriotic pride com
bined with other principles to make them eager to prove
to the inquiring and cultivated, but somewhat self-con
ceited and supercilious, Greeks, that they too had severally
a history and a science not unworthy of the world's
attention.1 Among these are to be included, along with
other less known writers, Manetho of Egypt, Menander of
Phoenicia, and Berosus of Babylonia. The books of these
and of the other writers of the same class have unhappily
perished, and are known to us only by some fragments
preserved at second-hand ; and these scanty remains are,
for the most part, of a character so valuable as greatly to
excite regret that the original writings have disappeared.
The last-named, Berosus, occupies a place of great and
1 Cf. Niebuhr, Led. on Ancient Hist, by Sehmitz, vol. i., pp. 12 f.

Berosus. 69
growing importance. Our information as to his personal
surroundings and history is very scanty. Of his name
various etymologies have been proposed.1 Of these that
suggested by Scaliger 2 seems to have been regarded gene
rally with most acceptance among subsequent writers
(Berosus = J?nn "13, the son of Hoshea), but none of them
seems entitled to consideration save that of Chwolson,3
according • to which the name is derived from "Q or
T1? (Aram.) and W or n'W, the son of Uzo, the last being
a name of the Oriental Aphrodite. The sum of what is
told us of his history in the brief hints of those who allude
to and quote his writings is the following : — that he was
a priest of Bel in Babylon ; that he had reached maturity
when Alexander reigned there (in 323 B.C.) ; that he was
well instructed in the hterature of his native country ;
that he wrote in Greek a history of Babylonia (the work
is called sometimes to. XaXSaticd, sometimes ra Ba/3v-
Xwviaica), having drawn his materials, according to his
own statement, from ancient records preserved in Babylon ;
and, finally, that he dedicated this work either to An
tiochus 1. (Soter) or to Antiochus 11. (Theos). If the
latter, as seems probable, be the correct rendering of the
original statement,4 then, as Antiochus 11. began to reign
262 B.C., it is implied that Berosus lived to a very advanced
age.5 The name of Berosus is also involved in certain
references and statements in ancient authors, relating to
the teaching of astronomy and astrology. Thus, Josephus
informs us that Berosus pubhshed among the Greeks the

1 See Richter, Berosi quae supersunt, p. 1.
2 Thesaurus Temporum, p. 408. 3 Die Ssabier, vol. ii., p. 248.
4 In Tatian, Adv. Grcecos, c. 58, repeated by Eusebius, Prozp. Eu., XII.
5 Cf. Vossius, De Hist. Grcecis, lib. i., c. 13 ; Perizonius, Orig. Bab., p.
14 ; Richter, Berosi, p. 5 ; Niebuhr, Lect. on Ancient Hist., vol. i., p. 12.
6 Cont. Ap., i. 19.

7o Berosus.
Chaldean books of astronomy and philosophy. To Seneca1
we owe the statement that he interpreted Belus, meaning
apparently that he translated into Greek certain Chaldean
writings of an astronomical kind ; 2 and Vitruvius 3 says
that he left the city and land of the Chaldeans, and
taught as far as Asia the Chaldean learning, that having
settled in the island of Cos, he opened there a school of
astrology, and that he invented the hemispherical sun
dial ; and Pliny,4 that the Athenians, in consequence of
his extraordinary predictions, erected in a public place
a statue with a gilt tongue to his honour. Plutarch,
Censorinus, and Stobseus also allege the name of Berosus
in connection with statements of an astronomical import.
Now, as we know that astronomy and astrology formed
main elements in the science of the Chaldeans, there
appears nothing at all incredible in these reports, though
it must be confessed that in regard to some of them we
desiderate further information. Some writers, indeed,5
have been inclined to believe that the astronomer Berosus
must have been another and much more ancient personage
than the historian, — a supposition, however, for which
there is no sufficient evidence.6 Again, we find another
class of statements connecting the name of our historian
with one or other of the Sibyls famous in the ancient
world, and with certain of the Sibylline predictions.
Thus, Justin Martyr 7 speaks of Berosus, the author of
the Chaldean History, as the father of the Cumsean Sibyl,
1 Nat. Qucest., iii. 29.
2 Cf. Pliny, Nat. Hist., vi. 26 ; Solinus, lvi. 3 ; and see Sayce, Trans
actions of Bib. Archceblogy, vol. iii., pp. 147, 151.
3 Lib. ix. 2. 1 ; 6. 2. 4 H. N., vii. 37.
5 E.g. Bailly, Hist, de VAstronomie Ancienne, lib. iv., 35, 36.
6 Cf. Ideler, Untersuchungen iiber die astron. Beobachtungen der Alten,
p. 321.
7 Cohort, ad Grcecos, c. 37.

Berosus. 7 1
mentioned by Plato in his Phcedrus, a strange anachronism,
judged by all other extant testimony ; and corresponding
statements are found in Pausanias,1 Suidas,2 and Moses
of Chorene.3 Alexander Polyhistor also, to whom most
of the extant quotations from Berosus are ultimately due,
alleges as from the Sibyl a certain narrative which there
is some reason to think was contained in the history
of our author, and which is found almost verbatim in the
extant collection of Sibylline oracles.4 In our uncertainty
as to the age and character of these oracles, we are at a
loss to know what construction to put upon the statements
referred to. If, with their modern editors, we regard them
as of Hellenistic-Jewish origin, we may suppose that the
name of Berosus, as a man famous for his predictions, was
used in connection with them to give them authority.
Perhaps, however, it could be shown to be not an un
warranted opinion, that fragments really of Chaldean
origin are included in the collection.
The authors to whose writings we are indebted for the
principal of the extant fragments of the Chaldean History
of Berosus are Josephus, Eusebius, and Syncellus. Re
ferences also to the same work, of some importance, are
found in Clement of _ Alexandria, Theophilus of Antioch,
and Moses of Chorene. It is unfortunate in regard to
most of these writers that they do not appear to have
themselves read Berosus, and that their quotations are
taken only indirectly from his work. Josephus indeed gives
no hint that he quotes at second-hand ; at the same time,
his quotations are of such a character as to render this
the more probable view.5 Clement indicates that he
knew Berosus and his writings through the Assyrian
1 Disc. Grcecice, x. 12. 2 S.v. vlHuWa. 3 Hist. Armen., i. 5.
4 But see M. v. Niebuhr, Assur u. Babel, p. 470.
5 See M. v. Niebuhr, op. cit., p. 13.

72 Berosus.
History of Juba, and Theophilus seems acquainted only
with the extracts given by Josephus. Syncellus foUows
Eusebius, and Eusebius, the discovery of whose Chronicle
in the Armenian version towards the close of last century
added greatly to our knowledge of the Chaldee historian,1
derives his extracts chiefly from Alexander Polyhistor,
perhaps through Africanus. The same author gives
considerable extracts, hke wise through Polyhistor, from
a writer called Abydenus, of uncertain age and nation
ality, relating to Babylonian and Assyrian history,
and showing a striking agreement with those from
our author. It is difficult to determine in what
relation this writer stands to Berosus (Syncellus says he
wrote 'according to Berosus'); the extracts themselves
seem to indicate that he drew from independent and
original sources.
The fragments thus obtained, tending as they do in
a striking way to illustrate and confirm the Jewish
Scriptures, have been subjected, hke these Scriptures
themselves, to a large amount of unfavourable criticism.
Some have questioned the real existence of their alleged
author ; others have relegated him to the pre - historic
age ; others, bowing to the authority of Vitruvius, Pliny,
etc., have allowed him the position of a famous Chaldean
astrologer, and have alleged that the historical recitals
current under his name are the figments of an unknown
Greek of Alexander's time, who sought to give authority
to his compositions by ascribing them to Berosus as
their author ; 2 while others have maintained that
the writer of these narratives must have been a Jew,
who gave to the Jewish narratives a Chaldean colour
ing in order to secure for them greater credit among
1 See Niebuhr, Kleine Schriften, i., pp. 85 f.
2 "Wachler, iu Ersch u. Gruber's Encyclopcedie,' s.v. Berosos.

Berosus, 73
the Gentiles.1 The most recent, as well as most
cautious and moderate, representative of this school
of negative critics, Havet,2 grants both the real exist
ence of Berosus, and the historical value of the frag
ments that bear his name, while at the same time
he seeks to prove that the grounds are insufficient for
assigning these fragments to the age and the author to
whom they are usually ascribed. He believes that the
attainable evidence favours the opinion that they belong
to an age at least a century and a half later, and that
they emanated 'from Alexandria, from the same school
from which proceeded, in the interest of Jewish propa-
gandism, so many pieces of fabricated Greek literature.' 8
His principal grounds (confining our view to Berosus, —
Havet includes the Egyptian Manetho in his unfavourable
criticism) are these : — the silence of writers prior to
Josephus, particularly of Diodorus, in regard to these
Berosian narratives, the known Sibylline oracles embraced
in them, the Hellenistic spirit which they breathe, and the
remarkable and unparalleled coincidence between the
pretended Berosus and the pretended Manetho, in age,
position, and character. The full discussion of the points
raised by this writer is here impossible. It is enough to
remark that his reasoning is throughout an argumentum e
silentio, being based merely upon the scantiness of existing
¦ means of information. He himself allows that it demon
strates nothing, and at the best warrants only a probable
conclusion. But even for this it is inadequate. The
opinion commonly entertained in regard to the age and
authorship of the remains in question contains in itself,
1 Cruice, De Fl. Josephi in auctoribus contra Apionem afferendis fide et
auctoritate. 2 Mimoire sur la date des icrits qui portent les noms de Birose et de
Manithon. 3 Havet, op. cit., p. 48.

74 Berosus.
as has been shown above, nothing contradictory or in
credible, — that opinion rests upon a large amount of
express and positive testimony, and it can only be over
thrown by a preponderant amount of express and positive
testimony on the opposite side.
The extant remains of Berosus,1 scanty and imperfectly
reported as they are, have long attracted a great amount
of attention, as forming among all the remains of ancient
Greek literature our principal source of information in
regard to the traditions and history of his native country.
The use made of them by writers like Miinter, Movers,
Niebuhr, and Bunsen attests the important place which
they occupy in historical hterature. And quite recently
this attention has become even greater than before. Now
that the line of research opened up by Rawlinson and
others has rendered- intelligible, at least to a large degree,
the original records of Babylonia and Assyria, it is found,
and that in a measure increasing with the advance of
knowledge, that the old priest of Bel was thoroughly
well informed in regard to the traditions and history of
his country,2 and that, as Josephus and others declare, he
is an entirely capable and trustworthy writer.
The fragments of the Berosian history, when put together
1 The remains are collected in Fabricius, Bibliotheca Grceca, vol. xiv.,
and by Scaliger, Thes. Temp., more recently and completely by Richter
in the work above referred to, and by C. Miiller, Fragmenta Hist. Grasc.,
vol. ii. The cosmical fragments are given by Lenormant in his Essai de
Commentaire des fragmens cosmogoniques de Birose, and the historical,
translated anew by Petermann from the Armenian Eusebius, by M. v.
Niebuhr, Asswr u. Babel ; see also Cory's Ancient Fragments. A work
appeared at Rome in 1498, entitled Berosi Babylonii Antiquitatum Libri
Quinque, cum commentariis Joannis Annii, which is one of the fabrications
of Giovanni Nanni, a Dominican monk of Viterbo, ordinarily known as
Annius of Viterbo (see Richter, op. cit., p. 44).
2 It is now known that the cuneiform mode of writing continued in use
long after the time of Alexander. See Oppert, Melanges d'Archiologie,
pp. 23 f. ; Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 389.

Berosus. 75
and arranged, give a sufficiently clear idea of the plan
and contents of the original work. The First Book, after
a description of the country of Babylonia, was occupied
with the Chaldean conceptions in regard to the cosmo
gony. As read in the brief and bald extracts or abstracts
given by Polyhistor, these present the appearance of
uncouth and monstrous fables, in which certain echoes of
the chaos and the creation in Genesis may be perceived.1
But read in the light of the original Babylonian docu
ments now accessible, they are found to be in almost
every point significant and instructive, and to represent
faithfully, however curtly and inadequately, the genuine
Chaldean doctrines.2 Avoiding inndue details, I quote
from one of the most recent sources- one or two extracts
descriptive of some of the new illustrations drawn from
these documents regarding the cosmogonies at once of Scrip
ture and of Berosus. ' Of the curious myths,' says Mr.
Smith,3 ' connected with the Babylonian religion there are
several examples ' (in the new collection of tablets brought
by him from Assyria). ' I have already mentioned one,
unfortunately too mutilated for translation — the account
of the creation. It appears to. record that when the
gods in their assembly made the universe there was con
fusion, and the gods sent out the spirit of hfe. They
then create the beast of the field, the animal of the
field, and the reptile or creeping thing of the field, and
fix in them the spirit of life ; next comes the creation of
domestic animals and the creeping things of the city.'
After giving the translation of another inscription of the
same class, he proceeds : ' This inscription gives us a
1 Cf. Ltiken, Die Traditionen des Menschengeschlechts, p. 36 ; M. v.
Niebuhr, op. cit., p. 485.
2 See Lenormant, Essai de Commentaire, — passim, esp. pp. 59, 66, 85.
3 Ass. Discoveries, pp. 397, 402 ; and cf. The Chaldean Genesis, ch. v.

76 Berosus.
curious picture of the myths prevalent in the Euphrates
valley. They appeared to believe that in the early days
of the world there was a chaos or confusion in heaven,
and monstrous forms of animals ran riot as evil spirits in
the universe, while the sun, moon, and stars had not been
set in their places. In the upper regions of heaven ruled
the god Anu, who corresponded in some senses to the
Ouranos of the Greeks. ... On the earth ruled Bel, god
of the middle region, and the principal object of Baby
lonian worship. . . . Bel represents the acting principle
moving in all matters, controlling and creating. The
deep or ocean and region under the earth were ruled by
Hea, who represents the mind or wisdom of the gods.
Thus these three leading deities of the Babylonian
pantheon represent in some sort a trinity, and exhibit the
godhead under a threefold aspect. . . . Bel, seeing the
confusion in heaven, resolves to place there the sun,
the moon, and Venus, who typifies the stars, that these
heavenly orbs might rule and direct the heavens, etc. etc.
. . . This legend of Bel ending the rule of the monsters,
and setting the sun, moon, and stars in the heavens,
forms a curious commentary on the description of the
creation by Berosus, the Chaldean priest, who represents
monsters as existing in the earth before Bel created
hght and the heavenly bodies.'
The Second Book was devoted to the history of Chaldea
from the earliest period to the termination of the Assyrian
dominion. In an historical sense, this may justly be
esteemed as not only the most valuable portion of the
Berosian fragments, but even as one of the most valuable
portions of ancient literature. It presents, first, the list
of the ten earliest kings of the country, giving the names
and other data, surrounded with a haze of mythical con
tortion and exaggeration. The duration of their reigns is

Berosus. 77
stated in Sossi, Neri, and Sari, i.e. in periods respectively
of 60, 600, and 3600 years, a system of reckoning now
known to be genuinely Chaldean.1 The coincidence be
tween these ten oldest kings in Berosus and the ten
antediluvian patriarchs of the Book of Genesis has been
often remarked upon, and similarities traced even in the cor
responding names.2 Quite recently it has been announced,
by one of the leading investigators in cuneiform literature,
that he has lighted upon some fragments of the public
chronological records upon which apparently the scheme
of Berosus was based ; and that in the earliest of these
he is able to recognise in the names a resemblance to
those in the Greek of our historian.3 The account of this
first or patriarchal dynasty is followed by that of the
Chaldean deluge, so remarkably coincident with, and so
often quoted or referred to in illustration of, the flood of
Noah. It was on this narrative that the charge some
times brought against the Berosian fragments of having
been coloured by Jewish conceptions and traditions was
especially founded ; for, up to a very recent date, no
certain reference to a general deluge had been detected
throughout the whole large domain of cuneiform hterature.
Now, on the other hand, in regard to this very narrative,
we are able to adduce the most satisfactory evidence of
the good information and good faith of our author. The
brilliant discovery made in 1872 by the scholar just
referred to, Mr. Smith, of portions of the Chaldean legend
of the deluge on tablets from the ruins of Nineveh, has
been successfully followed up by new researches there, and
1 See Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies, vol. i., p. 129 ; Oppert,
Melanges dArchiologie, i., p. 28.
2 See e.g., M. v. Niebuhr, op. cit., p. 269.
3 Smith, in Trans. Bib. Archceology, vol. iii., pp. 362 f. ; id., Chal. Gen.,
p. 290.

78 Berosus.
large additional fragments have been recovered, so that
we have now an almost complete copy of the original
from which Berosus apparently took his account. The
legend of the deluge, we now learn, formed one of a series
of legends, forming together a kind of epic, composed in
a poetical style, celebrating the deeds of a hero, whose
name is provisionally read Izdubar ; and in the original it
is a certain Hasisadra, or Adrahasis, son of Ubaratutu, who
is represented by the Xisuthrus, son of Otiartes, of the
Berosian remains. The story of the flood appears here
marked by some differences from that in Genesis, but also
by a large amount of very remarkable and minute re
semblances, indicating that the tradition has been derived
through an independent channel from a common source.
' When the Chaldean account is compared with the
Biblical narrative, in their main features the two stories
fairly agree ; as to the wickedness of the antediluvian
world, the divine anger and command to build the ark,
its stocking with birds and beasts, the coming of the
deluge, the rain and storm, the ark resting on a mountain,
trial being made by birds sent out t© see if the water
had subsided, and the building of an altar after the flood.
All these main facts occur in the same order in both
narratives ; but when we come to examine the details of
these stages in the two accounts-, there appear numerous
points of difference, as to the number of people who were
saved, the duration of the deluge, the place where the
ark rested, the order of sending out the birds, and other
similar matters.' x In the 'points in which the cuneiform
and the Biblical accounts vary, the narrative of our histo
rian agrees, as was to be expected, with the former.2 It is
1 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 218 ; id., The Chaldean Genesis, pp. 263 f.
2 See, in general, Smith, Chaldean Account of theDeluge, from terra-colta
tablets; id., Ass. Discoveries, chap, xi., and Trans. Bib. Archaeology, vol.

Berosus. 79
worth mentioning that the name of the god who in these *.
tables warns Hasisadra of the approach of the flood, and
counsels him in regard to the building of the ship, which
is read by Smith Hea, is by Lenormant and Menant read
Nuah, in which, if the reading is confirmed, we cannot
mistake the reminiscence of the Biblical Noah.1
There is another point of special interest which
deserves notice before leaving these Deluge tablets. The
Biblical account of. the flood gives clear indications that
the weekly division of time was then in use, the patriarch
sending out the birds from the ark at intervals of seven
days.2 In the narrative of Berosus, as handed down to
us, this particularity is obliterated, and the expression
employed in regard to the same interval is simply ' again
after certain days.'3 In the original Babylonian legend,
however, as now recovered, the note of time presented in
the Bible reappears. Thus, as rendered by Smith,4 it is
said,' ' Six days and nights passed the wind, deluge, and
storm over the land; On the seventh day in its course
was calmed the storm. ... On the seventh day, in the
course of it, I sent forth a dove,' etc. Elsewhere, in the
same series of legends, additional evidence is given of the
sacredness of the number seven, and especially of the
seventh day. Thus, of Izdubar's offering after the flood
we are told, 'by sevens herbs I cut,' or in another trans
lation, ' seven by seven the victims I slew ; ' 6 and again,
in another passage it is said, ' on the seventh day, at day-
ii. pp. 213 f. ; iii., pp. 530 f. ; Lenormant, Premieres Civilisations, vol. ii.,
pp. 1 f. ; Menant, Babylone et la Chald6e, pp. 21 f. ; Talbot, Tram. Bib.
Archceology, vol. iv., pp. 49 f., 129.
i Cf. Lenormant, La Magie chez les ChaldSens, pp. 148 f. ; Sayce, in
Trans. Bib. Archceology, vol. i., p. 301.
2 Gen. viii. 10, 12. 3 Richter, Berosi, p. 57. lAss. Discoveries, p. 190.
6 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 191 ; Talbot, Trans. Bib. Archceology,
iv., p. 59.

80 Berosus.
break, he gave him a dress of honour, and exalted the
man.' l Such indications become the more important
when it is found that much additional evidence bearing
upon the same point is coming to hght. Thus Mr. Sayce
tells us,2 'Seven was a sacred number among the Accadians,
and their lunar months were at an early epoch divided
into periods of seven days each. The days were dedicated
to the sun and moon and five planets, and to the deities
who presided over these. In one of the newly found
fragments which recount the Chaldean version of the
creation, the appointments of the stars called "leaders of
the week" is expressly mentioned ; and the same frag
ment records how the moon. was made to go forth from
heaven on the seventh day.'
After the flood the chronological scheme of Berosus
embraces the following dynasties : —
1. Chaldean, . . of 86 kings, and 34,080, or 34,091 years.
2. Median, . . „ 8 „ 224 ,,
3. (Anon.), . . „ 11 ,, (number awanting, a
marginal gloss gives 48).
4. Chaldean, . . ,, 49 „ 458 years.
5. Arabian, . . . ,, 9 ,, 245 ,,
6. (Anon., but certainly
Assyrian), . „ 45 „ 526 „
After these come the rulers who occupy the first 122
years of the Canon of Ptolemy, and are for the most part
1 Talbot, op. cit., p. 67.
2 Academy, Nov. 1875, p. 554. I cannot resist the desire to give the
sequel of this important communication : — ' Four years ago Mr. George
Smith drew attention to the fact that the 7th, 14th, 21st, and 28th days
of the month were termed days of sulum or "rest," on which certain works
were forbidden to be done : and that the expression, "day of rest," was
but the Assyrian translation of an older Accadian equivalent, which
signified " dies nefastus." Now, a hemerology of the month of the inter
calary EM . . . gives what we may call a saints' calendar for the month,
with notes upon the religious duties required from the king on each day.
The memorandum attached to the 7th day I translate as follows :— "The

Berosus. 8 1
contemporaneous with the Sargonides at Nineveh. The first
of these dynasties represents, of course, a mythical period
like the antediluvian, and the myriads of years assigned
to it are obviously determined by some astronomical cycle.
The remaining portion, however, has been recognised by
all investigators as truly historical and of the highest
value. The main drawback to its utility is found in the
lacuna in the number of the years belonging to the third
dynasty, which has led to much discussion. Apparently
it is now ascertained on sufficient grounds that the miss
ing number is 248.1 The progressive unfolding of the
stores of cuneiform literature is gradually teaching both
how fully to interpret this scheme, and how to fill up its
details. E.g., the first historical dynasty, described as
Median, somewhat puzzling before, may now with con
fidence be referred to the invasion and conquest of Baby
lonia by the Turanian race, the Akkad, whose original
home was the country of Media, and who have left their
impress so deeply upon the rehgious literature and history
of Chaldea.2 The fifth Arabian dynasty has long been
7th day, the festival of Merodaeh and Zirpanitu ; a holy day, a Sabbath
for the ruler of great nations. Sodden flesh (and) cooked fruit he may not
eat. His clothes he may not change. (New) garments he may not put
on. Sacrifices he may not offer. The king his chariot may not drive. In
royal fashion he may not legislate. A place of assembly for the judge he
may not establish. Medicine'for his ailments of body he may not apply, "
etc. etc. Even the word Sabbath itself was not unknown to the Assyrians.
Mr. Boscawen has pointed out to me that it occurs under the form Sabattu,
in W. A. J. ii., 32, 16, where it is explained as "a day of rest for the
heart." '
1 See Gutschmid, Beitrage zur Geschichte des alien Orients, p. 18. Cf.
Brandis, Serum Assyriarum Tempora emendata, pp. 16 f. ; Rawlinson,
Five Ane Monarchies, vol. i., p. 191.
2 Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i., pp. 434,648 : id., Five Ane. Monarchies,
vol. i., p. 194; Sayce, Tram. Bib. Archceology, vol. i., p. 298. Oppert
refers this dynasty to ' the migrations of the Indo-Europeans towards the
west.' — Hist, des Empires de Chaldee et d'Assyrie, p. 9.
F

82 Berosus.
understood to stand in some undefined relation to the
many traditionary and other indications of the existence
of a large Cushite element in the population and culture
of ancient Babylonia; and now the cuneiform tablets
have revealed the fact that a Kassite race obtained the
ascendancy there, and fixed their seat at Babylon, about
the time to which the Arabians are assigned in Berosus.1
The Third Book was occupied with the history of the
nation from the time of Nabopolassar and the overthrow
of the Assyrian force, to the time of the Persian rule,
perhaps bringing down the narrative to the entrance of
Alexander into Babylon. This portion of the work, in
the httle that remains of it, is important as an authority
in regard to the life of the great Nebuchadnezzar, as well
as to the series of his successors down to the capture of
the city by Cyrus. One striking testimony to the historic
veracity of the Berosian fragments occurring in this portion
has been referred to above.2 The historian relates that
the monarch just named erected a new palace, exceedingly
large and magnificent, ' in fifteen days.' The period seems
incredibly short, yet the . fact stands plainly recorded in
the Standard Inscription of Nebuchadnezzar.3 In another
particular given in this book, there appeared till quite
lately an irreconcilable difference of statement between
the Chaldee historian and the Jewish Scriptures ; and the
manner in which the difficulty has been removed and
fresh light shed upon both authorities by the help of a
third, recently discovered, is very instructive, and proves
what should need no proof, but is often forgotten, — the
unwarrantableness of drawing positive conclusions from
merely negative premises.
1 See below, pp. 95 f., 112. 2 See p. 40.
3 Rawlinson, Herodotus, vol. ii., p. 578 ; Talbot, Jour. Sac. Lit.
1855-6, p. 418.

Berosus. 83
According to the Book of Daniel, the last native king
of the Babylonian empire was named Belshazzar,1 and
till a recent date the name was unknown in any other
than Jewish records. In the sacred narrative this monarch
is spoken of as a young man, the son of the famous king,
Nebuchadnezzar ; and he appears on the scene but once,
on occasion of the feast held in the palace of Babylon on
the night in which the city was captured by the Persians
and himself slain. Now in Berosus the last Chaldean
king bears another name, Nabonnedus, and in other Greek
sources the same name appears variously written ; 2 while
he is represented to have been not of royal descent, but
to have gained the throne in virtue of successful con
spiracy. Moreover, while it is stated, in accordance with
Daniel, by Herodotus and by Xenophon,3 that Babylon was
taken on a night of festivity, — to which the latter adds
that the king was slain, — Berosus expressly says that the
king survived the capture of the city, and was treated
with much kindness by the conqueror. In attempting
the reconciliation of these seeming contradictions, many
writers have followed Josephus,4 in asserting that Nabo-
nadius and Belshazzar were different names of the same
person, and recourse has been had to various expedients
in order to harmonize the accounts. Others have identified
Belshazzar with Nergalsharezer, the son-in-law, and others
with Evil-Merodach, the son of Nebuchadnezzar.5 The
discovery and decipherment of the old Persian inscription
1 Dan., v. 1 ; see vii. 1, viii. 1 ; cf. Baruch, i. 11, 12 ; Josephus, Ant.
Jud., x. 11, 2.
2 Ptolemy's Canon has Nabmadius, Syncellus, Nabonnidus, Herodotus,
Labynetos, Abydenus or Megasthenes, Nabonnidochus, and Josephus,
Naboandehus (probably corrupt for Naboandechus).
3 Herod., i. 191 ; Xen., Cyrop. vii. 5, 15, 30.
4 Ant. Jud., x. 11, 2.
5 M. v. Niebuhr, Assur u. Babel, p. 91.

84 Berosus.
at Behistun confirmed to some extent the correctness of
Berosus and other Greek authorities ; for there J mention
is made of the last Chaldean king of Babylon by the name
Nabunita. Moreover, the process of research in the line
of cuneiform inscriptions has brought to light numerous
records of the same monarch, drawn from various localities
throughout Babylonia, especially from the ruins of the
capital and from Mugheir ; and in these his name appears
in a corresponding and twofold form, Nabunahid and Nabu-
imtuk — the twofoldness arising from the variety of idioms
employed in ancient Chaldea, and accounting for the
diversity of spelling among the Greeks.2 Now, on the
cylinders of Nabunahid, as first announced almost con
temporaneously by Oppert,3 and by Sir H. Rawlinson,4
appears the name of Bilsaruzzur, from which Belshazzar
is an obvious formation, like Neriglissar from Nergal-
sharezer; and that in such language as sheds light over
the whole previously known facts. The monarch in these
inscriptions styles Bilsaruzzur his oldest son, and suppli
cates on his behalf long life and other blessings.5 The
inference is inevitable, that the son whose name thus
appears on the documents of the empire had been
associated with his father in the government — a practice
of which we find many instances in ancient history.
With this fact of a joint reign, it is in striking accordance
1 Col. i. 16 ; iii. 13.
2 See Lenormant, Lettres Assyriologiques, i., p. 87.
3 In Zeitschrift der morg. Ges., viii., p. 598.
* In Athenaeum, Mar. 1854, p. 341. — Mr. Fox Talbot seems to stand alone
among Assyriologers in refusing to receive this identification. See
Records of ihe Past, vol. v., p. 143 ; cf. Rawlinson, Bampton Lect. , p.
168 : id., Five Mon., vol. iii., p. 515 ; Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und
das alte Testament, p. 279.
5 See Hincks, Jour. Sac. Lit., Jan. 1862, p. 412 ; Oppert, Expedition
en Misopotamie, vol. i., p. 272 ; Menant, Babylone et la Chaldie, p. 254.

Berosus. 85
that Daniel, when he is rewarded by Belshazzar for the
reading of the mysterious scroll upon the wall, is made,
not, like Joseph and Mordecai, the second, but the third,
ruler of the kingdom.1
That Belshazzar, the son and co-regent of Nabonadius,
is called in the Book of Daniel the son of Nebuchadnezzar
creates no difficulty. The supposition is a natural one,
that Nabonadius, who had no ancestral title to the throne,
strengthened himself in his position by marrying a
daughter of the renowned monarch just named. His oldest
son was thus the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar and doubtless
the heir of the royal house ; and it was as descendant and
representative of the great king that he had been raised
while yet a youth to sovereignty. It was obviously
inevitable that when, on the occasion presented in the
sacred narrative, appeal was made by the queen (i.e. the
queen mother) and by the prophet to the facts of his
grandfather's history, he should be addressed as his son.2
It is in keeping with the circumstances that Nabonadius,
according to Berosus, went forth to meet the enemy in
open battle, while the joint-king, whose life was peculiarly
precious, was left within the fancied secure defence of
the vast walls of the city. The doom which reached
Belshazzar there was the fulfilment of Jeremiah's
words,3 'All nations shall serve him (Nebuchadnezzar),
and his son, and his son's son, until the very time
of his land come,' etc. In connection with all this,
it is an instructive circumstance that when revolt
broke out once and again in Babylonia, as in other pro
vinces of the Persian empire, against Darius Hystaspis,
the leaders assumed the name of Nebuchadnezzar, son
1 Cf. Gen. xii. 40, Esth. x. 3, with Dan. v. 29.
' See also Pusey, Daniel, 3d ed., p. 406.
3 Jer. xxvii. 7.

86 Berosus.
of Nabunita.1 This shows, 1st, that the line of Nebuch
adnezzar was recognised and honoured throughout Baby
lonia as the royal line, the heir of which was entitled
to the throne; 2d, that Nabonadius was universally
known to have been related by marriage to this line,
so that in his family the true heir was to be sought;
and, moreover, to have had a son called by his grand
father's honoured name ; and, 3d, that it was notorious
that his oldest son, he whose name had been conjoined
with his, own in the pubhc records, was already in
Darius's time cut off, so that the endeavour to stir up
the spirit of the Chaldeans against the Persian yoke was
made in the name of a younger son, called after his
grandfather.2 Of the astronomical and' astrological writings of our
author, we are unable to give any clear account. They
formed, most probably, a work, or works, distinct from
the Chaldaica. Berosus must have drawn his materials
for these, as for his historical writings, from native astro
nomical works ; and he expressly alleges that observations
on the heavenly bodies had been prosecuted in Chaldea,
and were preserved on clay tablets, extending back into
the past for a lengthened period. We hear of his specu
lations respecting the moon, its nature, its movements,
its phases, and eclipses ; the interchange of catastrophes
in the history of the earth, by water and by fire, at the
close of certain cosmical periods ; the influence exerted by
the heavenly bodies upon human affairs ; and the natural
length of human life, of which it is said he fixed the
1 Behistun Inscription, Records of the Past, vol. i., pp. 114, 122.
2 See, in addition to the works above cited, Rawlinson, Bampton Lect. ,
p. 168 ; and Five Ane. Monarchies, vol. iii., p. 515 ; Duncker, Gesch. des
Alterthums, vol. ii., p. 735 (3ded.); Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und
das alte Testament, p. 279.

Berosus. 87
limit at 116 years. A few illustrations from native
sources, on these and kindred points, have been already
furnished,1 and to these doubtless more will ere long be
added. ' See Sayce, on The Astronomy and Astrology of the Babylonians, in
Trans. Bib. Archceology, vol. iii., pp. 145 f. Also Smith, The Chaldean
Genesis, p. 34.

88 Nimrod and his Dynasty.

III.
NIMROD AND HIS DYNASTY.
{Reprinted from the Journal of Sacred Literature,
April 1860.)
It has hitherto been assumed by chronologers and com
mentators, with one or two exceptions hereafter referred
to, as a doctrine admitting of no dispute, that the date of
Nimrod and his conquests, described in Genesis x. 8-12,
falls to the earhest times of postdiluvian antiquity. This
is a doctrine, however, which recent discoveries have ren
dered highly questionable, ahd of which they urge to a
serious reconsideration. To the present writer it appears
not only that it has been too hastily assumed, but that it
is decidedly and demonstrably false, and that nothing has
tended more to shed an air of myth over the statements
of Scripture as to the origines of the race. In prosecut
ing the inquiry now proposed, several distinct sources of
information present themselves, among which the sacred
writings take the first place.
I. In turning to the narrative already referred to in
Genesis, we inquire whether this itself affords any
indication in regard to the date of the events recorded.
We venture to propose the following rendering of
the words as more correct than that of the Authorized
Version : —
' Cush begat Nimrod : he began to be mighty in the
earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord : where-

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 89
fore it is said, Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the
Lord. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and
Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.
From that land he went forth to Asshur,1 and built
Nineveh, and Rehoboth Tr, and Calah, and Resen be
tween Nineveh and Calah : that is the great city'
Here it may at first sight appear that the first state
ment, ' Cush begat Nimrod,' is decisive of the question,
and determines Nimrod to be the great-grandson of Noah.
Let us not forget, however, that such expressions, in the
language of the Bible and of other Eastern books, as
proved by innumerable instances, may mean nothing
more than this, that the one was the ancestor of the
other, or that Nimrod was by descent a Cushite. It
appears to us capable of proof that such is the more
natural interpretation here. The passage quoted is clearly
parenthetical. Nimrod is distinguished, in the mind of
the writer of the sacred narrative, from those sons of
Cush mentioned in verse 7, who possessed an ethnical
importance as the founders of tribes ;2 and it is difficult
to account for this, if he was, in the same sense with
them, the. son of Cush, and founded, as is ordinarily
assumed, his mighty empire about the time of the disper
sion of the nations. It is further asserted that this pas
sage represents Nimrod as the founder of Babel, and thus
1 Such, we do not doubt, is the meaning of this clause, and it is supported
by the leading recent commentators, as Tuch, Delitzsch, Kalisch. It is
somewhat strangely ignored by Sir Henry Rawlinson and his brother, the
Rev. George Rawlinson, even in their most recent publications. See the
Herodotus, vol. i., pp. 589, 656, n. 5 ; Bampton Lect., p. 69.
2 The attempt made, e.g. by Rawlinson, Notes on the Early History of
Babylonia, p. 14, to remove the name Nimrod out of the category of per
sonal names, and'to give it an ethnical significance, is clearly inconsistent
with the scope of the sacred writer. The identification of it with the
Namri of the Assyrian inscriptions is altogether unfortunate.

90 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
assigns him to the period of the building of the tower and
the confusion of tongues. This is, however, mere asser
tion ; Scripture makes no such statement as that Babel
was founded or built by Nimrod.1 On the contrary, the
opposite is plainly implied in the language of the passage
quoted. There is a marked difference of phrase when the
two great fields of Nimrod's activity are spoken of. On
the one hand, it is said, ' The beginning of his kingdom
was Babel,' etc. On the other hand, the expression is,
' He built Nineveh,' etc. Perhaps another hold for the
common view may be found in the place which this
passage occupies in the narrative of Genesis, in the
account of the peophng of the world by the sons of Noah,
and before any of the particular relations with which the
rest of the book is occupied. It needs,, however, no
proof to show that the place in the narrative determines
nothing, in the case of such a parenthetical account, as to
the place of the events narrated in the chronological
sequence. Indeed, if this circumstance proves anything,
it proves too much) viz. that the conquests of Nimrod and
the building of Nineveh preceded the building of the
tower in the land of Shinar, and the confusion «pf tongues,
which are not related till the eleventh chapter. Thus
the passage before us, in its language and place in the
book of Genesis, furnishes no ground for the common
view as to the date of the events — rather seems to dis
countenance it ; and the impression that this date ought
to be lowered to a considerably more recent time is
strengthened, at least for those who believe in the Mosaic
authorship of the narrative, by consideration of the pro
verbial saying here quoted. The currency of the words,
1 We find ourselves here in agreement with Chwolson in the important
memoir, to be further referred to below, Ueber die Ueberreste der altbaby-
lonischen Literatur, p. 73.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 9 1
' Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord,' as an
expression of admiration for a man of distinguished
prowess at the time the book of Genesis was composed,
evidently imphes that the renown of Nimrod was then
fresh in the memory of the men of the East.1 The
similar phrase, 'Who can stand before the children of
Anak?' (Deut. ix. 2), also current in the time of Moses,
corroborates this inference ; for it is certain that the
Anakim had gained their hold of the land of Canaan at
a comparatively recent period — a period subsequent to the
days of Abraham.2
Our conclusion is strengthened when we proceed to
consider the outline of events set before us in the Scrip
ture narrative. The obscurities and perplexities in which
the history in Genesis is involved by the ordinary em
placement of Nimrod's reign, are such as to compel us to
seek for another and later date. These are obvious
enough, and they have been more than once laid hold of
in order to discredit the historical veracity of the Biblical
accounts.3 If, for example, the account in Gen. xi. 1-9
is true, we find it difficult to understand how the forma
tion of such an empire as that of Nimrod was at the
epoch then referred to possible. God, we are told, inter
posed to check, by confounding their speech, the attempt
of men to found one great community, with a city and
1 We are again happy to have the support of Chwolson in this view.
We quote his iUustration : ' Wir sagen, z. B., ja auch von einem ausseror-
dentlich kraftigen und unerschrockenen Manne : " er sei ein wahrer Napo
leon," aber nicht "ein wahrer Friedrich Barbarossa," oder " ein wahrer
Carl der Grosse," weil diese Manner unserm Zeitalter zu sehr entriickt
sind ; und die Israeliten des mosaischen Zeitalter sollten den Namen eines
Mannes des gegen 3000 Jahre vorher gelebt haben soil, auf diese Weise
gebraucht haben ! Ich glaube es nimmermehr.' — Op. cit., p. 72.
2 See further on this passage below.
1 See e.g., Priaulx, Qucestiones Mosaicce, second ed., p. 270.

92 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
a tower for metropolis and gathering-place. Was the
Most High baffled in the accomplishment of His purpose,
that during the same generation an empire so extensive
as that of Nimrod, comprehending at least the whole
valley of the Euphrates and Tigris, was established \
Moreover, when it is said, ' He went forth to Asshur,' the
use of this name implies that the country referred to had
been already occupied by the son of Shem thus desig
nated and his descendants, and had become familiarly
known by that term ; and when we read that there he
built that great city whose renown filled the East, and
whose principal parts are here mentioned, we are com
pelled to understand that he and his followers were not
the first settlers in the region, but that he had estabhshed
his power by conquest over a pre-existing population,
who spoke, as the decipherment of the Assyrian inscrip
tions has proved, in accordance with what is here implied,
a Shemitic tongue. When we come down to the events
of Abraham's day, our perplexities increase. At this
period we find (Gen. xiv.) four powerful kings seated in
the south and south-east of the Euphrates valley, two of
whom, the king of Shinar and the king of Ellasar, occupy
between them1 the territory described as the beginning
of Nimrod's kingdom. What has become of the earlier
and more extensive dominion of the mighty hunter ?
And what of the great city, with a corresponding great
authority over the surrounding region, which he reared
in Assyria ? The expeditions westward of Chedorlaomer
and his confederates must have proceeded up the valley
1 We here assume as correct Rawlinson's identification of Ellasar with
Senkereh. Oppert, we believe, as Rawlinson at a former period was in
clined to do, places Ellasar at Kileh Shergat ; we know not on what
grounds. The reasoning in the text is not materially affected, though
the latter view be adopted.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 93
of the Euphrates (cf. Gen. xiv. 5, 14, 15), yet no account
is taken in the narrative of Nineveh and its king. This
is a fact all but utterly unaccountable, if the great As
syrian city was then built, and Nimrod's conquests had
already taken place ; and it becomes the more so when
we consider that, according to Scripture, Chedorlaomer
exercised a somewhat lengthened dominion over the tribes
in the Jordan valley. Thus the statements of the Bible
lead us to the conclusion, not only that the ordinary date
of Nimrod and his conquests is erroneous, but also that
they ought to be assigned to a period subsequent to the
events recorded in Gen. xiv. We know not that from
this source we can obtain any more precise data for the
determination of the question in hand. We simply
notice, what we may have occasion again to refer to, the
statement in Judg. iii. 8-10, as to the existence at that
time of the kingdom of Aram-Naharaim under Cushan-
rishathaim. This name has not yet been satisfactorily
explained. The component Cushan, however (cf. Hab.
iii. 7), certainly favours the idea that the monarch here
spoken of was, like Nimrod, of Cushite descent, and that
a Cushite race was then predominant in Northern Meso
potamia. II. Let us now proceed to inquire what light is thrown
upon this question by the cuneiform monuments. Here
it is to be remarked, on the one hand, that the negative
evidence against the primeval date assigned to Nimrod
and the building' of Nineveh is as strong as such evidence
can be. Not till long after the period when historical
light begins to break from contemporary records upon
the Mesopotamian lands is there any trace of the exist
ence of the city Nineveh. The country of Assyria first
appears as a territory under the dominion of the Chaldean
kings who ruled at Babel, at which time its capital is

94 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
not Nineveh, but Asshur,1 identical, according to Rawlin
son, with Kileh Shergat. These Chaldean kings occupy
the very cities, Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh, mentioned
in Scripture as the first conquest of Nimrod (a fact which
certainly countenances the idea that their age was previous
to that of Nimrod), and their power is shown by the
monuments to have gradually extended northwards, till
they planted a subordinate kingdom at Asshur. Thus
again we are led to ask, Where have the city and empire
of Nimrod gone ? On the other hand, the supposition
that the conquests of Nimrod follow the reign of the
early monumental kings of Babylon and the South,
makes the course of events and the narrative of
Scripture altogether intelligible and probable. The
Cushite invader falls first upon the Chaldean capitals,
Babylon, Warka, Kinzi Akkad, and Niffer (to accept
Rawhnson's identifications) ; and having established his
power in the South, he follows the track of Chaldean
conquest northwards, gains possession of Asshur the
capital (or territory) of the younger branch of the
dynasty he had already subdued, and rears for him
self a new metropolis some distance higher up the
Tigris, and in a much more advantageous position. If we
adopt the view thus commended to our acceptance, we
obtain the materials from cuneiform discovery of an ap
proximation to the age of Nimrod. Among the Chaldean
kings just referred to is Ismidagon, whose reign is certainly
determined to about B.C. I860.2 But this king is far
from being the last of his dynasty, and the legends of a
number of others who came after him have been recovered.
Sir H. Rawhnson, who has had the largest opportunities
of studying the relevant materials, brings down the latest
1 See Rawlinson's Herodotus, vol. i., pp. 437, 456.
2 See Rawlinson's Herodotus, i., p. 433.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 95
monarch to about B.C. 1550.1 Somewhere about this
date may be presumed to fall the invasion of Nimrod, —
a conclusion, we may remark in passing, entirely coin
cident with the more indefinite results already derived
from the statements of Scripture.
It may be objected that if the activity of Nimrod is
to be brought down to this comparatively recent period,
we ought to find traces of his reign and dynasty in the
monuments of Babylonia and Assyria, whereas none has
ever been pointed out. In reply we remark, on the one
hand, that even if none such could be pointed out, it
would not be decisive against the view which we advocate.
None of the great remains of Babylonia or Assyria, except
perhaps that of Khorsabad, the work of Sargon, has been
thoroughly explored; and in Assyria, at least, the works
of Nimrod would require to be sought for at the founda
tion of the oldest mounds. Moreover, it was common on
a change of dynasty to destroy the monuments of that
which had been displaced, and this procedure is expressly
ascribed2 to Ninus, the representative, we conceive, of
the Assyrian dynasty which succeeded that of Nimrod.
But, on the other hand, we believe that monumental
traces exist which may with sufficient evidence be referred
to the domination of the Cushite race in Mesopotamia.
Thus (1.) Rawlinson mentions that bricks have been
found at Kileh-Shergat, Which record the names and titles
of four tributary satraps. The legends are of the Baby
lonian rather than the Assyrian type, and the titles belong
to the most humble class of dignities.3 These legends
seem to intimate that the old capital of Assyria was at
1 See Rawlinson's Herodotus, i. , p. 440.
8 By Moses of Chorene, i. 13. See the passage in Layard's Nineveh and
its Remains, vol. ii., p. 232.
3 See Rawlinson's Herodotus, i. , p. 448, 7.

96 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
that time degraded, and thus point to the predominance
of Nineveh ; and they cannot be so conveniently assigned
to any period as to that of Cushite ascendancy. (2.) We
venture to assign to this period also the remarkable ivory
fragments found by Mr. Layard at Nimrud, of which it
has proved a difficulty hitherto to furnish any satisfying
explanation.1 Only a brief indication of the leading
points of the argument can here be given. These ivories
are confessedly of Egyptian or quasi-Egyptian style and
workmanship ; there are certain peculiarities in the
execution and mode of treatment that would seem to
mark the work of a foreign, perhaps an Assyrian artist.2
They were found buried under an immense heap of rubbish
in the oldest of the Nimrud edifices,3 which there is
reason to believe had fallen to decay and been covered
up long before the time of Sargon and his successors,
when the more recent connection between Egypt and
Assyria was formed. The most perfect analogues of the
royal name on the only complete cartouche, read by Birch
Ubn-ra, are found in the Egyptian dynastic lists preceding
the eighteenth.4 These and other considerations point us
to an early period of Assyrian history for the origin of
the relics in question ; and we might almost venture to
argue that, since from their style and their hieroglyphics
they cannot have emanated from the native Assyrian race,
and since they cannot well be deemed to have been
importations from Egypt, they must be of Cushite pro
duction. But we have further and more cogent evidence.
1 These ivories are figured in Layard's Monuments of Nineveh, first series,
plates 88-91. See also his Nineveh and its Remains, ii., pp. 207-211. '
2 Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii., p. 10.
3 Layard, I.e. p. 9.
4 See Birch, in Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii., p. 210 ; cf. Bunsen,
Egypt's Place, ii., p. 494.

Nimrod and his Dynasty . 97
Their Egyptian aspect and character certainly evince a
connection with Egypt, and a connection with Egypt
also can be proved in behalf of Nimrod and his family.
According to the Scripture genealogy (Gen. x. 6), Cush
and Mizraim are brothers. Their settlements also were
contiguous, for while the latter occupied the valley of the
Nile, by the former the regions adjoining Egypt on the
east, and doubtless the Arabian peninsula in general, were
originally possessed.1 The two nations exercised also an
important mutual influence. It seems to be now generally
agreed that the Hyksos were of Arabian origin. We hear
also, from independent sources, of an invasion of Egypt
by the Amalekites, probably a Cushite people from the
same quarter.2 It is apparently to the fourteenth or
Xoite dynasty, i.e., a dynasty having its principal seat in
a district of Lower Egypt, and exposed to the attacks^ of
enemies from the East, that the name already referred to
as analogous to that in the Nimrud cartouche belongs.3
Still more decisive is the fact that among the names
belonging to the twenty-second or Bubastite dynasty,
whose, seat again borders immediately on Arabia, occurs
that of Namurot, in which all have agreed to recognise
the Egyptian form of Nimrod. It is allowed that this,
with the other names of that dynasty, are non-Egyptian,
and betray a foreign origin, and the attempts that have
been made4 to prove them Shemitic cannot be regarded as
successful. The known facts are met and harmonised by
supposing them Cushites from Arabia.5 Still further, the
1 This, we presume, is now generaUy acknowledged. See proofs collected
by Bochart, Phaleg, lib. iv. cap. ii. ; Enobel, Die Volkertafel, sec. 27, 6 ;
sec. 28, 5-11.
2 See Chwolson, Die Ssabier, i., p. 322.
3 Cf. Bunsen, Egypt's Place, ii., p. 483.
4 As by Lepsius, On the Twenty-second Dynasty, by BeU, p. 23.
5 There is evidence in an inscription of Seti i. that at that time (nine-
G

98 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
Egyptian monuments furnish evidence of the close rela
tions subsisting between the two countries. With Arabia
the Egyptians have important commercial relations, re
ceiving thence gold, ivory, ebony, colours and pictures,
with other articles. It is specially worthy of remark
that some of the Egyptian deities seem to have been
derived from the same quarter, among others Hor and
Hathor,1 and of these very deities representations occur
upon the ivory fragments now in question.2 These con
siderations, to which not a few others might be added,
seem to us sufficient to prove that a people allied by
descent and similar in culture to the Egyptians occupied
the country adjoining Egypt on the east, among whom
such names as Nimrod, Ubn-ra, and probably others
occurring later in the Assyrian royal lists were indi
genous, and thus make it probable that from that region
Nimrod and his Cushites proceeded in their invasion of
Babylonia, and that of their art and domination in Assyria
we have traces in the Nimrud ivories. (3.) Another
coincident trace we find in a different part of Mesopotamia.
Among the widely-extended researches of Layard, those
at Arban on the Khabur produced results which have
not been sufficiently attended to. He discovered there a
pair of winged human-headed bulls which are thus de
scribed : ' They resembled in general form the well-known
winged bulls of Nineveh, but in the style of art they
differed considerably from them. The outline and treat
ment were bold and angular, with an archaic feeling
teenth dynasty) the north-eastern portion of Egypt was in possession of an
Arabian race. Cf. F. Corbaux, Journal of Sacred Literature, Jan. 1852,
p. 371. Bubastis is mentioned as one of the cities which they occupied.
Brugsch, however, questions the reference of the original word. — Geog.
In., ii., p. 50.
1 See Brugsch, Geog. In., ii., pp. 15, 16.
2 See Layard's Nineveh and its Remains, i., pp. 392, 394.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 99
conveying the impression of great antiquity. . . . The
human features were unfortunately much injured, but
such parts as remained were sufficient to show that the
countenance had a pecuhar character, differing from the
Assyrian type. The sockets of the eyes were deeply
sunk, probably to receive the white and the ball of the
eye in ivory or glass. The nose was flat and large, and
the lips thick and overhanging, like those of a negro!1
These are the well-known features of the Cushite race,
and we see no reason why we should hesitate to ascribe
this monument to the period of their predominance in
Mesopotamia. Our confidence that it is the rehc of an
age antecedent to the rise of the proper Assyrian dynasty
is confirmed by the fact that a number of Egyptian
scarabsei of the eighteenth dynasty were also discovered
in the Arban mound.2 The discovery of such remains in
central Mesopotamia is, further, in excellent harmony
with the supposition that the scriptural Cushan-rishathaim
represents the Cushite dominion there established. These
seem to us not obscure traces of the reign of Nimrod
and his race, and they serve to support the results already
obtained in regard to the chronology of his conquests.
III. The monuments of Egypt will furnish us with
additional and still clearer information. It is well known
that the Egyptian kings of the eighteenth and nineteenth
dynasties, in their Asiatic expeditions, came into contact
with a powerful and widely-extended people called the
Retennu or Rutennu. It has already, on sufficient grounds,
been concluded by Egyptologers,8 that this people repre
sents the occupants of the Assyrian territory. In our
1 See Layard's Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 275, 276 ; cf. p. 283.
2 See Layard's Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 280 f.
3 See Brugsch, Geog. In., ii., pp. 37 f. ; Wilkinson, in Rawlinson's Hero
dotus, ii., p. 358.

i oo Nimrod and his Dynasty.
opinion, however, the data will justify a more definite
conclusion, viz. that the Rutennu are identical with the
Cushite invaders who, under Nimrod, obtained the pre
dominance in Western Asia. The following are among
the grounds of this identification : (1.) Their colour.
They are depicted of a red hue, a colour which appears
on the Egyptian monuments to distinguish the more
northerly Hamites, and which characterised, besides the
Rutennu, the Egyptians themselves, the Hittites, and the
Arabians. Shemitic races, on the other hand, appear of a
reddish yellow. It is specially worthy of remark that
slaves or servants of the latter colour are sometimes
represented accompanying the Rutennu,1 proving these
to have been the conquerors of a Shemitic people. (2.)
The nature and extent of their dominion. During the
eighteenth dynasty the hegemony of Western Asia is in
their hands, and they are found from the borders of
Canaan to the land of Shinar. At the same time they
are divided into several mutually independent kingdoms,2
among which are included Naharina and Assur, and
among their capital cities are named Kadesh, Nineveh,
and Babel. This is unlike the Assyrian empire, which
constituted one pohtical body, while at the same time
there is no evidence that the Chaldeans already spoken
of as ruling at Babylon ever planted themselves so widely
over Western Asia. (3.) The mention of Nineveh' as one
of their capitals? This also suits best the reign of Nimrod
and the Cushites. As already noticed, there is no trace
of the existence of Nineveh under the Chaldeans ; and
1 See Brugsch, Geog. In., ii., p. 89 ; Histoire d'Egypte, i., p. 122.
2 See Brugsch, G,eog. In., ii., p. 35. On one occasion seven kings of the
Rutennu are mentioned as taken prisoners, I.e., p. 37. Compare the
Scriptural statements as to the kingdom of Aram-naharaim.
8 See Brugsch, Geog. In., ii., p. 36 ; Histoire d'Egypte, i., p. 111.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. i o i
under the Assyrians Asshur the old capital was re-
occupied, and continued to be their chief city till
the reign of Sardanapalus (about B.C. 9 3 0), which is
much too late on any construction of the Egyptian
chronology. (4.) The fact that they precede the Cheta,
or Hittites, in the occupation of the territory upon the
Euphrates. This has been pointed out by Brugsch,
'Wahrend in den Zeiten Tauudmes in. die Retennu
das wichtigste Volk Vorderasiens sind, geben sie meni
als 100 Jahre spater ihre Rolle an die Chethiter ab.'1
This also proves them to have preceded the Assyrians ;
for when the latter first crossed the Euphrates, the
Khatti (undoubtedly identical with the Cheta, or Hittites)
were already the most powerful nation on its banks.2
These various indications in regard to the Rutennu
concur in showing that they held possession of Western
Asia in the period intervening between that of the Chal
deans and that of the Assyrians, and confirm the supposi
tion that they represent the dominion of Nimrod and the
Cushites. If the Egyptian chronology for that period were cer
tainly determined, it is evident that we could now fix
with great precision the age of Nimrod. The earliest
mention of the Rutennu occurs under the reign of Tuth
mosis I., they are the principal opponents in Asia of the
great conqueror Tuthmosis ill., and they seem to preserve
their importance during the reign of the later kings of
the eighteenth dynasty. They appear again under Sethos
I. and Ramesses II. of the nineteenth dynasty, but then
the Cheta had replaced them in much of the territory
1 Geog. In., ii., p. 37 ; cf. p. 39.
2 See inscription of Tiglath Pileser I., sec. xxv. p. 46. I do not believe
that Talbot's rendering of a certain name in this inscription by Egypt
can be sustained.

1 02 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
which they once occupied.1 Some unimportant later
notices need not be mentioned. The period from Tuth
mosis I. to Ramesses il, according to- Lepsius, corresponds
with B.C. .1646-1323; according to Bunsen, with B.C.
1595-1325.2 I have httle confidence, however, in the
correctness of the results obtained by these inquirers for
this period, and the difference between them shows the
insecurity of their method of procedure. The monuments -
with astronomical indications, which have been elucidated
and founded on by Biot and De Roug^, appear to furnish
more reliable data.3 According to these, the reign of
Tuthmosis in. falls about B.C. 1450, and that of Ramesses
ill. about B.C. 1300. These data make the commence
ment of the above period, i.e., the beginning of the reign
of Tuthmosis 1., not higher than B.C. 1520.4 This is1 a
result which appears to us entirely suitable and con
sistent with previous conclusions ; and it concurs with
what has been already advanced in assigning the activity
of Nimrod to about the middle of the sixteenth cen
tury B.C.
IV. We pass from the monuments Assyrian and
Egyptian, to inquire what further information may be
obtainable from secular authors on the present question.
Here we will altogether omit the numerous historical and
mythological statements scattered through Greek writers,
1 See Brugsch, Geog. In., ii., p. 39 ; Histoire d'Egypte, i., pp. 90 ff.
2 Lepsius, Konigsbuch, Syn. Taf ein, p. 6 ; Bunsen, Egypt's Place, iii.,
pp. xxi. f.
3 See Biot, Recherches sur quelques dates absolues ; De Rouge, Mimoire
sur quelques phAnomenes celestes, Rev. Arch., ix., pp. 653 ff. ; id., Sur une
Stele Egyptienne, pp. 213 f. ; cf. Lepsius, Konigsbuch, pp. 153 f. ; Bunsen,
Egypt's Place, iii., pp. xvi. f.
4 Adopting Bunsen's arrangement of the intervening reigns, Lepsius
makes the period between Tuthmosis 1. and Tuthmosis in. twelve years
longer.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 103
in regard to the existence of a Cushite or Ethiopian
dominion in Western Asia in the period preceding the
rise of the Assyrian empire,1 both to avoid lengthening
this discussion, and because these statements bear rather
upon the reahty of such a kingdom than upon the date
of it. There is one historian, however, in whose work
we ought to find a reference to the dynasty of Nimrod, if
it really falls to the comparatively recent period to which
preceding indications assign it. This historian is Berosus,
the Chaldee priest, who wrote the history of his nation
in Greek, and of whose work some important fragments
are extant. And our anticipations are not disappointed.
The fifth post-diluvian dynasty which ruled at Babylon
consisted, according to Berosus, of nine Arabian kings,
and endured for 245 years, coinciding, according to the
most reliable reconstruction of his chronological scheme,2
with B.C. 1518-1273. This we identify without hesita
tion with the reign of Nimrod and his Cushite successors,
for the following reasons : (1.) The name Arabian, applied
to the kings of this dynasty, is entirely suitable. The
Cushite race, as we have seen above, were the original
occupants of Arabia. The clear traces of a connection
1 See Movers, Phonizier, ii., pp. 276-297, where these statements are
diligently coUected, especially pp. 290, 291. There are also some notices
of Nimrod and his line in Arabian lists of the kings of Babylon. See
Chwolson, Die Ssabier, ii.,'pp. 621, 790 ; Ueberreste, p. 67.
2 That of Gutschmid, according to its latest recension, in his Beitrage
zur Geschichte des alten' Orients, p. 18. He refers to Muys, Qucestiones
Clironologicce Clesiance, p. 16. His views are followed by Brandis, Rawlin
son, and others. Bunsen prefers the reading of Syncellus, 215 instead of
245, for the duration of the Arabian dynasty, and makes its period B.C.
1488-1273. Oppert, on the other hand, reaches the conclusion that its
period is B.C. 1559-1314. We have some doubt, however, if the restora
tion we have followed is entirely correct. An emendation seems to us
possible which would have the effect of raising the period in the text a few
years higher.

1 04 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
between the family of Nimrod and Egypt with the country
adjoining it on the east also harmonise with this desig
nation. We know that the worship of the sun prevailed
in Arabia,1 and with this we compare, besides other indi
cations, the royal name Ra-ubn, the shining sun, upon
the Nimrud ivory. And is it fancy to find in the high
average duration (2 74; years) of the reign of these Arabian
kings, a coincidence with the long life for which the
Ethiopians were renowned among the ancients ?2 (2.)
The place which this dynasty holds in the historical
scheme of Berosus is also entirely suitable. It foUows
a Chaldean dynasty consisting of forty-nine kings who
reign for 458 years (B.C. 1976-1518). This is unques
tionably identical with that Chaldean race of kings
already spoken of, to whom the monumental Ismi-dagon
(b.c. 1860) belongs, and whose power we have already
found reason to suppose was overthrown by Nimrod. It
is followed by a dynasty of forty-five kings, enduring
for 526 years, who are unquestionably either identical
or synchronous with the native Assyrian line,3 which, as
we have also seen above, succeeded the Rutennu ot
Cushites in Northern Mesopotamia. These reasons, we
conceive, are sufficient, in connection with what has been
already advanced, to show that the fifth or Arabian
dynasty of Berosus is identical with the reign of Nimrod
and his line at Babylon ;4 and thus again we have the
1 See Wilkinson, in Rawlinson's Herodotus, ii., p. 364 ; Talbot, Jour, of
Sac. Lit., October 1856, p. 209 ; Osiander, Zeitschrift der morg. Ges., vii.,
p. 648, x., p. 64.
' See e.g., Herodotus, iii. 114.
3 The two are usuaUy held to be identical. Chwolson calls this in ques
tion ( Ueberreste, p. 76). The dispute does not affect our present argument,
as the contemporaneousness of the forty-five Babylonian kings with the
upper Assyrian dynasty admits of easy proof.
4 Some of the rationalist school, I believe, have identified Nimrod with

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 105
weighty authority of this writer, the trustworthiness of
whose historical statements gains support from every
fresh discovery, for assigning the age of the Cushite con
queror to the very period' already reached from other
independent sources.
V. The preceding reasonings appear to us sufficient
for rational conviction in regard to the error which has
been commonly made in the chronology of the subject
before us, and the true approximative date which ought
to be assigned. Within the last few months, however,
a fresh source of information upon the early history of
Babylon and the East has been opened, and from this has
come unexpected and surprising confirmation to the views
which have been above expressed, and which had been
attained by the writer more than a year before he became
aware of the confirmation. This fresh source is found in
the remains of old Babylonian writings which are extant
in Arabic translations. These, though not wholly unknown
before, have recently been made the object of special
investigation by Professor Chwolson, of St. Petersburg,
and his full appreciation of the value of their contents
is entitled to take rank with the most important of
those discoveries in the domain of ancient history by
which the past half century has been distinguished.. We
still await the complete publication of his materials and
researches ; and of the small portion of his results that
have been made known, only such as bear upon our
present subject ean be here referred to. If his conclu
sions, in some respects, appear too novel for belief, the
Merodach Baladan. Gumpach (Abriss d. bob. ass.. Geschichte, p. 54) be
lieves his power coincident with the 526-year dynasty of Berosus, which
Chwolson also ( Ueberreste, p. 74) is half inclined to do, though he suffi
ciently answers himself, and reaches at last the conclusion expressed above
(l.c. p. 77).

1 06 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
processes by which they have been reached ought to be
examined, and these we are persuaded will prove the
author to be neither credulous in spirit nor unscientific
in method.1
The most important of the writings referred to is one
which forms a large work, and which bears in Arabic the
title, Liber de Agriculturd Ndbathazorum. It was origin
ally composed by a native Babylonian, whose name is
written Qut'ami, and translated into Arabic by Ibn-
wa'hschijjah, a descendant of the Chaldeans, about the
ninth century A.D. As to the date of the original com
position, Chwolson determines by a careful induction of
the internal evidence, that it cannot be assigned to any
of the later and comparatively well-known periods of
Babylonian history. Thus he finds that there is in the
work no allusion to Christianity, to the reign of the
Arsacidee, of the Seleucidee, or of the Persians ; none to
the Jews as captives in the land, or to their rehgious
sentiments. While a number (twenty or more) of the
kings who had reigned at Babylon are mentioned, not
one of their names is identical with those of the known
Babylonian kings from Nabonassar downwards. Espe
cially is there no mention of the great king Nebuchad
nezzar, even when the author has occasion to refer to
works of canalisation and construction such as we know
that monarch executed. Nor can the composition be
assigned to any time during the ascendancy of the Assy-
1 The fullest account of Chwolson's researches is found in the memoir
above referred to, Ueber die Ueberreste d. altbabylonischen Literatur in
arab. Uebersetzungen, printed in the Memoires des Savants Grangers, t.
viii., and also separately (St. Petersburg, 1859). See also his work Die
Ssabier, in many places, and the Zeitschrift der morg. Ges., xi., pp. 553 f.
Quatremere had made some insufficient investigations in the same direc
tion. See his Mimoire sur les NabaUens, in Nouv. Jour. Asiatique, xv.,
1835.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. i o 7
rians over Babylon ; for though the Assyrians are men
tioned, it is in terms expressive of hostility and contempt,
altogether unlike the language to be expected of a subject
towards the dominant power in the state. Babylon is
represented as in a flourishing condition, the centre of
attraction and the source of intellectual and religious
influence to surrounding nations. At the same time it is
intimated that the country is under the sway of a foreign
line of kings. A Canaanite dynasty had possession of
the throne, and this dynasty had obtained the sovereignty
through means of an invasion and conquest of the country
by Canaanites not very long (five or six reigns) before the
author wrote. This fact is repeatedly intimated by the
writer, and the language he uses and feelings he expresses
are in entire accordance with such a state of things.
Now this foreign dynasty, as we proceed to show, is that
of Nimrod and the Cushite race ; and since at that time,
according to the author before us, Babylon had long been
the capital of a flourishing kingdom, a number of whose
native kings are mentioned in this book, it is evident
that, if this identity is proved, the doctrine above ex
pressed as to the comparatively recent date of Nimrod is
estabhshed, and that, we may say, by contemporary wit
ness. (1.) The most prominent and decisive proof on
the point in hand is furnished in the name of the founder
of this foreign dynasty, which is no other than Nemrod
or Nemr&da.1 Chwolson contemplates the possibility of
the name in the original work having been altered by the
translator into this familiar Bibhcal term, but is satisfied
from the form of the word that this supposition cannot be
reasonably entertained. It is true that the king bearing
this name is not expressly stated to have been the con
queror of Babylon, but this is to be certainly gathered from
1 Chwolson, Ueberreste, pp. 49, 51, 53 ff., 67, 72.

1 08 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
circumstances mentioned in regard to him. We do not
need to dwell upon the improbability of this being a
different person from the Nimrod of Scripture — a second
conqueror of Babylonia thus called. Three other Canaanite
kings, successors of Nemroda, are mentioned, two of whom
bear names which admit of being compared with others
already known. The first of these is Zahmuna, or Rah-
muna,1 the latter of which forms seems a possible equi
valent of the name Ubn-ra or Ra-ubn of the Nimrud
ivory; the other is Susqija,2 a form reminding us of
Shishak (Sesonk), the first king of the twenty-second
Egyptian dynasty, already noticed as. probably of Cushite
origin. (2.) We find confirmation in the name Canaanite
applied to this intrusive dynasty. Here an explanation
is required. Professor Chwolson informs us that the
translator habitually changes the geographical and ethni
cal names of the original work into those current in his
own day. Hence it is not certain that the word Canaanite
stood in the original, nor can we from this term draw
any conclusion against the properly Cushite descent of
those to whom it is applied. At the same, time, the geo
graphical position of the region from which these so-called
Canaanites had come is marked with sufficient precision
as at the extremity of Syria, and as including the river
Jordan ; and it must be regarded as identical with, or at
least as containing, the Biblical land of Canaan. In this,
however, it is evident that there is nothing inconsistent
with the indications already adduced in regard to the
original seats of Nimrod and his race. Rather we are
thus furnished, as it would seem, with some additional
information in regard to the spread of the people to whom
Nimrod belonged ; "and it is intimated to us that, instead
of being confined to the Arabian peninsula, they occupied
1 Chwolson, I.e. p. 53. 2 I.e. p. 63.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 109
also the regions on the north to an indefinite extent.
And on other grounds this is a probable view. We refer
especially to the scriptural notices in regard to the obscure
tribes of Rephaim, Zuzim, Anakim, Emim, Horites, and
others,1 who preceded the Israehtes and other Terahitic
races, probably the Canaanites also, in the possession of
the . Jordanic territory. We know of nothing which for
bids our believing that these tribes were of Cushite descent,
and there are several reasons which present themselves
but which cannot be here fuUy stated, that concur to
support this belief.2 It is of special interest to consider
the terms in which Moses refers to the warlike exploits
of the Anakim, and to the terror which these had inspired
(Deut. ix. 1, 2). Is it an unreasonable supposition that
among these exploits the invasion and conquest of Baby
lonia are to be reckoned ? In the work before us there is
little, so far as yet appears, that enables us to ascertain
with precision the ethnical character of these Canaanite
conquerors. These two things, however, deserve to be
noticed. While the Canaanites known to us from other
sources speak a Shemitic tongue, the names of those
here mentioned are for the most part, according to
1 Compare generally the interesting papers on the Rephaim, by Miss F.
Corbaux, published in the Journal of Sacred Literature (October 1851,
and succeeding numbers). She, too, finds traces in another line of research
of the Rephaim ' having once, and for perhaps a long interval of time,
exercised a powerful influence over the destinies of Assyria and Babylonia '
(I.e., April 1852, p. 69; cf. ibid., April 1853, p. 283, where the Arabian
dynasty of Berosus is referred to in this connection). She brings forward
much relating to the Egyptian affinities of the tribes in question, but her
materials need sifting.
' The inquiry as to the ethnical relations of these tribes must be entered
upon anew. Fresh light is dawning upon the subject, of which even
recent investigations, as those of Ewald (Geschichte, i., pp. 301 ff, 2d ed.)
and Kurtz (Hist, of Old Cov., i., pp. 152 ff, English ed.), display no per
ception.

no Nimrod and his Dynasty.
Chwolson, not susceptible of explanation from Hebrew
and Syriac roots.1 Again, it is expressly stated that they
possessed the art of embalming the dead, — a coincident
proof of a close connection with Egypt, and participation
in Egyptian culture and practices.2 (3.) There is finally
to be considered the impossibihty of finding any known
events corresponding to this Canaanitic conquest of Baby
lon, except those referred to in the Scriptural account of
Nimrod and in the notice in Berosus of the Arabian
dynasty. This Chwolson finds himself compelled to
admit, though unfortunately, as it seems to us, he takes
the designation Canaanite in that ordinary sense in
which it is eniployed in the Scripture narrative. Bunsen,
as reported by Chwolson in the work referred to, unhesi
tatingly maintains the view advocated above, bringing
this foreign occupation of Babylon into connection with
the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt.3
We have thus gone over, with the omission of many
less essential details, the information bearing on the
subject in hand, drawn from these, five independent
sources. The results have been found coincident and
mutually illustrative, and they concur in assigning Nimrod
and his dynasty, not to the grey antiquity to which they
have been usually relegated and in which they stand
surrounded with the uncertain haze of fable, but to the
period immediately preceding the rise of the Assyrians to.
supreme rule in Western Asia, or from about B.C. 1520 to.
1275. 1 Chwolson, I.e., pp. 53, n., 95.
2 Chwolson here notes that mention is made in an Arabic writer of the
discovery of embalmed bodies in South Chaldea. See I.e., p. 63, n.
3 I.e., pp. 75 f.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. in

APPENDIX.
I have thought it better that the foregoing paper, printed
originally in 1860, should reappear unchanged, though
in some points of detail I now see it capable of improve
ment. The general tone also now appears to me to be
over-confident, and a larger measure of hesitation and of
modesty would better suit my present sentiments on the
subject. Especially since reading the Essay of Gutschmid
on the book On the Agriculture of the Nabathmans,1 and
until the long-promised publication of the complete work
affords more adequate means of judgment, I desire to hold
myself in reserve on the question of its authenticity.
Meanwhile, during these fifteen years, nothing that I
am aware of has appeared sufficient to invalidate the
foregoing reasoning, but rather something that tends con
siderably towards its confirmation. In regard to Oriental
tradition, no argument can be drawn from this quarter
adverse to the date above proposed for Nimrod. While
this tradition often, perhaps most commonly, relegates
our hero to the second or third generation after the flood,
or to the period of the building of the tower and of the
dispersion of nations, at other times it brings him down
to the period of Abraham and even of Nebuchadnezzar.2
And some writers expressly indicate that they recognise
the discrepancy, and allege that there were two personages
of this name. In truth, the same phenomenon presents
itself here that we find in other cases. Just as we have
a twofold Zoroaster and a twofold Berosus, one pre-
1 In the Zeitsch. der morg. Ges. , xv.
2 See the traditions collected in d'Herbelot, s. v. Nemrod ; Beer, Leben
Abraham's, pp. 1 ff. ; cf. Griinbaum, Zeitsch. der morg. Ges., xxiii., pp.
62 ff.

1 1 2 Nimrod and his Dynasty.
historical, the other historical, or quasi-historical, so we
have a twofold Nimrod, one early, one comparatively late.1
The traditions in which the name Nimrod is involved are
evidently of no value in determining the question before
us. And those only seem of any importance that- speak
of a wide extension of the Cushite or Arabian race2
throughout Mesopotamia and Western Asia. On this
point the Arabian agrees with Greek tradition.3
In regard to the cuneiform inscriptions, while they are
silent hitherto as to the name of Nimrod, they now bear
quite distinct testimony to the ascendancy in Babylonia
of a Cushite dynasty about the time to which Nimrod
has been above assigned. The first Babylonian monarch
apparently in whose tablets the name Cushite occurs is
Karaindas, who is called ' king of Babylon, king of Sumir
and Akkad, king of Kassu; king of Karu-duniyas.' 4 But
there is evidence in a tablet, called ' The Synchronous
History of Assyria and Babylonia,' 5 of the predominance
of the Kassi in Babylon somewhat before the time of
Karaindas ; and it is manifest, from the way in which the
name appears in the above series of titles, that this king
cannot have been the head of the Kassite dynasty.
There is another somewhat earher king who appears to
have a better right to be regarded as the introducer _ of
the new line. This is the king whose name is variously

1 Macoudi, Les Prairies d'or, vol. iii., p. 240.
2 In the inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser (about B. c. 744) a king, Tutammu,
is found on the east of Assyria, whose name recalls the Teutamus of the
Greeks, who sent Memnon, prince of the Ethiopians, to Troy, — Smith,
Zeitsch. der cegypt. Sprache, 1869, p. 11 ; Lenormant, Lettres Ass., i.,
p. 23.
3 See Macoudi, op. cit., iii., p. 224.
4 Smith, in Trans. Bib. Archceology, i., p. 68 ; Records of the Past,
v., pp. 68, 82 ; cf. Lenormant, Etudes Accadiens, i., p. 80.
6 See Sayce. Trans. Bib. Archceology, ii., pp. 119 f.

Nimrod and his Dynasty. 113
rendered Hammurabi and Khammuragas,1 and of whom
there are extant somewhat abundant memorials. From
these it expressly appears that he was the head of a new
line of kings, that he displaced a previous dynasty by con
quest, and that he fixed his capital at Babylon, which
thenceforward continued the metropohs of the Euphrates
vaUey. There are as yet no means of determining accu
rately the date of this king, but various indications show
that it must fall in the sixteenth century B.C.,2 the very time
when, according to Berosus, the Arabian dynasty began.
The thought that this Hammurabi is the Biblical
Nimrod has already presented itself to the minds of some
leading Assyriologers, and has been favourably enter
tained.3 The chief difficulty lies in the diversity of the
names, of which as yet there is no satisfactory explana
tion. We might suppose that Nimrod was the personal,
and Hammurabi the royal', or official ; but it is better to
wait patiently till the monuments yield fresh testimony.
Meanwhile, even those who are not disposed to look
favourably on the identification of Nimrod and Ham
murabi seem agreed in identifying the Kassi of these
Chaldean tablets with the Arabian dynasty of Berosus.4
1 See, for this king, Menant, Inscriptions de Hammourabi, id., Babylone
et la Chaldee, pp. 107 ff. ; Oppert, Hist, des Empires, p. 34 ; Smith, Trans.
Bib. Archceology, i., pp. 55 f. ; Lenormant, Etudes Accadiens, ii., p. 355.
2 See Rawlinson, Five Mon., i., p. 213. Karaindas is known to have
reigned in the fifteenth century B.C., as he was the contemporary of an
Assyrian king whose date can be approximately determined ; and Ham
murabi preceded Karaindas by several reigns.
3 E.g., Mr. Smith, Trans. Bib. Archceology, i. p. 91 ; Dr. Haigh, Zeitsch.
d. cegypt. Spraclie, 1874, p. 19. Others, as Sayce and Grivel, endeavour
to find Nimrod in a form of the name of the god Merodach. Mr. Smith
more recently has avowed the opinion that Nimrod is Izdubar, the hero
of the Chaldean legend of the Deluge. At the same time, he aUows that
some of the arguments in the foregoing Essay, to which it is, I presume,
that he refers (dial. Genesis, p. 178), possess ' considerable force.'
4 See Sayce, Trans. Bib. Archceology, ii., p. 120.
H

1 14 The Geography of the Exodus.
IV.
THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE EXODUS.
Much interest was excited at the International Conference
of Orientalists held in London in September 18 74,. by a
lecture delivered to the Hamitic section by His Ex
cellency Brugsch-Bey, well known as one of the leading
Egyptologers, on the Exodus of the Israelites. The
subject of the lecture was ' The Geography of the Exodus,'
though the chronology also and other points came in for
subsidiary consideration ; and a view was proposed and
advocated which, if not new in some of its leading
features, was almost entirely so in the evidence by which
it was supported. In the two pamphlets named below,1
we have the author's doctrine on the interesting subject in
question submitted to pubhc consideration; and assuredly
the well-earned eminence of Brugsch-Bey in the sphere
of Egyptological research, all departments of which he
has traversed during thirty years with unwearied activity,
demands for his views the most respectful attention.
Especially is this due on a question relating to the geo
graphy of ancient Egypt; for it is in this department
that our author has achieved his most signal success, and
is acknowledged to stand unrivalled.
My object in this essay is simply the exposition of
1 ' La Sortie des He~breux d'Egypte, et les Monuments Egyptiens.' Con
ference par Henri Brugsch-Bey, publiee sous les auspices de S. A. C.
Prince Ibrahim-Pacha. Alexandrie, 1874 ; 'L'Exode et les Monuments .
Egyptiens.' Discours prononci a V occasion du Congres International
d'Orientalistes a Londres, par Henri Brugsch-Bey. Leipzig, 1875.

The Geography of the Exodus. 1 1 5
Brugsch's doctrine. It belongs to professed Egyptologers
to criticise the evidence which he adduces in its support,
and this no doubt will ere long be adequately done. It is
fair to keep in mind that in occasional lectures like these
presented in the above publications — the one dehvered in
Cairo, the other in London — with a few appended notes
and remarks, the subject cannot be so fully and con
vincingly set forth as the author may have it in his power
to do, and that we must wait for the appearance of other
more elaborate works in order to have a complete exhibi
tion of the evidence on the subject. At the same time,
the author has himself attained to full assurance, and
speaks of his new theory of the Exodus with unhesitating
confidence as resting on facts which can no more be
denied than that A is A and B is B. It is time, there
fore, that all interested in Bibhcal studies should under
stand what this theory is.
In order to appreciate the significance of this contribu
tion towards Israehtish history, it will be well to state
briefly the opinions on the subject in hand hitherto
entertained, classifying them according to the view held
in regard to the sea through which the Israelites passed
and in which the Egyptians perished. On this point I
am acquainted with three distinct opinions held previously
to Brugsch. 1. The common view is and has always been that the
sea crossed by the Israelites was the western arm of the
Red Sea near its northern extremity, the place of crossing
being somewhere not far from the modern town of Suez.
This was the view of Josephus (Ant. Jud. ii. 15, 1), who
names the Red Sea, and evidently means the sea ordinarily
so called; and his description of the place where the
Israelites were hemmed in by the Egyptians — ' between
inaccessible precipices and the sea, for there was a ridge

1 1 6 The Geography of the Exodus.
of mountains that terminated at the sea which were im
passable,'- — if it is not drawn from his own imagination, —
can be applied only to the point where the Jebel Atakah
abuts into the sea south of Suez. With infinite variety
of detail,1 this view has continued the most prevalent.
Some have sought the place of transit a httle to the
north or south of the Jebel Atakah, some a little to the
north or south of Suez. And as opinions have varied in
regard to the place of transit, so also in regard to the
place of starting and the intervening route. Very often
the starting-place has been sought on the plain a few
miles to the north-east of Cairo, somewhere about the
village of Matariyeh which marks the site of the ancient
On or Heliopolis ; and thence by many the host has been
led eastwards by the Wady Tumilat to the neighbourhood
of the Lake Temsah, near which Etham has been located.
The change of direction which here took place (Ex. xiv.
2) is nnderstood to be a change from eastward to south
ward, and a certain (rather feeble) foothold for the view
in question is found in the modern nomenclature of the
district west of Suez, by identifying Pi-hahiroth with
Ajrud, and Migdol with el-Muntalah or Muktalah. Quite
recently this general view has been adopted and advocated
by Ebers,2 with large command of Egyptological data,
and with certain new suggestions by way of removing
objection, and imparting to it increased probability.
2. The second view is that advocated by Unruh.3
This writer, like many others, believes that at the time
of the Exodus the Red Sea extended much to the north
of the present Gulf of Suez, and covered the present
Bitter Lakes and Lake Temsah, and that to this northern
1 See Ewald's note, Hist, of Israel, vol. ii., p. 73 (Eng. Tr.).
2 See his Durch Gosen zum Sinai, pp. 73 f.
3 In Der Zug der Israeliten aus JUgypten nach Canaan, 1860.

The Geography of the Exodus. 1 1 7
and comparatively shallow portion of the gulf the appella
tion Yam-Suph, rendered Red Sea in our version, properly
belongs. Further, he supposes that a little to the north
of Suez there existed a bay or estuary formed by a small
stream descending from the Jebel et-Tih and forming
an indentation of the eastern shore ; and that when the
Israelites in their march out of Egypt diverged south
ward, they kept on the east side of the sea till their
course was arrested by the waters of this bay. It was,
Unruh thinks, in making a way for them ^across this
obstacle that the signal divine interposition of Jehovah
on behalf of Israel took place, and the final triumph over
Egypt was secured. This writer, so far as I am aware,
stands alone in the opinion thus indicated.
3. The next doctrine on the subject is that represented
by Schleiden,1 who refers to two previous writers as also
its advocates.2 The peculiarity of Schleiden's view is
that he believes the sea through which the Israelites
crossed in their final escape to have been, not the Red
Sea or any part of it, but the Sea or Lake Serbonis
adjoining the Mediterranean, on the north-east of the
Isthmus. He thinks that the divergence at Etham from
the direct course took place, not in a southerly, but in a
north-easterly direction ; that the sea referred to in the
description of the final encampment — ' between Migdol
and the sea ' — is the Mediterranean ; and that Pi-hahiroth
there mentioned is a descriptive name (= Greek, fiapadpa)
of the ' Serbonian bog,' before which they encamped and
through which they were pursued.
1 See his Die Landenge von Sues, zur Beurtheilung des Canalprojects,
und des Auszugs der Israeliten aus Mgypten, 1858.
2 These are G. H. Richter in Geographische Untersuchung ob das
Meer durch welches die Israeliten bei ihren Auszug aus JSgypten gegangen
sind, der ardbische Meerbusen gewesen sei, 1778 ; and Thierbach, Ueber
der Zug der Israeliten durchs Meer. 1830.

1 1 8 The Geography of the Exodus.
Now it is the last of these suppositions — that of
Schleiden — which has found a new expositor and de
fender in Brugsch-Bey. The author claims for the
documents (chiefly papyri) from which he derives his
proofs, that they are contemporaneous or nearly so with
the residence of the Israelites in Egypt, a claim which
necessitates his entering upon the vexed question of the date
of the Exodus. In reference to this, he calls attention to
the fact that in Ex. i. 11 the Israelites are represented
as having built for Pharaoh two cities named 'Pithom and
Raamses,' a fact in which he finds for the sacred narrative
the desired point of attachment with Egyptian history.
He shows that both cities are well known from native
records, the one called Fi-tom, ' the city of (the god) Tom,'
the other Pi-Eamses, ' the city of Ramses.' Further, he
assures us that ' the papyri positively affirm that it is the
king Ramses n. who ordered a new city to be built, to
which, in honour of its royal founder, was given the
name of Ramses;' and of this new royal city he adduces
from the same sources a somewhat lengthy and pompous
description. Then, finally, by way of conclusive confirma
tion, he appeals to the remarkable fact that in the same class
of documents, the papyri of the age of Ramses IL, mention
is made once and again of the Epriu, Eburiu, or Aperiu1
(the word is transliterated variously), in which name
Brugsch, in common with most of the leading Egypt-
1 First announced by Chabas in his Melanges 4gyptologiques, tom. i., p.
49, tom. ii., pp. 143, 146. Cf. Brugsch, Geog. In., iii., p. 76. In rela
tion to this identification, it is a somewhat awkward circumstance that
mention is made of the Aperiu or supposed Hebrews in a stele of the age
of Ramses iv. , and therefore of a date later than the latest that can be
reasonably proposed for the Exodus. Chabas conjectures that ' all the
Israelites had not t>een able to respond to the appeal of Moses, and such
may well have been the case with those whom the Egyptians had sent
away to the southern part of their empire or to their establishments in the

The Geography of the Exodus. 119
ologers, recognises the Egyptian transcription of the
Shemitic ,")32>) or Hebrew, as a body of slaves employed
in the construction of public works, and in one record
expressly spoken of as 'dragging stones for the great
fortress of the city of Ramses.' In these facts we seem
to have not merely striking attestations to the truth of
the Scripture narrative, but also satisfying and adequate
materials for the establishment of an important historical
synchronism. At least, Brugsch is satisfied and so are
the majority of Egyptologers; and accordingly with them,
Ramses 11., of the nineteenth dynasty, is the Pharaoh of
the period of the oppression, and his son, Meneptah 1.,
the Pharaoh of the Exodus.1
Having thus found in extant Egyptian records express
testimony to the building by the Hebrews of the city
Ramses, we have next to ask if it be possible from the
same records to obtain any precise determination of its
locality. In regard to this, Brugsch and his fellow-
Egyptologers unanimously and strongly assure us there
is no room whatever for doubt. It is described, they tell
us, as a beautiful city, situated in a district distinguished
for fertility, lying near the sea, furnished with a harbour,
and visited by foreign princes. It is also said to have
stood on the frontiers of Egypt, towards Asia and the
desert ; ' cf. his Voyage d'un Egyptien, p. 212. I observe that only in his
Cairo lecture, the earlier of the two above named, does Brugsch mention the
Aperiu ; in the other and later they appear only in the attached map, and
that as dwelling in the Herobpolitan Nome, east of Memphis. See also
Eisenlohr, Trans. Bib. Archceology, i., p. 356.
1 Into the difficult inquiry regarding the date of the Exodus, I do not of
course enter. For further illustrations and confirmations of the view stated
above, references may be made to De Rouge, Examen critique de Vouvrage
de M. fe chevalier de Bunsen, 2e partie, p. 74 ; Chabas, Recherches pour
servir a Vhistoire de la XIXm' Dynastie, pp. 142-150. On the other
side, see B. H. Cooper, Hieroglyphical Date of the Exodus, pp. 30 f. ;
Cook, Essay on Egyptian History, in- Speaker's Commentary, vol. i.

120 The Geography of the Exodus. \
south of Palestine. These various indications show tha^H
Ramses must have been situated on a branch of the Nile,
near the north-east border of the country.1 This, however,
is not all. Excavations recently conducted by Mariette-
Bey at San in the Delta, the Tanis of the Greeks, the
Zoan of the Old Testament, have revealed inscriptions
which have enabled Brugsch to identify Ramses with
Zoan or a part of it.2 His conclusion in his own words
is as follows : ' The monuments interrogated in regard to
Ramses give us an answer very clear and very precise,
and it is that the city Ramses, the same which is men
tioned in the sacred Scriptures, formed in ancient times
a distinct quarter of the city of Tanis, containing a great
temple of the Theban Amon and a very massive fortress,.
built by the orders of Ramses n. to defend Egypt on its
eastern side from the invasion of any enemy that might
rise up.'3 Quite justly here does our author call atten
tion to the striking agreement in which this fact stands
with the statement of the Hebrew Psalmist (Ps. lxxviii.
12), 'Marvellous things did He in the sight of their
fathers, in the land of Egypt, in the field of Zoan ; ' and
yet more remarkable does the agreement become when
we learn that the peculiar expression, 'the field of Zoan,' is
simply the reproduction of a usual phrase in the Egyptian
texts indicating the Tanitic territory.4 Taking for granted
1 Cf. Chabas, Mil. Egypt., ii., pp. 135 f. ; Recherches, pp. 121, 139 (this
writer identifies Ramses with Pelusium) ; Renouf, Academy, Nov. 1874,
p. 524. Some of the principal passages aje quoted by Malan, Outline of
the Jewish Church, pp. 221 f.
2 This was first announced in the Zeitschrift fur cegyptische Sprache
und Alierthumskunde, 1872, p. 18. Renouf (I.e.) regards the identifica
tion as ' beyond a doubt.'
3 La Sortie, p. 18.
4 See Zeitschrift, p. 16. The Egyptian expression is Sekhet Tan, answer
ing perfectly to the Hebrew \SfTVW- Cf. Ebers, Durch Gosen, p. 498.

The Geography of the Exodus. 121
that Ramses is geographically identical with Zoan or
San, the importance of the fact in relation to the general
question before us, the geography of the Exodus, must be
at once manifest. Zoan is known from Egyptian sources
to have been a large city, the capital of the fourteenth
Nome, lying on both sides of the Tanitic branch of the
Nile, a branch which is now reduced to a canal, but
which in ancient times was large enough to float sea
going ships.1 ' This city of Tanis, or, as it was called
later, Ramses, was during the time of the Pharaohs of
high importance for the eastern part of the Delta. There
began the great highway which led from Egypt to
Palestine, and the armies of the Pharaohs were concen
trated there in order to direct their march towards the
East.' 2 Towards this point, we are to understand, the
scattered bodies of the captive Israelites were convened
in view of their deliverance, and from this the Exodus
began (Ex. xii. 3 7) ; and it is evident that the deter
mination of the starting-point must, to some extent, guide
us in determining the next stages of the journey.
In regard to the other ' treasure-city,' Pithom, which
the Israelites were employed to build, the information
furnished by the native records, if less abundant than in
the case of Ramses, is, according to our author, not less

1 There is a. plan of the ancient Zoan engraved on one of the walls
of the great temple of Karnak. See Brugsch, Geog. In., vol. i., pi.
xlviii. 'This curious design,' says Brugsch, 'dates from the epoch of
Seti 1., the father of Ramses n. It is not difficult, notwithstanding the
simplicity of the lines, to distinguish the two parts of the city, on the two
banks of the Nile, joined by means of a bridge. The river is indicated by
the presence of crocodiles and aquatic plants. The sea also indicated is
marked in a corner of the design by the figures of marine fishes.' The
Greeks (Strabo, p. 802, Stephan. Byz.-s.v. Tins) call the place p-iyix* Tins
and Tins ToXts /AiyiXrs.
2 La Sortie, p. 20.

122 The Geography of the Exodus.
certain or precise. Pithom, we learn, was the chief
town of the Nome which immediately adjoined the Tanitic
on the east, and which in the classic authorities bears
the name of the Sethroitic Nome, while in the monu
ments it is called by that of Thuku or Thukut.1 It may
be interesting to quote a passage in Brugsch's translation
from one of the papyri, written by a scribe who lived
during the reign of Meneptah I. (the Pharaoh of the
Exodus according to our author), which is important not
only as making mention of the city of Pithom, but also
for the vivid illustration thrown by it upon events in the
lives of Abraham and Jacob : — ' Another thing which
will satisfy the heart of my master. It is to let him
know that we have given free passage to the tribes of the
Bedouins (Shorn) of the country of Edom (Atuma), by
the fortress of the Pharaoh Meneptah, which is in the
district of Thukut, on the side of the lakes of the city
of Pithom of King Meneptah, which is situated also in
Thukut ; to nourish them and to nourish their cattle in the
domain of Pharaoh, the good sun of the world.' Pithom 2
thus lay to the east of Ramses ; and the fact that it, as
well as the other capital, was ' built,' i.e. added to and
fortified, by the Israehtes testifies that the Pharaoh of
the time was apprehensive of invasion from the east
(in accordance with Ex. i. 10), and was solicitous to
strengthen his eastern frontier.
Having thus discovered the two cities which the
captive Israelites were employed to build, and from one
1 So in La Sortie, p. 21. In the second and later pamphlet he writes the
name Suku and Sukot, see L'Exode, pp. 9, 12.
2 The real author of this identification is Chabas, by whom the above
passage is quoted and translated, see his Mil. Egypt., ii., p. 155. Brugsch,
in his Geog. In., i., pp. 260 f., had proposed another Egyptian name for
Pithom ; see also Lauth, in Zeitsch. der morg. Ges., xxi., pp. 656, 670.
The nircvpos of Herodotus, ii. 158, must be a different place.

The Geography of the Exodus. 12$
of which their journey began, the next inquiry relates to
the position of the stations on their route. The first of
these is Succoth (Ex. xii. 37). Can this place be
pointed out in the neighbourhood in which Ramses and
Pithom have been found ? According to Brugsch, we
have already found it in the name Thuku or Thukut,
which in the papyrus quoted above designates the district
of which Pithom was the capital ; and he is at pains to
show that the one word is the exact transcript of the
other.1 In connection with Succoth, our author proposes
incidentally another and more important identification.
It is well known that it has been hitherto a problem to
discover the Egyptian original of the Hebrew Goshen.2
Apparently the solution has at last been found. Imme
diately south of the Sethroitic Nome, or Succoth, lay the
district called by the Greeks the Arabic Nome, to the
chief town of which they gave the name Phacusa, or
Phacoessa, represented by the modern Faqus. Now in
the ancient lists this district bears the name of Qosem
or Gosem- which at once suggests the Goshen of Scrip
ture; and the name occurs occasionally with the addition,
1 of the East,' or ' of Arabia,' which exactly reproduces
the Feaefi 'Apa/3ia<; of the Septuagint (Gen. xlvi. 34).
The prefixing of the Egyptian article gives, the form
Phacusa.3 Before leaving the three names, Ramses, Succoth, and
1 Lauth, Moses der Ebraer, p. 11, and Ebers, Durch Gosen, p. 506, find
the original of the name Succoth in the Egyptian word for field, Sekhet,
already referred to.
2 Two of the latest attempts may be referred to. Malan (Jewish Church,
p. 205) proposes the Egyptian Kah-shen, 'the land of gardens,' softened
into Goshen. Haigh (Zeitschrift d.cegypt. Sprache, 1869, p. 47) reads a name
which he believes applicable to the town Heroonpolis, as Kasen, Goshen.
3 The Coptic name is K6s and PhakSs ; see Champollion, tgypte sous
les Pharaons, ii. 76.

124 The Geography of the Exodus.
Goshen, or the three Nomes which these names reprefgent,
the Tanitic, the Sethroitic, and the Arabian, something
remains to be said in regard to their population^ 0f no
little importance for the illustration of the Scripture
narrative. It would, Brugsch assures us, be^/an entire
mistake to suppose that the inhabitants of th^se districts
were naturally of Egyptian race. On the contrary, he
says, ' the monuments and the papyri furnish u^ -with the
most conclusive proofs that these ancient inhabitants,
though subjects of the Pharaohs and put uWler the
authority of Egyptian governors, had nothing inJ3ommon
with their masters. They were the Khalu, oi\ Kharu, to
make use of a monumental expression, a mix^d popula
tion but of Phoenician origin, who, from the mist remote
period of Egyptian history, had taken up jth.eir abolde
around, the Lake Menzaleh, occupying themselves with
commerce beyond sea, with fishing, and with their special
industries. Subjected to the laws of Egypt, this popula
tion enjoyed all the 'benefits of a strong wise and civilised
government. There were some among these Khalu wrao
were servants at the Court, and who were char<red with
functions of all kinds, especially in connectior with Jthe
relations of the Government with the inhabitants;- "^ Pales
tine, whose language they knew, and with whose Vx
and customs they were familiar. The papyiuj^&\nd
with examples which prove this fact in an inffisputjable
manner, citing as they do a multitude of the functionaries
in the service of the Pharaohs by names /©i a purely
Shemitic type. These are finally sustained and/ corroborated
by the very remarkable circumstance that, oL the ancient
map of Egypt, the most of the names which serve to
designate the different towns, villages, forts; canals and
lakes in the three districts of Pithom, Ramses, <Mid Goshen,
are not drawn from the Egyptian language, and are ex-

The Geography of the Exodus. 125
plicable only by the help of the Shemitic dialects.'1 Of
this, Succoth (Hebrew, tents) just mentioned is an example.
Migdol (Hebrew, tower), about to be mentioned, is another.
Pi-hahiroth, Baalzephon, Shur, and probably also Avaris,
are Shemitic rather than Egyptian.2 The existence of a
wide-spread Shemitic people in north-eastern Egypt is an
important fact in relation to the history of the Israelites.
It shows us how entirely at home the colony led by
Jacob and his sons would find themselves in Goshen
among a people of kindred race and speech, and of
similar habits. .Perhaps we may infer from the name
Succoth (doubtless the indigenous name), that this dis
trict was occupied by a pastoral people, and the adjoining
district Goshen, we know, was assigned to the Hebrews
1 La Sortie, p. 26 ; cf. L'Exode, pp. 12, 18.
2 Shemitic words are often used in the papyri when objects in this part
of the country are spoken of. E.g., in the passage quoted above, the word
lakes, in the phrase, 'the lakes of the city Pithom,' is in the original
berekawata, an obvious transcription of the Hebrew ni312- Chabas,
Mil. Egypt., ii., p. 158. See also his Recherches, p. 105 ; Lauth, Zeitsch.
der morg. Ges., xxi., 653 ; and an elaborate discussion of the question
regarding a foreign, or non-Egyptian, element in the Delta, in Ebers,
JEgypten und die Biicher Jfose's, i., pp. 130f. It is a singular fact that the
population of the eastern part of the Delta and on the shores of Lake
Menzaleh, are still in features, customs, and traditions, recognisably dis
tinct from the Coptic or Egyptian race. M. Mariette, who has recently
directed attention to this fact (Melanges d'Archeologie, i., pp. 91 f.), finds
that the names applied to this population in Arabic and Syriac writers are
clearly derived from terms employed by the old Egyptians. These names
are Bashmurites and Biamites, in both of which the first element is the
Egyptian article Pi, and for the rest, the Shemer is a common designation of a
foreign race adjoining Egypt, and the Amu, another even more common,
of a widely-spread and probably Shemitic people. In a very old document
(see Bunsen, Egypt, iv., 672), the north-eastern part of Egypt is expressly
called ' the land of the Amu. ' Brugsch strangely attempts to bring the
name into connection with the Ammonites of Scripture (Geog. In., ii.,
p. 90). Are they not rather the Avim of Deut. ii. 23 ? Ebers recognises
them in the Anamim of Gen. x. 13 (op. cit., p. 101).

126 The Geography of the Exodus.
on the express ground that they were shepherds (Gen.
xlvi. 34), and therefore could not be allowed to inter
mingle with the genuine Egyptians. Perhaps, too, we
can thus more easily understand their retaining their
native speech during all the centuries of their residence
in Egypt. They heard there a language which they
understood not (Ps. lxxxi. 5), and Joseph, at the Court,
spoke to his brethren through an interpreter ; but at the
same time, a language either identical with, or akin to,
their own prevailed among the mass of the people with
whom they daily mingled. And in the circumstances
now indicated, we can easily understand how a large
' mixed multitude,' not Israelites by birth but speaking
their tongue, joined them in their Exodus, and marched
with them towards Palestine (Ex. xii. 38 ; Num. xi. 4).
After leaving Succoth, we are told (Ex. xiii. 20) the
departing host encamped at Etham, 'in the edge of
the wilderness.' This name Brugsch recognises in the
Egyptian word for fortress (Khe'tam), which word he finds
applied to two places of the kind, on the borders of the
Succoth Nome, one on the north-east near Pelusium, the
other on the south, both intended for the purposes of
observation and of defence. It is the latter which he
identifies with Etham. In regard to its emplacement, he
assures us there can be no doubt. It was situated on
the Pelusiac, (the most easterly) branch of the Nile, at a
point where a bridge joined the two banks, near a city
called T abend, the Daphnae of Herodotus (ii. 30, 107),
the Tahpanhes of Scripture (Jer. xliii. 8 ; Ezek. xxx. 1 8),
the modern Tell-Defenneh ; and a little to the west of
the place now called Cruisr-el-aanthareh, the dike of the
bridge, a name in which the tradition of the ancient
bridge is embalmed. There is even a picture of this
Etham on a monument of Seti i. at Karnak, showing the

The Geography of the Exodus. 1 2 7
river and the bridge, with a fort consisting of two portions,
one on each bank.1 Beyond this point the desert be°-an,
so that it was really on the edge of the wilderness. By
this fort passed the principal of the two roads leading
from the northern capital, Zoan, towards Philistia (c£
Ex. xiii. 1 7) ; the other, which was, however, unfit for the
passage of armies, pursuing a more northerly course,
through the city Pithom and through the marshes, towards
Pelusium. One author illustrates the course of the
Israelites as far as the point which we have now reached
by an extract from an ancient Egyptian letter written on
papyrus, now preserved in the British Museum, relating
to the pursuit of two runaway servants, who had sought
freedom in the same direction and by the same road.
' Thus,' says the writer, ' I set out from the hall of the
royal palace on the ninth day of the third month of
spring, towards evening, after the two servants. Now I
arrived at the enclosure of Succoth the tenth day of the
same month. They told me that they (the fugitives) had
resolved to pass by the way of the south. The twelfth
day I arrived at the Khetam. There they informed me
that the grooms who came from the country (of the . . .)
had said that the fugitives had passed through the country
of the Wall, on the north of the Migdol, of the king
Seti Meneptah.' This is assuredly a very striking and
instructive illustration of the Exodus. It shows us that
the departing host pursued, as we should have expected,
the known and commodious high-road, leading eastwards
from Zoan to Syria ; and the stations succeed each other
in the same order, and apparently at the same intervals
of time, as in the sacred narrative. Moreover, what is of
great importance in relation to the present subject, it
seems to fix indisputably the position of Etham, and that
1 See this design reproduced in Schleiden, Die Landenge, plate vi.

128 The Geography of the Exodus.
at a point considerably more northerly than it has been
usual to assign to it. Now if we come thus far with M.
Brugsch, it seems somewhat difficult to refuse to accom
pany him all the way by which he would lead us. For
at Etham, Moses received the command, ' 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 ' (Ex. xiv.
2 ; cf. Num. xxxiii. 7) ; and at this point, so far to the
north, we cannot but feel the force of M. Renouf 's words,
' that the sea here mentioned should be the Arabian Gulf,
as has hitherto been supposed, really appears incredible,'
while, at the same time, just at this point serious diffi
culties begin to emerge. Our author sees no difficulty.
Of the command to turn at Etham, he finds the explana
tion in the fact that the road they were pursuing began
there to bend northwards. The sea beside which they
were ordered to encamp, in his opinion, can be no other
than the sea near which they were, viz. the Mediterranean.
Migdol, the next station on the route (see Num. xxxiii. 7),
he finds in the Migdol, or tower, mentioned in the missive
just quoted, a place, he assures us, Well known in Egyptian
documents, in which it is written Makthal, known also to
the Greeks by the name Magdolum, the Tell-es-Semout
of the present day.1 This, he tells us, is the only place
1 This is the Migdol also of Ezek. xxix. 6 ; xxx. 10. It seems to have
been a position in the line of defence which an old Egyptian king (caUed
Sesoosis in" Diodorus, i. 57) had constructed on the north-eastern frontier
of the country (see Schleiden, Die Landenge, pp. 137, 154 ; Ebers, Durch
Gosen, p. 507). According to Brugsch, it is the northern extremity of
this line which bears the name of the "Wall in the passage above quoted
aud in other texts, and of the Egyptian term he believes the Gerrhon, or
Gerrha, of the Greeks, and the Shur of the Hebrews, to be translations
(L'Exode, p. 14). By Ebers, Etham and Migdol are located at points
somewhat to the east of the Birket Ballah. Cf. Chabas, Voyage d'un
Egyptien, p. 286.

The Geography of the Exodtis. 129
of the name which he has found in the geographical texts.
In regard to the remaining localities, his identifications
are, in appearance, equally convincing. Pi-hahiroth he
renders, the mouth or entrance of the quicksands (Khiroth),
and locates at the western extremity of the famous Lake
Serbonis, at the commencement of the tongue of land
which separates this lake from the Mediterranean, and
' which afforded, in ancient times, the only road from
Egypt to Palestine.' ' The name Baal-zephon, which,
according to the discovery of the eminent Egyptologist,
Mr. Goodwin, is found in one of the papyri of the British
Museum with its Egyptian form Baali-zapuna, denotes a
divinity ' — the lord of the north — and this divinity had
a temple or sanctuary built on the Mount Kasios of the
Greeks, the modern Kas-el-Kasrun, ' the most advanced
northern point of the Egyptian frontier,' on that coast.1
And again, the Yam-Suph, rendered Red Sea in our.
English Bible, but which means literally the Sea of Sedge
or Water Plants, is really the Serbonis Lake, or at least
its eastern half, the whole watery tract being distinguished
by the luxuriant growth of marsh-plants, and Suph being
actually found as the name of a town at the east end of
this tract. Where, then, according to our author, took
place the dividing of the waters, the passing of the
Israelites through the midst of the sea, and the drowning
of the host of Egypt ? ' After the Hebrews, marching
on foot, had crossed the flats which stretch between the
Mediterranean Sea and the lake anciently called Serbonis,
a high tide surprised the Egyptian cavalry, and the
1 L'Exode, p. 31. The name Kasios is derived, according to Brugsch,
from ' the Semitico-Egyptian name of the region where this temple was
built. ' This is Hazi, or Hazion, ' the land of the asylum. ' For a different
view of this name, see De Vogue, Inscriptions Semitiques, p. 104, and com
pare Schleiden, Die Landenge, pp. 96, 193.
I

130 The Geography of the Exodus.
captains of the war-chariots who pursued the Hebrews.'
This is all. ' The miracle, it is true,' he adds, * ceases
then to be a miracle ; but, let us acknowledge it with all
sincerity, divine providence maintains always its place
and its authority.' 1 Similar catastrophes are known to
have taken place, more than once, in the same locality,
and to these Brugsch finally appeals,2 by way of illustra
tion and confirmation of his views. The Israehtish host
having thus escaped the danger of being overtaken by a
high tide in passing along the spit of sand on the north
of Lake Serbonis, are supposed by Brugsch to have turned
from their direct course towards Palestine, at Mount
Kasios or Baal-zephon ; and to have marched in a south
westerly direction through the desert of Shur till they
reached the shore of the Bitter Lakes. To this journey
he applies the words, Ex. xv. 2 2 ; and at the Bitter Lakes
he finds the station Marah. The next stopping-place,
Elim, he discovers at the well-known Ayun Musa (Moses'
wells), a locahty which, he assures us, is mentioned in
Egyptian records by a name which may be read Aa-lim.
Having reached Elim, our author terminates his com
mentary on ' The Geography of the Exodus,' and thus our
task of exposition also is accomplished. Notwithstanding
the length to which this account of his views has extended,
I may perhaps be allowed to make one or two concluding
reflections. Brugsch-Bey refers in the notice prefixed to
the later of the above-named pamphlets, to 'the very
hostile and rather unchristian attacks' which he has already
suffered at the hands of ' several orthodox savants.' It
is to be regretted that he should have any occasion1 to
make such a complaint ; at the same time, the thing is
1 La Sortie, p. 36.
' As Schleiden (Die Landenge, p. 194) had before done. See Diodorus,
xvi. 46 ; Strabo, i. 3, 13.

The Geography of the Exodus. 131
easily explicable, and should excite in his mind no sur
prise. The satisfaction with which he himself regards
his theory, as not only true, but perfectly in harmony
with the statements of Scripture, is perhaps a thing to be
admired and envied, but certainly cannot at once be
shared in by the generality of the ' orthodox.' It would
be wrong to question M. Brugsch's sincerity when he
professes orthodoxy, and declares that ' he has not to
change a single iota of the texts of Scripture ' 1 bearing
upon his subject ; but it cannot be wrong, with all the
deference which his great learning and profound researches
demand, to ask explanation in regard to certain points
calculated to excite questions in ' orthodox ' minds. We
all desire to rejoice with him in the joy with which he
regards the discoveries he has made ; but in order to this,
it is imperative that he should enlighten us as to the
means of resolving such doubts as the following. (1.) Is
the meaning of the word turn (2V£>) in Ex. xiv. 2 and
Num. xxxiii. 7, used in reference to the change in the
course of the departing host at Etham, adequately met
when it is applied to the natural trending at that place
of the path which they were pursuing to another not
remote point of the compass ? (2.) Does the passing in
safety over a tract of sand, which was liable occasionally
to be flooded by the tide, but which was safe enough to
bear the ordinary high road between Egypt and Syria,
meet the representations of the Scripture narrative regard
ing the obstruction in the way of the escaping' Israehtes,
and the manner in which that obstruction was removed 2
1 L'Exode, p. 4.
2 Schleiden's representation of the event, probably the most plausible
possible, oh the supposition common to him and Brugsch, may be quoted :
' As Pharaoh with his host drew near, the Israelites marched forwards along
the Syrian road, over the strip of sand between Sirbonis and the Mediter
ranean, which an east wind, blowing the whole night, had uncovered to an

132 The Geography of the Exodus.
(Ex. xiv. 16, 21, 22)? (3.) Granting that the name
Yam-Suph (^D-LV) is etymologically applicable to the
Lake Serbonis, and even that Egyptian documents favour
this application, is it not unambiguously employed in
such passages as Num. xxxiii. 10, 11, 1 Kings ix. 26,
to denote the Red Sea, ordinarily so called, or in other
words the Arabian Gulf ? 1 (4.) Is a journey of three
days, the time occupied in Ex. xv. 22, sufficient, judging
from M. Brugsch's own map, to enable the host to traverse
the distance from Mount Kasios to the Bitter Lakes ?
Other difficulties there are, which, did space allow, might
be alleged ; — these are obtrusive, and imperatively demand
explanation. I have no hesitation in expressing my belief that the
researches embodied, in a preliminary and imperfect way,
in these two pamphlets, will prove epoch-making in the
discussion of the subject in question, and that they con
tain not a little of the nature of genuine and welcome
discovery. At the same time, it is to me not less evident
that all is not yet discovered.
unusual breadth. The east wind is here so extremely uncommon that the
Israelites almost necessarily found in this a special interposition of Pro
vidence in their favour. But it is quite usual that when a regular wind is
interrupted for a short time by one from a quite different point, the pre
vailing wind returns with proportionately greater violence, and thus the
pursuing host was overtaken by a fate which not even by prudence and
local knowledge could be foreseen. '
1 It is in another way than Brugsch that Schleiden deals with the data
bearing on this point. He understands by Tam-SHpk the Red Sea, and
believes himself able to show that in the oldest, or so-caUed Elohistic
account of the Exodus, only the sea, i.e. the Mediterranean, was named,
and that the other name is an insertion of the so-called Jehovist, and
occurs only in later post-exilian documents. See Die Landenge, pp.
180 f., 196 f. TJnrah, as above mentioned, applies the name Yam-shph
to that northern extension of the Red Sea, as far as the Birket Ballah
inclusive, which he believes to have existed at the time of the Exodus. See
Der Zug der Israeliten, pp. 6 f.

The History of fob. 133

V.

THE HISTORY OF JOB, AND ITS PLACE IN
THE SCHEME OF REVELATION.
Hard questions in regard to the date, the authorship,
and the contents of the Book of Job have been debated,
into most of which I do not enter. I understand it,
meanwhile, to be what it professes to be, the authentic
record of a special divine revelation, — a revelation intended
for a particular purpose, vouchsafed in patriarchal times
to a particular tribe or family, belonging apparently to the
house of Esau, and dwelling in the land of Uz, on the
east or south-east of Canaan.
My object is to estimate the fitness of this special
revelation to occupy the place assigned to it in the
general scheme of revelation, judging from the character
and teachings of the book itself.
It may be asked, — Does not the controversial character
of the book impair or destroy its authority as a revelation
. of truth ? Who can tell which, among the various views
and sentiments expressed by the different speakers, is to
be regarded as expressive of the mind of the Most High ?
How shall it be determined which passage is to be quoted
with confidence as inspired of God, which to be set aside
as the product of wisdom merely human ? Now, it is
evident that, in the book itself, the words both of Job
and of his friends are alike represented as marked by
human imperfection and error. The former is asked by
Jehovah, ' Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words

134 The History of Job, and its
without knowledge?' to the latter it is said, 'Ye have
not spoken of me the thing that is right.'1 These state
ments, therefore, are to be judged by the general terms
of the word of God, and are to be accepted only when
found in harmony therewith. It is not the particular
sentiments or words of the human speakers, but the great
lessons resulting from that revelation of God of which
the book is the record, that are to be regarded as
divine. If it is asked again, Why should divine truth be exhi
bited in this dramatic form, and in connection with the
struggles and prejudices, the half lights and passionate
emotions of feeble and imperfect men ? it may well be
answered, Why should it not ? Is it not becoming in
the Most High to put ' treasure into earthen vessels ' ?
And, moreover, is not the hard ordeal of experience the
best, the only efficacious, mode of acquiring moral and
spiritual convictions ? No abstract statement of truth,
however clear and correct, no well-rounded system of
doctrine, can teach lessons equal in impressiveness and
value to those gained in ' a great fight of afflictions,' and
burned into our spirits by some fiery trial. It was
by a lengthened national experience, by the history of
Israel, that God taught the chosen people and the world
through them, the truths which form the indispensable
groundwork of the Christian economy ; and so, through
the history of Job, and his experience under the ordeal
of severe afflictions, does God impart to men universally
certain lessons which He sees to be essential to human
progress. Questions about the inspiration of this or that
particular verse or chapter are here irrelevant, just as would
be questions relating to this or that particular utterance of
Moses, or Samuel, or David, as recorded in the historical
1 Chap, xxxviii. 2, xiii. 7.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 135
books. The book is the inspired record of an interposi
tion by God in a particular scene of human hfe. It
shows us men in their human weakness, darkness, sinful
ness, doubting, groping, struggling, rashly accusing, and
rashly repelling accusation, involved in blind amazement
and alarm, or in equally blind self-confidence and pride ;
and it shows us God arranging, regulating, overruling the
whole action, so as to make it, as here recorded, a source
of permanent instruction to the whole world.
The scene is laid in two worlds, — the invisible and the
visible ; the powers of the spiritual, as well as those of
the material, universe, take part in the action ; and in
each of these scenes a different question is brought upon
the arena.1 It will probably conduce to clearness of
exposition to take up, first, the second of these aspects
of this divine drama.
I. The mundane question is that regarding human
suffering, and the relation in which this stands to God
and to His righteousness. This has often been repre
sented by expositors as if it embraced the whole action
of the book ; and yet is it the less important of the two
with which the book is occupied, and is introduced as
incidental and subsidiary to the other. In this depart
ment of the history we have set before us the patriarch
Job, a man in the highest position and of the highest
character among the men of the East, — a man of unques
tioned and, to all Ivuman appearance, unquestionable
integrity, and not only morally blameless, but also scru
pulously and devotedly religious, — a man whose great
affluence and abounding prosperity only served to make
his goodness more conspicuous, and to render him, in his
day, and to a wide circle, the type and exemplar of God-
1 Cf. Prof. A. B. Davidson, Job, p. xxvii. ; Whitelaw in British and
Foreign Evan. Review, October 1872, p. 742.

1 36 The History of fob, and its
fearing men. Then we have this man, by a rapid
succession of unexpected calamities, suddenly reduced to
utter indigence, — not only his cattle and his property
swept from him, but his children also, the treasures of his
household, crushed to death by a sudden and cruel stroke.
And then, while his heart is yet wrung within him by
this strange series of disasters, his own person is stricken
by a frightful and most painful malady, so that his pre
sence becomes loathsome to his friends and to himself,
and in his anguish he shuns society, and goes forth to sit
' among the ashes.' In these sad circumstances he is
visited by three other patriarchs, who, from different and
apparently somewhat distant quarters, come to see and
to condole with him. They sit long silent by him, dis
concerted and confounded at the sight of his wretchedness,
and overwhelmed by the new thoughts in regard to their
friend which it excites within them, till, at last, the wild
outburst of his anguish and despair gives occasion to the
cohoquy which the book recites. Though only Job himself
and the friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, are mentioned
as speakers, there is no reason to suppose that they were
alone while engaged in this lengthened debate. Another
younger man, Elihu, is introduced towards the close as
taking part in the conversation ; and it is a reasonable
supposition that there was a number of spectators and
auditors. Doubtless, the afflictions of Job were borne
abroad throughout the East on the wings of universal
rumour, and formed the theme of general discussion, and
the meeting between him and the three friends, who had
come so far to visit him in his wretchedness, was a great
and solemn occasion, attracting together an interested
company. If we set ourselves to realise the situation, and take
into account the sentiments then generally prevalent

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 137
regarding the providence of the Most High, we shall find
that the conversation could not well take any other turn
than that which it actually took. The speakers were aU
alike pious, earnest, candid men, and the occasion was not
one for words of empty courtesy, of commonplace con
dolences, and insincere flattery. The sudden calamity by
which Job had been visited was of a kind to stir all
hearts, and to lead to the deepest questionings in regard
to the principles and methods of the divine government.
The circumstances were such as seemed to place at stake
the honour of the Most High ; and it is plain that, to
the hearts of Job's three visitants, the honour of the
Most High was dear. Doubtless, also, they were stunned
and grieved by the vehemence of Job's opening words,
and the violence with which he seemed to arraign the
procedure of the Eternal. And hence the laudable object
which throughout they kept in view was to vindicate the
righteousness of God in regard to the calamities which
had in so marked a manner befallen their friend,
to persuade him to such conduct as seemed in the cir
cumstances to be dutiful, and "especially to lead him to
repentance, and confession, and supphcation, and humble
acquiescence in the divine appointments. It should be
borne in mind that, whatever light may be shed regard
ing the special reason of Job's afflictions upon the minds
of the readers of this book, no such hght was available
for Job himself or for his friends. They were all alike in
utter ignorance as to the secret spring in the unseen
world whence they had originated ; and this very lack of
explanation, this apparent unreason in those sudden cala
mities, by which this distinguished servant of God, this
typical good man, had been overwhelmed, was just that
which gave occasion to the questions here debated, — Is
God capricious in His inflictions 1 Are His judgments sent

138 The History of fob, and its
indiscriminately and at random ? or, more awful still, Is
God unjust ? Can it be that there is unrighteousness on
the throne of the world ? If such suppositions cannot
be entertained, what is the true theory ? On what prin
ciples is suffering distributed, and how is it to be explained
that such a man as Job has been subjected to afflictions
so marked and so severe ? Around this great and solemn
question the utterances of Job and of his friends revolve ;
and as the case of Job is only a sample of what is per
petually recurring, — as the afflictions of the apparently
righteous are many in all ages, — it is evident that the
subject is one of enduring and universal significance.
The view which the mind that believes in God is prone
to cherish, and with which it consents only with reluc
tance to part, is this, that manifest righteousness must
mark God's distribution of good and evil upon the earth ;
that the prosperity and adversity of men are determined
by recognisable retributive justice ; and hence, that the
treatment of men at the hands of divine providence is an
infallible index of their true character. Accustomed to
see justice done between 'man and man by human govern
ments, we naturally expect to see justice reigning also in
the government of God. If, sometimes, earthly judges
and rulers pervert judgment or fail to exercise a perfect
righteousness, we expect that no such failure and perver
sion will be found in the rule of the Most' High. The
common sentiment which measures character by condition,
which believes that great calamities necessarily and uni
versally follow great crimes,- — the sentiment which was
marked in the question put to Christ of the blind man,
' Lord, who did sin, this man or his parents, that he was
born blind?' and which led to the general conviction
that those men on whom the tower of Siloam feU were
sinners above all sinners, — this sentiment is a homage

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 139
rendered by the natural conscience to the righteous
ness of the Eternal. That principle within us which
demands that we should act • uprightly to others, and
teaches us to feel that if we do wrong we deserve to
suffer, teaches us also to expect that we shall find the
world the theatre of a government manifestly just, and
hence to interpret all suffering as the result and penalty
of wrongdoing. This, the natural anticipation of the
heart, is the sentiment which, in the book before us, is
held and maintained by Job's three friends, and which
was held also by himself till his own experience led him
to doubt. And like all errors that have wide prevalence,
it is not mere error ; on the contrary, it represents a large
amount of important truth. It cannot be gainsaid that
suffering, wherever inflicted on rational creatures, is the
result of sin and an indication of the presence of guilt ;
that the total sum of the happiness or the misery experi
enced by an individual is in strict proportion to the moral
character and deserts of him by whom it is experienced ;
and that, ultimately, and in its final issues, the govern
ment of God will be found characterised by a perfect
righteousness, so as to meet and "satisfy the demands of
every conscience. Surely we do quite right to anticipate
the manifestation of justice in the administration of God ;
surely the foundation of the divine, as of all govern
ment, is righteousness ; and righteousness must some time
be displayed and vindicated if the confidence of subjects
is to be retained. It must be evident to all who believe
in God, that if righteousness appears veiled, eclipsed, for
gotten, or set aside, in the divine procedure, it must be
for some special purpose, and for some transient occasion.
Hence it is easy to understand that, in great part, the
speeches of Eliphaz and the others are, abstractly taken,
full of truth, marked by statements sound, edifying, and

140 The History of Job, and its
important, and in their general outline presenting only
what is in harmony with the whole tenor of Scripture,
and finding parallels throughout the Psalms and the
Prophets in their constant promises of reward to the good,
and their constant denunciations of woe to the wicked.
This anticipation of visible justice in the providence of
God continues still to be widely prevalent, and may be
fairly called the vulgar" sentiment 5 but doubtless at the
period to which the history of Job ostensibly belongs, it
was still more general and still more profound. There
were special reasons in the early ages of the world for its
having universal prevalence. Not only was it then, as
now, enforced by the natural dictates of the human con
science, — it was enforced also by signal and memorable
events in the world's early history. There is a reference,
as is allowed by almost all expositors, in one of the
speeches of Eliphaz, to the destruction of the ancient
world by the flood, and perhaps, elsewhere, to the over
throw by fire of the cities of the plain.1 It is obvious from
such references that these terrible visitations of divine
judgment had, as was to be expected, most deeply im
pressed the minds of men, — a fact confirmed by the
circumstance that the traditions of the deluge have spread
over the world, with the spread of the families of mankind.
In connection with this, it is interesting to learn, from the
researches of the scholars who are deciphering for us the
remains of the ancient hterature of the Euphrates valley,
that this catastrophe was in the memory of the men of
the East distinctly connected with the world's sinfulness,
and expressly represented as the work of divine justice.2
By such ineffaceable remains and traditions, the natural
1 Chap. xxii. 15, 16, xviii. 15.
2 See the Deluge Legend, Smith's Ass. Discoveries, pp. 185, 189, 'All
to corruption are turned,' etc.; id., Chal. Genesis, pp. 264, 269.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 141
intuitions and expectations of the human mind were
strengthened, and doubtless Eliphaz and the other wise
men of Teman, and of surrounding tribes, felt that they
had the warrant of God's own providence in its most
striking incidents for regarding outward calamity as the
mark of pecuhar guilt. It is for us an easy thing to
point out the faUacy of this procedure. After the long
experience of the intervening ages and with the teach
ings of the Word of God, it is easy to show that to apply
the natural demands of the human conscience to the
interpretation of divine providence towards men upon the
earth is hasty and unwarrantable. We are able now to
understand that this goes upon rash assumptions, such as
these, — that this present world and the hfe of the indi
vidual man on earth furnish an adequate arena for the dis
play and vindication of the divine righteousness, — that
there is no hereafter — no judgment to come, and that time
is ' the be-all and the end-all ' of the government of God ;
— that the mind of man is competent to determine what
is due, in the way of retributive award, to the various
characters of the individuals and communities of the race,
and is able to judge in regard to the varying degrees of
merit and demerit belonging to different kinds of character
and conduct : — that, in fine, there can never arise special
circumstances and occasions in a system of administration
so vast and complex as that of God, producing what to
short-sighted creatures appears as a suspension or derange
ment of justice, and that the wisdom of the Omniscient
may not discover ways and means of maintaining and
asserting righteousness which to us are infinitely above
all anticipation. But though to us all this may be
obvious, it can be no reproach to the contemporaries of
the patriarch Job, that they held fast to the conviction
that the justice of God is made manifest in His providence,

142 The History of Job, and its
and hence were shut up to the conclusion that the only
explanation of signal suffering was the supposition of
signal guilt.
We are now prepared to glance at the debate which
arose, as, in the circumstances, it could not b.ut arise,
between Job and his friends. In this debate there were
two cardinal questions : — Is God just or not in His deal
ings with men ? and, Is Job a sinner above 'all sinners,
or is he not ? In regard to the former, the patriarch's
heart went with his friends ; in regard to the latter, his
own conscience and his fealty to truth impelled him to
obstinate and vehement resistance. The loud outburst of
complaint which, after his long and brooding silence,
broke from the lips of Job when he cursed the day of
his birth conveyed, if literally taken, a reflection on the
righteousness and goodness of the Most High. Stirred
up to speak by this complaint, Eliphaz and his com
panions, in the first cycle of their addresses, give pro
minence to the truths thus assailed, and earnestly and
eloquently assert the doctrine, — God is a just God ; He
prospers the good, and He punishes the wicked. But
the patriarch inevitably finds in this a covert attack upon
his own character, and the conclusion from the doctrine,
which at first his friends abstain from propounding, is
forced upon his view : — Since I am a sufferer above others,
I must be a sinner above others. Thus in his answers, with
his complainings against God, he mingles complainings
against his friends ; and to their argumentation he opposes
the facts of his own and of general experience. I am
innocent, he says, though I thus suffer, — nay more, ' He
destroys the righteous with the wicked.' So plainly
opposed to universal fact is the sentiment of his friends,
that he expresses doubt as to their sincerity in professing
it : ' Will ye speak wickedly for God ? and talk deceit-

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 143
Mly for Him ? Will ye accept His person ? Will ye
contend for God?'1 These appeals to the anomalies of
God's providential government, as 'it seems to me, do not
indicate that Job held any other theory on the subject
than his friends. They are simply urged in self-defence ;
they are merely brought forward as facts parallel to the
fact of Ms own calamity, and, like it, utterly inexplicable.
Doubtless, both by himself and his friends, he was felt to
be doing a daring, almost a blasphemous thing', correspond
ing to the cursing of his existence, in thus bringing into
prominence the apparently dark blots in the Almighty's
administration. In the second cycle of their discourses, the friends put
their sentiment in a somewhat different, and, as it pro
bably seemed, a more incontrovertible form. If the
righteous are not always prosperous and rewarded, at
least the wicked are always punished. Suffering is the
appropriate lot of evil men. Again the inference is felt
to be inevitable. Since Job is pre-eminent in suffering,
he must be pre-eminent in wickedness. And again also
the appeal of the sufferer is to the unquestionable facts
of human experience : ' Prove that wherewith ye reproach
me.' At the same time, his language shows that he feels
himself to occupy a daring and awful position, and even
in citing incontrovertible facts his spirit quails as if he
were arraigning . God. ' When I remember I am con
founded, and trembling taketh hold on my flesh. Where
fore do the wicked live, grow old, yea, become mighty in
power % ' 2
In the third and only other cycle of their discourses, the
two friends who speak are shut up to that to which their
previous argumentation had pointed, namely, the direct
accusation of Job as one guilty of some secret and heinous
1 Chap. xiii. 7, 8. 2 Chap. xxi. 6.

144 The History of fob, and its
sin. They cannot explain the facts to which the patriarch
has appealed, and they cannot renounce their principle;
and the only thing left them is to reiterate the assertion
that in this particular case some hidden crime must be
the explanation of Job's suffering. The patriarch in
reply, as he had before exhibited the wicked prosperous,
now presents the righteous suffering calamity ; then, as
his spirit grows more calm and his words more measured,
as if to satisfy his friends that he is no heretic and no
blasphemer, but a true believer hke themselves in the
justice of the divine administration, he gives distinct and
clear expression, in language parallel to their own, to his
appreciation of the openly retributive character of divine
providence j1 then in splendid words declares his convic
tion that the secrets of God's administration are hidden
with Himself, and that for man true wisdom hes in
humble subjection to the Most High, — concluding by
earnestly and articulately protesting his innocence of such
iniquity as had been imputed to him.
We are not to suppose that, in repudiating the insinu
ations and charges of his friends, Job meant to disallow
the fact of his sinfulness or to claim absolute perfection.
The contrary is abundantly plain from his repeated state
ments. ' If I wash myself in snow water, and make
myself never so clean, yet shalt Thou plunge me in the
ditch, and mine own clothes shaU abhor me.' But con
fessing that he is not clean in God's sight, he at the same
time is prevented by fealty to truth and to his own
conscience from allowing that he is a hypocrite and
pre-eminent transgressor. At the same time it is evident
that, by insisting that he must be a sinner above all
sinners, his friends occasioned a natural reaction, called
1 Chap, xxvii. 11-23; cf. Schlottmann, Hiob, p. 371; Delitzsch, Job,
p. 322.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 145
into active exercise the natural self-righteousness of his
spirit, and led to a more vehement assertion of his own
integrity than in a serener mood he could have justified.
So far as the debate had thus gone, no real progress had
been made in dealing with the question at issue. Both
parties held the ground from which they started, — on the
one side, God must be righteous in His providence, — on
the other, I know that I am not a hypocritical trans
gressor, — and between the certain doctrine and the equally
certain fact they could find no means of concihation.
Enough, indeed, had been said to lead dispassionate
onlookers and auditors to the conclusion that the ordinary
sentiment which supposes that the dispensations of God
towards man on earth are determined by regard to their
various degrees of merit and demerit is a line too short
to measure therewith the deahngs of providence, and can
furnish no adequate explanation of the varieties of human
happiness and misery ; that, whatever truth may underlie
this doctrine, it is not truth which is applicable to the
complex phenomena of human hfe, and that its rigid
application tends, not to settle and satisfy the minds of
suffering men, but rather to unhinge their judgment,
to vex their souls, to exasperate their hearts against God,
and to destroy their confidence in His righteousness. A
large amount of fresh light is thrown around the question
by the interposition and words of Ehhu, in regard to
whom there is so much that excites and so little that
satisfies our curiosity. His discourses are directed against
both parties, but especially against what was wrong and
defective in the rash, impatient, and somewhat self-
righteous utterances of Job, and were fitted to show him
wherein he had erred.
In regard to the doctrine of Elihu's discourses, it is not
necessary to go into detail. He clearly and impressively
K

1 46 The History of fob, and its
points out the errors into which Job had fallen, in main
taining that God altogether withdraws Himself from inter
course with men, whereas He is constantly in various
ways imparting to them revelations of His will ; in
setting up his own conscious integrity in opposition to
the righteousness of God, and in seeming to question the
justice of the divine administration, whereas the deep
sinfulness of men entirely justifies God in inflicting
upon them suffering ; and finally, in speaking as if the
afflictions here endured were absolutely inscrutable, and
even aimless and arbitrary, instead of being imposed by
paternal love to serve as chastisements with a view to
secure the ends of sanctification and salvation.1 It may
be safely affirmed that it is not possible for the human
mind to go farther than Elihu goes in accounting for the
sufferings of the righteous, and that his discourses are not
only in agreement with, but contain the germs of, all that
is elsewhere more fully unfolded to us on this subject
throughout the Word of God.
While Elihu is speaking, the clouds gather, a storm
darkens the heavens, and sweeps across the landscape, and
the thunder utters its voice. The speakers are all of them
awed and solemnised; they know that the Lord, maketh
the clouds His chariot, and flieth upon the wings of the
wind, and that ' the God of glory thundereth.' And out
of the whirlwind that, passes by, Jehovah speaks, and in
magnificent appeals and descriptions declares to Job His
infinite unimaginable greatness and majesty as Creator,
Upholder, Governor of all things. He brings no explana
tion of the problem in debate, but He shows Himself,
and by the revelation of Himself, Job is made to feel his
own insignificance, his own sinfulness, and the fearful pre-
1 See on these points, Schlottmann, Hiob, pp. 57, 410 f. ; and especially
Davidson, Job, i., pp. xxxviii. f.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 149
ancients of Teman and of Uz. There He publicly and
impressively forewarned the world that they were not to
expect to see on earth what they considered just treatment
of the world's inhabitants, or a fair distribution of the
world's goods, or to find outward condition corresponding
to moral desert.
This testimony has a special importance in relation to
that other divine manifestation which covers the whole
field of human history, and which reaches its highest
pinnacle of glory in the life and death of the Incarnate
Son of God. To that greatest of all the works of God,
all His other works are intended to do homage. And we
see in the afflictions of Job and the divine interpretation of
them what has a most momentous bearing upon the right
estimation of the afflictions of Jesus Christ. If the justice
of the divine government requires us to pronounce that all
who are pre-eminent in suffering pre-eminently deserve
suffering, then of course it follows that Jesus Christ was of
all sinners the chief, and that His death is no more than
the death of a criminal justly punished, whose guilt differed
from that of others only in being marked by greater enor
mity in God's sight. Surely it was fitting that ere the
divine Father brought in His only-begotten Son into the
world, in order that the Son might be subjected to unex
ampled suffering, He should be careful to give previous
warning and testimony that in the world's government,
suffering, if related to sin, does not necessarily imply
that the sufferer is personally abhorred by God, or is
regarded as peculiarly worthy of condemnation. Evi
dently, the innocent and calumniated sufferer of the land
of Uz pointed forward to and prepared the way for the
more innocent and more calumniated sufferer of Geth-
semane and Calvary. Hence it is not without reason
that Jesus and Job are placed in juxtaposition as sufferers

1 48 The History of fob, and its
of Job's afflictions and of the connected discussion and
theophany is fitted to serve. It is a solemn and magni
ficent protest on the part of the Most High against being
measured by the limited standards of human reason, or
having His deeds weighed in the slight balances of
man's prevalent sentiments and accepted doctrines. ' My
righteousness,' He here virtually says, ' is very high' ; my
purposes and ends are too wide and lofty to be scanned
and understood by your feeble minds ; ' my thoughts are
not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith
the Lord ; for as the heavens are higher than the earth, so
are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than
your thoughts.'- — Thus at the beginning of the world's
history, and specially in view of those signal interpositions
of judgment upon sin which had previously marked His
providence, does God make room for Himself and for the
special methods of His future procedure, preparing the
stage and securing free and unchallenged scope for the
display of all that in the eyes of just but finite and narrow
minds should appear anomalous, unaccountable, and even
questionable, in the distribution of good and evil among
the world's inhabitants.
The general scheme of the world's government, as now
made manifest, is one which does not admit of exact
visible retributive measures being carried out on earth ;
and thus necessarily gives occasion to reflections being
thrown upon the righteousness of God, and tempts men to
cry out, ' Where is the God of judgment ? ' We remem
ber the perplexity of Asaph, in the 73d Psalm, the com
plaint and expostulation of Jeremiah, in his 12 th chapter,
and many other corresponding utterances by others of
God's servants. All such reflections should be regarded
as having been, of set purpose, foreclosed by God in the
revelation vouchsafed so many centuries ago to these

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1 5 1
question as to the possibility on earth of imphcit faith in
and disinterested love to God.
In this department of the action of this great drama,
the actors are God and Satan, the Ruler of the world of
light, and the ruler of the world of darkness ; the one the
Author and Guardian of all righteousness and goodness,
the other the adversary and the accuser of all the good
in heaven and on earth. Job now appears occupying a
still loftier position than before. Like the apostles of
Jesus Christ, and doubtless like all God's faithful servants,
he is ' a spectacle to God and to angels,' as well as to his
fellow-men. Now we learn not only that his moral and
religious character is altogether praiseworthy in human
sight, but that he is the object also of the divine praise.
He is one whose heart the Most High has won for Him
self, in whom ' the Lord taketh pleasure,' of whom, indeed,
He makes, so to speak, His boast, as a distinguished
trophy of His grace. In token of the complacency of
Jehovah in this His tried and faithful servant and friend,
He calls the attention of the adversary to him, as His
living witness on the earth, challenging Satan to discover
any unsound element in his spiritual character. But the
adversary does not willingly allow that his resources are
baffled, that his power is on the wane, or that any
serious breach has been made in the defences of his
empire. He acts his accustomed part as the accuser,
alleging that if Job serves God it is not for nought, that
his apparent rehgion is false and impure, that his piety
rests n#t on love but on calculation and on selfishness.
It is a most serious and pregnant accusation, from which,
if it is established, two or three results of the most por
tentous import may with certainty be deduced. One is,
that true piety is a thing non-existent on the earth, and
that all apparent religion is pretence and imposture, that

1 50 The History of Job, and its
by the Apostle James : ' Ye have heard of the patience
of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord,' — and that the
Church in all ages has regarded the one as a type of the
other.1 It was the more needful and fitting that such a pre
paratory testimony should be raised against the rashness
of human judgment, when it was divinely purposed that
the appearance of Jesus Christ was to take place in con
nection with an economy in which the principle of
visible retribution was largely operative. The Jewish
system was, to a great extent, a system of outward and
material rewards and penalties, and hence was fitted by
itself to give currency to that common sentiment that
condition is proportioned to, and indicative of, moral
character. We know in fact that this sentiment was
very firmly rooted in the general Jewish mind, and that
certain grievous outward calamities were universally re
garded in that nation as a sign of lying under the curse of
God. In such circumstances, it would have been inevi
table that the facts of the Saviour's history should be uni
versally and fatally misinterpreted, had not suitable means
beenbeforehand provided to guard against the misinterpreta
tion, and to teach the people the truth that the best and most
favoured of God's servants have sometimes been visited
with apparently the most signal marks of His displeasure.
II. I turn now to the supra-mundane or invisible
action of this book, that which imparts to the history here
recorded its chief momentousness, and in which is involved
a question deeper and wider even than that just reviewed
regarding the mystery of human suffering. This is the
1 Cf. Delitzsch, Job, p. 24 : ' Der eigentliche Inhalt des B. Job ist das
Mysterium des Kreuzes, das Kreuz auf Golgotha ist die Rathsellbsung
alles Kreuzes, und B. Job ist eine Weissagung auf diese schliessliche
RathseUbsung. '

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1^3
Job's religion, would show not only that religion is non
existent, but that it is an impossibility, — not only that it
had no place in the world then, but that it never can
have place, that the heaping of benefits on creatures
naturally selfish can have no effect but to confirm their
selfishness, and thus that those who have once sinned are
doomed to be Satan's slaves for ever. Even this is not
all that is implied in the adversary's accusation of Job's
professed piety. Another still more dire consequence is
involved. If thus God by His best gifts be unable to
touch the hearts of creatures and draw forth their love, it
is proved that God is one that can never, at least by
fallen creatures, be truly loved.1 This challenge of the
enemy is virtually the asserting in regard to the Most
High that His very greatness dooms Him to be for ever
without a friend, and to dwell, with His creatures all
around Him, in eternal loneliness, flattered for His gifts,
dreaded for His power, but desolate in His dreary altitude,
yearning in vain for the joy of pure unbribed affection.
Such is the envenomed arrow which Satan shoots at
1 My views as to the meaning of the Book of Job were formed and deli -
vered years ago to my congregation in Aberdeenshire substantially as they
are written down in this Essay, and it was with no little satisfaction, and
also with something like surprise, that I read the foUowing in Goclet'sEtudes,
p. 232 : ' Cette insinuation malveillante parait au premier coup d'oail ne
tomber que sur Job ; mais en reality elle atteint Dieu meme. Car si le
plus pieux des. hommes est incapable d'aimer Dieu gratuitement, c'est-a-
dire, reellement, il en resulte que Dieu est impuissant a se faire aimer.
Or, comme la perfection d'un etre est d'aimer, sa gloire est d'etre aime.
L'etre qui ne reussit pas k exciter un mouvement de sincere amour, fut-il
le plus puissant des etres, n'en est pas moins le plus indigent et le plus
humilie. Le coup le plus sensible que l'on puisse par consequent porter
a l'honneur divin, c'est de pretendre que le plus pieux adorateur de Dieu
sur la terre ne le sert qu' avec cette arriere-pensee : Que m'en reviendra-
t-il ? S'il en est ainsi, Dieu n'est plus qu'un puissant flatte par des
laches ; il n'a pas d'amis, pas d'enfants ; il n'a que des mercenaires et des
esclaves. '

1 5 2 The History of Job, and its
genuine love to God is unknown, and that the reign of
sin and of Satan is yet undisturbed. If the best of God's
servants be at best a hypocrite, then Satan may fairly
claim the title of the god of the world. Another still
more portentous conclusion follows. If the grace of God
towards men in general, and towards Job in particular, has
availed to the production of merely a new form of selfishness,
then is not the way of God as a God of mercy foreclosed ?
If goodness be found ineffectual in subduing sin and
changing human hearts, if the result of g6odness in God
be only the appearance of goodness in man, and the
course of things be, — the more grace the more hypocrisy,
then what remains of resource for God, of help or hope
for men ? For what other instrument has God to use ?
and by what other appliances than those of love, can love
be called forth ? Shall Satan have this taunt to cast in
the face of the Almighty : — Thou hast withheld Thy grace
from me, and I continue Thine adversary ; but at least I
am an adversary open and declared ;• — surely better than
Thou hast made of these men, Thy favourites, to whom
Thou showest such partiality of kindness, whom Thou hast
bribed to be Thy servants, yet whom all Thy bribes have
failed to win from my side, and have only changed from
enmity open and honest to enmity secret and fawning ;
who have not ceased to be true servants of mine in be
coming pretended servants of Thine ? And from more
grace what fruit will spring but a more deep-rooted and
calculating selfishness ? What can be expected from the
bestowing of fresh and richer bribes, but that thdee who
flatter Thee to Thy face will say in their hearts, Let us
continue in sin that grace may abound ? No doubt1
religion will luxuriantly flourish when religion pays so
well. Treat me as Thou treatest Job, and I will serve
Thee too. — Satan, in challenging the disinterestedness of

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1 5 5
moral principle of the race of men in their new redeemed
state behoved also to be tested, and was actually put to
the proof in the trial now before us of the patriarch
Job. But it is evident that, in this latter case, the trial
could not be accomplished by means so simple, and to the
individual so easy, as in the former. To prove that love
is disinterested and real, all the boons that love confers
must be withdrawn, and frowns, harshness, and apparent
cruelty must take the place of smiles and benefactions.
Since the sincerity of Job's affection towards God, and
not his only but that of all good men in all time, is
publicly challenged and behoves to be publicly estab
lished and attested, it is indispensable that God should
withdraw from him for a season the light of His counte
nance, and that Job should be treated as if God had no
special interest in him, and had left him to suffer the
natural consequences of sin.
It is evident from what has been already said, that the
trial was one most important and most indispensable in
relation to the procedure and the glory of the Most High.
Some of our poets have said, 'An honest man's the
noblest work of God,' — an expression aiming at, though
falling far short of, a sublime truth. It is a redeemed
man, — a man redeemed from the dominion of selfishness,
and brought under the sway of love, a man loving God
with undivided heart and serving Him with entire
devotion, — it is such a man who forms unquestionably
God's noblest work. But no fiat can call such a man
into being, — this is a work beyond the reach even of
Almighty strength. It is a law impressed upon the
nature of intelligent creatures, that love is inspired only
by love. Like all the laws of the moral universe, this is
supreme over the acts of all moral beings, and of God
Himself. And thus He sets Himself by deeds of love to

154 The History of Job, and its
the ' thick bosses of Jehovah's buckler,'- — a dart which,
were it possible for it to reach its aim, would pierce the
very heart of Him who sits upon the throne, and, in
destroying the blessedness of God, would quench the
light and glory of the universe. The charge against Job
was really a charge against Him who had made Job what
he was, and had honoured him as His friend, — a charge
against the grace, the wisdom, the power, the love of
God. But the question may present itself, Wherefore
give heed to the false and vile insinuations of the Prince
of darkness ? Can it become the All-sufficient One
to be influenced in His procedure by the malicious
-inventions of the father of lies ? Might not the charge
of the accuser have been permitted to fall back into the
darkness and oblivion of the pit whence it sprung ? A
little consideration will show that it could not be thus
disposed of. Job was, in the world and before his con
temporaries, a representative person, the foremost among
God's servants, — a type of those redeemed from the
power of sin by divine grace in forgiving sin. More
over, among His worshippers, Jehovah has publicly
declared His satisfaction with Job's piety and His com
placency in his obedience. And in the same presence,
Satan has appeared with his suspicions and his accusa
tions. Now, although the truth is perfectly known to the
Omniscient, it is not so with His creatures. In their
presence His servant has been maligned and His own
glory defamed. For their sakes and for the establish
ment of their hearts, there must be vindication. And
there are no means by which this may be effected save
the1 demonstration of actual trial. Just as the moral
principle of the race of man in their original unfallen
condition behoved to be tested, and was actually put to
the proof by the trial of Adam in the garden, so the

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 155
moral principle of the race of men in their new redeemed
state behoved also to be tested, and was actually put to
the proof in the trial now before us of the patriarch
Job. But it is evident that, in this latter case, the trial
could not be accomplished by means so simple, and to the
individual so easy, as in the former. To prove that love
is disinterested and real, all the boons that love confers
must be withdrawn, and frowns, harshness, and apparent
cruelty must take the place of smiles and benefactions.
Since the sincerity of Job's affection towards God, and
not his only but that of all good men in all time, is
publicly challenged and behoves to be publicly estab
lished and attested, it is indispensable that God should
withdraw from him for a season the light of His counte
nance, and that Job should be treated as if God had no
special interest in him, and had left him to suffer the
natural consequences of sin.
It is evident from what has been already said, that the
trial was one most important and most indispensable in
relation to the procedure and the glory of the Most High.
Some of our poets have said, ' An honest man 's the
noblest work of God,' — an expression aiming at, though
falling far short of, a sublime truth. It is a redeemed
man, — a man redeemed from the dominion of selfishness,
and brought under the sway of love, a man loving God
with undivided heart and serving Him with entire
devotion, — it is such a man who forms unquestionably
God's noblest work. But no fiat can caU such a man
into being, — this is a work beyond the reach even of
Almighty strength. It is a law impressed upon the
nature of intelhgent creatures, that love is inspired only
by love. Like all the laws of the moral universe, this is
supreme over the acts of all moral beings, and of God
Himself. And thus He sets Himself by deeds of love to

1 56 The History of Job, and its
win back to Himself the hearts of revolted and selfish
men. It is a man's highest honour and richest satisfac
tion to gain the love of others ; and all who attain to this
spiritual pre-eminence do so in the way of first showing
the love they seek. We need not scruple to affirm that
if the Almighty had no power at His command but the
power of material creative might and over - mastering
force, he would be a Being weaker and poorer than the
feeblest child who loves his mother and is loved in
return. But such weakness belongs not to the Almighty.
He too loves, and He too wields the power which love
gives, and seeks and gains the honour and the satisfaction
which love imparts. It is in this high moral way that
He proceeds on the theatre of the world, now that man has
fallen and through his fall has come under the dominion
of selfishness and of Satan. This is distinctively the glory
and the joy which Jehovah is now engaged in seeking
under the present economy of providence, — to subdue
enmity by undeserved kindness, to melt hard hearts by
the coals of love, and so save and recover to Himself that
which is lost. This is the Sabbath work of God upon the
earth, that of which the Son of God spake when he said,
'My Father worketh hitherto, and I work,'1 — that which
the Son of God has done so much to promote and to glorify
in ' giving Himself for us to redeem us from all iniquity,
and to purify to Himself a peculiar people zealous of good
works.' In calhng in question the disinterestedness of Job's
religion, and thus claiming him as his own, Satan really
cast contempt upon that redeeming work in prosecuting
1 John v. 17. The reference in this verse, as it seems to me, is plainly
not to the upholding and sustaining work of God in His ordinary provi
dence, but to His redeeming work through the bestowment of benefits upon
sinners and rebels, for 'it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath day.'

Place in the' Scheme of Revelation. 157
which God has ' set His glory above the heavens,' and
to which the richest powers of the divine nature are
bent. In order to ' still the enemy and the avenger,' and
to vindicate His own procedure, Jehovah institutes this
trial, by way of furnishing an unchallengeable demon
stration that He, the Almighty, can be loved not for His
gifts but for Himself, and thus publicly justify the
method by which He had begun to overthrow Satan's
dominion. It is worthy of remark, that the trial of Job
is not unexampled in the Word of God, and in the same
period of the world's history. We hear of another
patriarch who, like Job, was distinguished among men for
the strength of his faith and the integrity of his obedi
ence, so that he bore the honourable name of the Friend
of God, and doubtless was also a spectacle to angels as
well as to men. And of this other typical good man, the
Father of the Faithful, we read, 'God did tempt Abraham;'1
and in his case too the trial bore upon the same point,
the disinterestedness of the patriarch's seeming love to
his divine Friend. This was the question which was
brought to a pubhc and irrefragable determination, by the
command addressed to him to offer up his well-beloved
Isaac in sacrifice : — Doth Abraham love God better than
himself ? — nay, better than that son for whom he would
willingly lay down his own life ? In these two illus
trious examples and by the invincible demonstration of
these pubhc trials, does Jehovah attest His own moral
power, and vindicate His own moral glory, while at the
same time He justifies the method which, throughout the
course of the world's history, He is pursuing. And, in
these examples, too, He brings forward to the view of
all intelligences, a handful of the first ripe fruits of the
world's harvest, sprung from that seed of love which He
1 Gen. xx. 1.

158 The History of fob, and its
is sowing in the world's indurated soil, — a sample of
the glorious results which shall by and by fill the
heavenly garners. For in such men God exhibits for
universal instruction what that is in which essentially
religion lies, what characters by His grace He seeks to
form, and whom He counts His friends.
Now it is plain that there was, if not an absolute
necessity, at least a divine propriety, in transactions like
these, so rich in spiritual meaning, and so momentous in
relation to the vindication of the plans and the glory of
Jehovah, being assigned to one of the earliest periods of
the world's history. Selfishness in religion may draw
nourishment, not only from the bestowments of the
present, but also from the promises of the future. And
it is one main distinction of the dispensation of grace
that it is a dispensation of promise. The good presently
bestowed by God on His servants is constantly repre
sented as but the foretaste of the better things to come
in the hfe beyond death. In the patriarchal age, this
future and happier hfe was veiled and dark. The holy
men of old were sustained by no special, express, and clear
assurance in regard to the heavenly inheritance, nor was
their hope nourished and their imagination stimulated by
symbols and pictures, full of glory, of the things behind
the veil. They were left to build their faith simply on
a general conviction of the all-sufficiency of Him who
had said, 'I am your God;' so that in their last hour, and
in their moods of highest hope, they could only say, ' I
wait for Thy salvation, 0 God.' x But this economy of
comparative dimness and indistinctness was about to be
replaced by another and still another, in which, in the
experience of God's people, both the privileges of the
present and the promises of the future life were destined
1 Gen. xlix. 18.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 159
to be greatly augmented. It lay in the purpose of God
that, as the ages revolved, still higher and richer blessings
should be conferred on men, still brighter and more
elevating revelations of the future inheritance should be
given, — all with the view of softening and subduing the
souls of His enemies and encouraging in their hearts the
growth of holiness. But should Satan's insinuation be
proved well-founded, then evidently the Omniscient would
be found to have miscalculated, and all His purposes and
plans would be disannulled. Then His gifts, whether
present or future, would be certain to abound, not to the
ends of holiness and of salvation, but simply to those of
self-indulgence and licentiousness. Hence the need for
a public clearing of the ground and preparing a place
for the laying in Zion of the foundation-stone of the
spiritual temple. It was indispensable, in order that the
growing development of God's gracious designs might not
yield fresh occasion to the adversary, that it should be
shown, once for all, by a conspicuous and pre-eminent
living example, that God's chosen method of procedure — •
the method of subduing enmity by love, and ' giving gifts
unto men, even the rebellious,' — is a method feasible and
successful, fully adequate to the inspiring of new and
strong affection into dead souls, — an affection so genuine
and disinterested that it survives the withdrawal of all
present comforts, while it is, at the same time, sustained
by no bright prospects in the future, and sees in the grave
only ' a land of darkness as darkness itself, and of the
shadow of death, without any order, and where the light
is as darkness.'
Thus the trial of Job was the trial of all profession of
love to God and to men, — the trial of the possibility of the
production of the principles of genuine goodness in human
hearts and of the attainment of true salvation for the

1 60 The History of fob, and its
fallen and the lost, — the trial of the efficiency of the
methods of divine grace, and the hopefulness of the yearn
ings and the operations of divine love. And I have in
dicated also the suitableness and necessity of this great
trial being instituted and accomplished in the world's
spring-time, while God was but preparing the soil and
sowung the seed, and ere the harvest of the world had
begun to ripen. Evidently a trial so important and so
critical behoved to be 'of the most rigorous character of
which in the circumstances it was capable. And such
that before us actually was. — First, all Job's possessions,
as we have already seen, are taken from him, and that by
such sudden and sweeping strokes as both to render the
pain of the bereavement the intensest possible, and also
forcibly to impress his mind with the conviction that the
bereavement has come upon him by the express ordina
tion of the divine will. Yet though thus suddenly re
ducing him from pre-eminent affluence to utter indigence
and destitution, the succession of crushing calamities has
no power to shake his confidence in God, or to detach him
from His service. ' He fell down upon the ground, and
worshipped, and said, Naked came I out of my mother's
womb, and naked shall I return thither: the Lord gave,
and the Lord hath taken away ; blessed be the name of
the Lord.' Satan, however, refuses to hold himself
baffled : ' Put forth Thy hand and touch his bone and his
flesh, and he wiU deny Thee to Thy face.' This, too, is
granted to the adversary. Job is stricken by an abhorred
disease. Like an outcast leper, separated from men, shunned
of all, he is left in solitary wretchedness to brood upon his
sudden and terrible fall. His faithful wife, apparently
the only near relative left to him, who when property
and children were reft away seems, like himself, to have
humbly submitted to the divine hand, now at last, when

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1 6 1
he himself also is smitten, becomes distracted by her utter
misery, is able no longer to maintain her faith in the Most
High, and unconsciously plays into the adversary's hand
by urging him openly to abandon the God who appears
so unmistakeably to have cast him off.1 . But though his
one dearest earthly friend thus also becomes his tempter
and assails the stronghold of his faith, yet he remains in
soul unconquered, and meekly responds, ' Thou speakest as
one of the foolish women speaketh. What ! shall we receive
good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil ? '
The trial, however, is not ended. It takes another and
severer form. . For thoughtful men, the struggles of the
mind are the fiercest of all ; the fight with the doubts
and questionings of one's own restless reason and troubled
heart, is harder than any ' fight of affliction ' merely out
ward. This struggle might and certainly would have come
on Job in his misery,- even had he been left to himself ; but
it is precipitated upon him, in an intensified degree, by
the visit and words of his three friends. These are hke
himself, as already intimated, of the best, noblest, wisest,
most respected of the land. They had been his most
intimate, most trusted associates and counsellors ; and
now, hke his wife, they become to him, doubtless with
the most upright intention, ' messengers of Satan to
buffet him,' while, in them and in their words, Satan
approaches and assails Job under the guise of an angel
of light. The temptation to which the sufferer is now
subjected is one enforced not merely by the weight of the
approved integrity and distinguished wisdom of his friends,
but also, and here especiaUy lay its overwhelming power,
by the deepest convictions of his own mind and the
1 See Green, Book of Job, p. 96 ; Hengstenberg, Hiob, p. 112. The
older view of the character of Job's wife, which has found a recent advo
cate in Delitzsch, seems to me quite unfounded. L

1 62 The History of fob, and its
clearest dictates of his own conscience. We are not
to suppose that Job, even granting him the wisest of
his time, was above the wisdom of his time.1 It is
evident from his own utterances that he and his friends
were fundamentally at one in the views already attri
buted to the latter regarding the principles of the
divine government. There is no ground for beheving, in
regard to him, with some of his modern expositors, that
he was the heretic and the sceptic of his day. Like those
who came to comfort and to counsel him, he was per
suaded of the justice of the divine administration, and,
doubtless, hke them too he believed that this justice was
upon the whole made manifest on earth, and that moral
character might safely be estimated by outward estate.
The eloquence of his friends, so long as it revolved round
the general principles of divine providence, found an
echo in his own breast, and thus aggravated his per
plexity and intensified the temptation. God is just, say
they. Assuredly, replies the sufferer's heart. God, they
continue, cannot act capriciously, still less unrighteously,
in his various allotments to the children of men. It is
not to be supposed, rejoins the reason of the patriarch.
Then, going on to apply their principles, He cannot be
acting unjustly or capriciously towards thee — to which
what response can spring up in the secret of his bosom
but this, I suppose not ? But when the friends, still
basing their argument upon the principles common to
Job and themselves, proceed to state the manifest con
clusion : Therefore, thou art — whatever fair semblance thy
life and character may have borne during these many
years, — thou canst be no other than — for God cannot
1 ' II n'a pas a sa disposition une autre theologie que celle de ses amis,
pour parer les coups dont ceux-ci le transpercent. ' — Godet, op. cit.,
p. 239. This Froude, too, expresses, Short Studies, i., p. 300 (new ed.).

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 163
be unjust — a vile hypocrite, cherishing in secret some
unholy lust ; then the sufferer's conscience loudly pro
tests against the charge, and his whole soul rises up in
honest indignation. ' Thou knowest that I am not wicked.'
' I know that I shall be justified : who is he that will
plead with me ?' ' My righteousness I hold fast, and
will not let it go.' x But in this inevitable revolt of his
own conscience, maintained so firmly by his own truth-
loving heart, lay the very pith of the terrible inward
temptation to which he was subjected. The certainty of
the inference drawn by his friends on the one hand, the
assured convictions of his own consciousness on the other
hand, seemed to shut him up to the one conclusion that he
must abandon all faith in the Most High. The dilemma
between whose opposing points he was tossed was most
obvious and awful : either I am what my friends allege,
or else God is acting towards me capriciously and unjustly.
And the conclusion to which conscience and reason ahke
seemed to drive him was this : — But I know that I am
not what these allege, and therefore it must be that
towards me at least, God is capricious and unjust in His
dealing. It cannot be doubted that the bodily pain and
outward wretchedness formed but the symbol of the more
terrible spiritual misery felt within ; and that the ' slings
and arrows ' of his outward calamity called forth another
more terrible assault in his inner nature — in the form of
abhorred thoughts and dark suggestions. It was for Job
the hour and power of darkness ; the tempter who has
access, to us inscrutably, to human souls, availed himself
of the mental disconcertment, and the upheaval of all the
settled principles of his heart; — 'Dost thou still retain
thine integrity ?' Canst thou pretend to believe that
God is acting to thee righteously ?
1 Job, chap. x. 7, xiii. 18, 19, xxvii. 6.

1 64 The History of fob, and its
The severity of the trial was aggravated by the utter
darkness in which his reason was left to grope. Refer
ence has been made above to the absence of all
explanation of the providential visitation which had
overwhelmed him ; and this, it will at once be apparent,
was in the circumstances a necessity. What we read in
the prologue behoved to be kept secret from Job and from
his contemporaries. The special reason of his sufferings
required to be hidden, if his sufferings were to accomphsh
their destined probationary purpose. If any the least
hint of the purpose had been allowed to reach the suf
ferer's mind, then the. trial would have been spoiled ; for
the tempter would then have had it in his power to say,
It is still not for nothing that Job holds fast his integrity ;
he knows that God is using him for His own ends, and he
expects reward. Evidently, in order that his confidence
in God might be put to unchaUengeable proof, it was
essential that he should be left in utter ignorance as to
God's special reasons, should be doomed to walk in
absolute darkness, and should have nothing wherewith to
sustain his soul under the overwhelming visitation, but
merely his faith in God. For him, in his peculiar circum
stances, no explanation was possible. Thus the dispensa
tions of God towards him are to his mind an utter mystery.
His conscience accuses him of no change in his demeanour
towards God from the days when the candle of the Lord
shined upon him, and he basked in the sunshine of the
divine favour ; the change seems to him to be aU in God
Himself. Even such knowledge as he may have attained
to in regard to the general uses of affliction and the profit-,
ableness of suffering when rightly borne, — such know
ledge as is set forth in the words of Elihu, and which,
when thus set forth, compels him to silence, — we must
suppose, was obliterated for the time from his mind by

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 165
the fierceness of the mental assault, so that, in his own
reason, he could find no stay or help wherewith to sustain
his soul. The terrible directness of the charges of his
friends drove him to face the alternative, — either abandon
truth or abandon God, — and we mark the fierceness of
the struggle in the wildness, vehemence, presumptuous-
ness, daring directness of his speech to the Most High.
Yet, though driven upon this alternative, he cannot
commit himself to either of the seemingly contradictory
courses. He cannot abandon conscience, and aU through
his utterances, even when most wild and uncontrolled, we
mark the noble candour and outspokenness of a pro
foundly truth-loving and upright heart. And just as
little can he abandon God. His very contendings with,
and his vehement and even irreverent appeals to, Him
for consideration and for justice, are tokens that God is
still more to him than any other. His complainings
show his deep appreciation of the divine smile, his very
charges against God prove that the honour of God is still
for him the chief interest. The thought of a world with
out God, or with a God not just and good, is a thought
which he cannot bear. And so his faith in God endures,
*
and his hope in God is, in connection with his conscious
ness of his own integrity, the one sheet-anchor for his
soul. He has lost hope in regard to all other comforts
and stays ; his life for him is over ; restoration to health
is regarded as an impossibility ; but ' though He slay
me, yet will I trust in Him.' l And he is sure that
some time or other, in the after time when worms have
consumed his body, God will yet appear on his behalf,
and stand up to vindicate his integrity, to redeem his
character and his interests, and to own him as His
friend. 1 Job, chap. xiii. 15.

1 66 The History of Job, and Us
From this point begins his deliverance from the deep
waters in which he had been plunged. After this ex
pression of resolute hope in his Redeemer God, his spirit
grows calmer, and his very speech perceptibly improves
and becomes more measured, flowing, and eloquent. By
the addresses of Elihu, he is convicted of the errors of
which he had been guilty, especiaUy in seeming so
obstinately to array himself and his integrity against the
righteousness of God, while he begins to realise some of
those happy fruits of affliction which Ehhu so well
describes. The appearance and words of Jehovah com
plete the work of spiritual restoration. Job comes to
himself in coming to God and in realising His presence
and His glory ; the sin he frankly confesses is freely
forgiven ; and God attests that he has conquered in the
trial by declaring His satisfaction with him, rather than
with the three others who seemed more forward in
pleading God's cause, and by enjoining him to offer sacri
fice on his friends' behalf. Thus both the supra-mundane
and the mundane actions of the drama find their suitable
termination in the one finale. The two plots, so to
speak, are solved together. Job, though he had spoken
rashly and violently, had never really lost faith in God.
Zeal for the glory of God, and jealousy for His honour,
mingled with his zeal in the maintenance and vindication
of his own integrity. He had come out of this great
fight of afflictions and temptations, if not scatheless, yet
a conqueror ; and Jehovah in thus appearing, and speak
ing, and bringing satisfaction, correcting his errors, and
calming the surgings of his troubled soul, seals His
approval of his stedfast faith, and crowns him victor in
the strife. The new health and affluence which followed
were but the outward token of Jehovah's favour, and the
divine seal publicly put upon his tried integrity.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 167
I know of but one other scene of trial, in the whole
history of the world, worthy to be compared with that
before us. Job, as above stated, has often been spoken
of as a type of Jesus Christ ; but the resemblance is more
profound than has usually been conceived of. Not only
were both the objects of God's peculiar love and openly-
declared approval ; not only were both subjected in the
providence of God to peculiar sufferings ; not only were the
sufferings in the case of both without apparent reason or
moral ground, — they were both also appointed to occupy
a public and representative position; they both alike
suffered as public benefactors and for the world's good ;
in both ' the sufferings of their soul were the soul of their
sufferings ;' and of these spiritual sufferings it was in both
a great aggravation that they were subjected to the
assaults of the tempter in their fiercest form ; nay, more,
on the. integrity of both under the temptation, depended,
though in different ways, the success of God's great purpose
of human redemption. And in the experience of the one
and of the other, so far as made known, the presence of
the same elements of trial may be discerned. In the one
case no less than in the other, the one great question to
be decided by the trial was the question of disinterested
love to God ; both were left in darkness as to the reasons
of God's procedure ; while at the same time in both the
problem was brought to a determination by the utter
withdrawal from the sufferer of all His gifts, and by even
hiding from him the spiritual consolations which a sense
of His love gives. Under the strange and overwhelming
visitation which came on Christ in the dark hour when He
hung upon the cross, when the quenching of the sun formed
but the symbol of the deep spiritual gloom which enveloped
His soul, when not only by disciples and friends He was
left alone, but by His Father also, — in that outer dark-

1 68 ¦ The History of Job, and its
ness, we cannot doubt that, like Job, He too was exposed
to the tempter's envenomed shafts, — ' Dost Thou still hold
fast Thine integrity V 'If Thou be the Son of God,'
why art Thou thus forsaken and made an outcast ? We
may discern the token of the presence of the temptation
in the question wrung by this unwonted trial from the
sufferer's lips, — ' Why hast Thou forsaken me ? ' — and at
the same time, and even more clearly, we may observe the
proof of His unshaken faith, and His yearning, clinging
love, in the filial cry, ' My God, my God ! ' It was the
repeated, the final, the all-sufficient demonstration of the
fact that God knows how to make Himself entirely loved
and implicitly trusted.
Such an example as that of Job gives us an elevating
conception of the value in this world, and in aU worlds, of
the hfe of even one genuinely good man, one true and tried
friend of God. He stands in the sight of angels and of
devils, as well as of his fellow-men, a ' witness for Jehovah
that He is God.' He bears a testimony which is irre
fragable to the goodness of the Most High. His face
shines like that of Moses, reflecting the brightness of the
divine glory. He is a strong tower against the -powers of
darkness, an argument of resistless force against the cause
of Satan. He presents in himself a pledge of the reality
of the divine existence, and of the faithfulness of the
divine promises — the living proof that God is, and is Love
¦ — for by nothing save such love as God's could such love
as his be inspired. By this illustrious example we are
reminded also of the importance of the place occupied by
man among the other intelligences of God's creation. We
believe that problems have been wrought out in this world,
which could not find the materials for their practical
solution in any other — at least, in any unfaUen world.
This, for instance, brought forward by Satan's challenge of

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 169
-1 ob's disinterestedness could not have been fully or right
eously and becomingly decided elsewhere. Do God's
servants and worshippers serve Him for nought ? — how
could this be practically demonstrated among those
beings who have never sinned, and who deserve no
suffering ? The sinfulness of Job, that taint which he
bore in common with all his brethren of mankind, was
Jehovah's warrant in righteousness for treating him as a
sinner, and visiting him with those calamities which
constituted in the circumstances the decisive trial of his
fidelity to God. Evidently those who are not righteously
liable to such sufferings can never be subjected to such
a trial, and thus can never in so illustrious a degree
minister to the divine glory. In the other still more
illustrious case, indeed, to which reference has been made,
a still more signal testimony has been borne on a still
more conspicuous platform to the attractive power of
God's love ; and that by one belonging to the order of the
unfallen — the Son of God Himself — but He too, ere He
could thus signally glorify the Father, behoved to come
into connection with this sinful world, and take upon
Himself the burden of human guilt, that it might be a
righteous thing in God to treat Him as a sinner and to
hide His face from Him. And thus man is raised to play
a high and noble part before God's intelligent universe.
' Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast Thou
ordained strength, because of Thine enemies ; that Thou
mightest still the enemy and the avenger.' Now ' unto
the angels and principalities in the heavenly places is
made known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God.'
For what could be a greater enhancement of God's many-
sided wisdom, than His thus using the legal consequences
of sin as the instrument wherewith to destroy the reign
of sin, and to put to shame the power and cunning of sin's

1 70 The History of fob, and its
originator ? By the afflictions by which His servants are
visited and which their sins amply merit, He at once
exercises their faith in Himself, thus establishing in their
hearts the foundation-principle of all true piety and all
spiritual progress, while at the same time in this trying of
His servants' faith, by which their own souls are purified
from sin, He works confusion to the adversary in the
world unseen, confirming the faith of other and higher
intelligences, and accomplishing results which he far
beyond our view in the heavenly places. ' Lord, what is
man that Thou art mindful of him, or the son of man that
Thou visitest him ? ' x
III. I have endeavoured to show that the action
described in the Book of Job, when the book itself is
taken as it is given and allowed to be its own interpreter,
fills an important place in the history of the world, and
in the development of the redemptive purpose of Jehovah.
If the views stated above, in regard to its purport and
significance, are accepted, then certain interesting conse
quences seem to follow.
1. The narrative describes real events. By not a few
expositors the Book of Job has been regarded as a parable
or allegory — a work of fiction, reared perhaps on some
substratum of historic truth, comparable to ' a historical
romance of Sir Walter Scott, or a historical drama of
Schiller.'2 Parable, allegory, and fiction have indeed their
1 Cf. Irenseus, Against Heresies, iii. 20. ' The glory of man is God,
. . . and the receptacle of all His wisdom and power is man. Just as
the physician is proved by his patients, so is God also revealed through
men.' — See also, E. Irving, Coll. Writings, v., p. 470.
2 See Hengstenberg, Hiob, p. 39 ; cf. Professor Davidson, Job, p. 66.
Those who believe in the merely poetic and fictitious character of the
book are shut up to ignore the more momentous of the two problems
round which it revolves. The subject of the book cannot be the trial of
the disinterestedness of human piety, if there was no real trial. Says Dr. S.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1 7 1
place, and are frequently employed by God's prophets
and apostles in the communication of divine truth. But
it is evident that their place is subordinate. Not by
such means can new truths be introduced into the
economy of revelation, and new light shed upon the
character and ways of God. They may set in a more
vivid light truths already given, or may enwrap them
as in a covering, and so reserve them from the full appre
hension of men, till the time arrive for their being fully
unfolded. But they cannot establish truth, or add to the
treasures of divine revelation. This can only be done by
fact. It is by deeds, not words, that God reveals to
men the various aspects of His glory, and the various
principles of His government. The original volume of
His revelation is an historic process, and the sentences in
the volume are particular historic occurrences and acts.1
Doctrines are true only as they are faithfully drawn from
these divine facts, and parabolic representations are useful
and edifying only as they faithfully and vividly reproduce
what God's works have first revealed. I have shown
above that there was an imperative necessity for the
trial of which the book before us is ostensibly the record
being instituted, and for the problems here debated
being definitely determined. This is equivalent to saying
Davidson, Introd. to Old Testament, vol. ii., p. 216 — 'It is superfluous
to point out the absurdity of making the problem of the book to be,
Does Job serve God for nought ? ' (! !)
1 Cf. Steudel, Theologie d. alt. Test., p. 18. ' Wir wiirden eine
unvollstandige Vorstellung von dem Wesen der alttestamentlichen und
iiberhaupt der biblischen Religion uns bilden, wenn wir sie nur als Lehre
betrachteten. Es sind die bestimmtesten Thatsachen, welche als QueUe der
Ausbildung der religiosen Vorstellungen und des religibsen Lebens uns
vorgehalten sind. Es est nicht das Bewusstsein, von welchem aus die
objective Veranschaulichung der Religion Boden gewann ; nicht das
Bewusstsein schuf das als Thatsache Vorgehaltene ; sondern umgekehrt
durch die Thatsache wurde das Bewusstsein geschaffen. '

1 72 The History of fob, and its
that, taking the book itself to guide us, the narrative it
contains cannot be a mere fiction of a product of the
poetic imagination even of some spiritually enlightened
bard. It is impossible to conceive that any work
excogitated by a human mind could ,serve the purposes
which the history of Job was evidently designed to serve.
The problems in debate are real problems pertaining to
the sphere of God's objective procedure ; the interests
are real objective interests ; God is real, Satan is real ;
men and their selfishness, piety, and suffering are aU real ;
and it is manifest that the crisis that had emerged, on
occasion of the adversary's challenge, in the history
of the Church could be met in no other way than by
a real trial and debate on some conspicuous public
platform, and, I will add, by a real personal manifesta
tion of the Most High. Thus, even though it were
possible, on the supposition that the book is mainly
fictitious, to account for the references made elsewhere
to Job as a renowned saint of ancient times, yet the
book itself, fairly interpreted, renders the supposition
inadmissible, and assures us that the case which itself
supposes is one which could only be met by actual
historic occurrences.
I have no desire to commit myself to the assertion of
the literal verity of all the details embodied in the
narrative. It is open to us to suppose that the actual
historic facts, — the sudden calamity by which Job was
overwhelmed, the debate with his friends, the theophany
out of the storm, and his subsequent restored prosperity,
— were taken up by some inspired poet-prophet, to whom
the meaning of .these facts, and their supra-mundane
and universal import, were divinely revealed. But
perhaps the facts really took place in all their detail, as
here recorded. The one supposition seems to me scarcely

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 173
more beset with difficulties than the other, and probably
the origin of the composition will, to our cold western
minds, remain an insoluble mystery. If, indeed, an
inspired poet has been here, and not merely an inspired
reporter, then assuredly, though unknown, he must be set
' among the first three,' and indeed ' chief among the
three,' of the world's great poets. On this supposition,
the work, not only in grasp of thought and in depth of
spiritual insight, but also in dramatic power and charac
terisation, and in loftiness of imagination and wealth of
eloquence, remains unequalled.
2. The action here narrated occurred during patri
archal or ante-Mosaic times. I do not at present speak
of the date of the book, but of the date of the events
which the book describes. Now unquestionably the
narrative on the face of it bears to refer to the patriarchal
period. There is no allusion to the distinctive peculiari
ties of the Mosaic economy; the customs, the religious
observances, the idolatrous rites spoken of, the family and
social life, the imagery and descriptions, as well as the
personal and geographical names, all bear upon them the
stamp of the pre-Israelitish time. It is allowed even by
those who maintain the properly Israehtish and post-
Mosaic authorship of the book, that the poet has assumed
and kept up the guise belonging to another age and
another nation than his own, with admirable consistency ;
and the fidelity which he manifests to his assumed
character is set down to the credit of his wonderful
knowledge, his strong imagination, his marvellous dramatic
genius. I am not aware that the supposed poet has,
even by those who have sought diligently for tokens
in his work of his belonging to a late period in the
Israehtish history, been charged with falhng into ana
chronism, unless it be perhaps in two points, the prominence

174 The History of fob, and its
given to the personality of Satan, and the mention of the
Chaldeans as invaders of the Jordanic territory. Many
critics have been in the habit of representing the doctrine
of Satan, the great adversary of God, and in general the
demonology of the Bible, as an importation from Persia,
and as becoming current among the Jews" only after
their return from the exile in Babylon. Now, not to
mention that the existence of the Tempter is plainly
enough involved in the narrative of the Fall, and that the
Persian Ahriman is by no means identical with the Satan
of the Bible, — it is becoming more and more apparent
from the newly-opened sources presented in Babylonian
and Akkadian literature, that the doctrine of a world of
evil spirits 'was, from the earliest ages of which we have
any information, a part of the common behef of the
nations of Western Asia.1 From the same sources, all
occasion for cavil in regard to the occurrence of the
Chaldean invaders is hkewise removed. The narrative of
the fourteenth chapter of Genesis is fully confirmed from
native Babylonian records, and it is now certain that
several of the Chaldean kings extended their conquests
over the countries adjoining the Jordan, and took the
title, Lord of Syria and the West.2 There is then
nothing in the events narrated to discountenance, rather
everything to favour, the belief in their pre - Mosaic
occurrence ; and looking back upon the previous argu
mentation, it is plain that the history itself demands that
they should be thus placed. The questions at issue are
questions of such a nature, that, so far as it is per
mitted to our minds to judge of propriety and order
in the procedure of the Eternal, behoved to be pubhcly
1 See Lenormant, La Magie, — passim ; Talbot, Trans. Bib. Archceo
logy, ii., p. 58 ; and esp. Smith, Chaldean Genesis, pp. 87 f.
2 See Smith, Trans. Bib. Archceology, i., p. 42.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1 75
settled in the opening period of the world's history, and
specially before the pecuhar and limited economy of
Israel had begun its course.
3. The book was written in pre-Mosaic times. This
is another corollary which seems to follow with scarcely
less inevitableness than the preceding from our previous
reasoning. Not only was the action here exhibited too
interesting and momentous to be allowed to sink into
oblivion, or to be entrusted to the vagaries and uncer
tainties of oral tradition ; we may safely affirm that it
was of indispensable necessity that it should be at once
recorded and left in an authentic form to the generations
following, a K-rr^ia e? aei. It was, as I have sought to
show, a divine revelation and a divine work, having its
own indispensable place in the series of divine inter
positions in human affairs, — as really a divine revelation
as the economy of Moses and the history of Israel,
though on a less extensive scale ; and if it was indis
pensable in the latter case that the memory of Jehovah's
doings among His chosen people should be perpetuated
in authentic contemporaneous records, it was equally so
in the former. I know that with almost entire unanimity,
modern commentators and critics bring down the author
ship of the Book of Job to a comparatively late date ;
some even to the post-exilian period, others to the times
of Iosiah or Manasseh, others to those of Solomon.
The last opinion seems to be generaUy the belief even
of those who for the most part hold themselves aloof
from the eccentricities of the prevailing subjective
criticism ; 1 and the grounds on which they base their
conclusion are drawn partly from the style, partly
from the contents, of the book. In regard to the
former, it is alleged that it lacks 'the archaic and
1 As Havernick, Schlottmann, Oehler, Keil, Delitzsch, Godet, etc.

1 76 The History of fob, and its
primitive stamp,' x which is impressed, e.g., upon the Pen
tateuch, that the language is full of Aramaisms and
Arabisms, and of rhetorical or artificial turns of phrase ;
while in regard to the latter, it is said that the book
is too reflective and philosophic in its cast of thought
to be assigned to so early a period as the patriarchal,
and that the court of Solomon and the school of wise
men whom his influence drew together form the only
hkely source of such a composition. To these reasons
it is an obvious rejoinder that they scarcely consist with
the high praises conferred upon the unknown supposed
Jewish author, for his admirable, his unparalleled power
of projecting himself and Jhis imaginative production into
an era and a dispensation foreign to his own. Assuredly
one who was able so perfectly to reproduce the habits,
the feehngs, the rites, the whole life and circumstances
of the patriarchal age, was able also to copy their style
and imitate their modes of thought. Without dwelling
on this, it is to be remarked that the considerations
adduced in support of the late Solomonic date of the
book are reasons whose sole force depends not on know
ledge but on ignorance. We are entirely ignorant of
the style and language in use, on solemn occasions,
among the wise men of Teman and of Uz, and we only
suppose that it must have been marked by what is
characteristic of the oldest Hebrew known to us. We
do ' not find, as is supposed, a distinctly Aramaean colour
ing in the books of Scripture till we come down to the
times of the Kings, and we conclude that what we
understand to be a pure Hebrew must have been used
for a book written before the age of Moses. We do
not happen to possess any Israehtish literature of a re-
1 Dr. S. Davidson, Introd. to Old Test., ii., p. 190 ; cf. Renan, Livre
de Job, p. 21.

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 177
flective and moralising, or philosophising cast till we
come to the age of Solomon, and therefore we conclude
there can have been no moralisers or philosophers in
the time and among the people to whom ostensibly Job
belongs. We do not know of any other such representa
tions of the divine wisdom, or any such theories regard
ing the evils in the world as we find in the book till
we come down to Proverbs and Koheleth ; and there
fore Job must belong to the same, or, if not, to a later
age. Surely it needs not to be pointed out that such
reasoning proves nothing. It is based on want of
information, and it appeals to want of information.
The truth is, we know nothing at all as to the origin
of the book,1 or the history of its composition. We
can only accept it as existing, and as certainly be
longing to the Jewish canon, with whatever may be
safely inferred from this. We have nothing to guide
us in regard to the question of its chronological em
placement, but its own contents. So far as our relevant
information goes, it looks quite unfavourably upon the
reasoning adverted to. We learn from Genesis that
Aramtean was a dialect in use in Mesopotamia in
Jacob's days ; and the Moabite Stone proves that
Hebrew with a certain local colouring was in use
on the east of Jordan, in the times of the Israehtish
kings. What is there that renders improbable the
existence of a Hebrew form of speech, somewhat coloured
by the proximity of Aramaean and Arabian tribes, in
the very district and at the very time when Job is
represented to have lived ? 2 And while external facts,
so far as we know them, are in no way opposed to the
1 Even Hengstenberg allows, ' Wir haben in der alteren Literatur, der
canonischen, eben gar keine Analogie fur unser Buch.' — Hiob, p. 39.
2 Cf. Palfrey, Lectures on Jewish Scriptures, vol. iv., p. 248.
M

178 The History of fob, and its
behef in the patriarchal authorship of the book, 'its
internal phenomena, as above shown, almost necessitate
this conclusion. In the inspired record of God's acts
and manifestations, His people have in every successive
age found the amount and kind of instruction specially
needed by them ; and the Bible in its growth has exactly
kept pace with the growth of the Church and the
development of its needs. The want which necessitated
the divine interposition here recorded necessitated also
the record itself.1
4. It was essential to the function of this book that
it should be communicated to the Israehtish race, and
thus come to the world through the chosen medium of
supernatural revelation. Its lessons were first for Israel,
and then for the world. Its function was first to instruct
the chosen race as to the principles of God's universal
government, and to guard them against perverting and
turning into error the peculiarities of their own economy.
It had its own contribution to bear to the influences of
the preparatory system, so as to make ready a people
for the coming of the Lord, and qualify them for the
right appreciation of His character and His sufferings.
Thus, though originating out of Israel, it was by divine
wisdom brought to the knowledge of the Israehtes, and
joined to the number of their sacred books ; and there
are many indications in the subsequent Hebrew writings
of the influence which it exercised over their thoughts
and even over their language. — If these a priori con
siderations, drawn from .the contents of the book itself,
be not absolutely sufficient to prove its genuineness
1 Oehler, Theologie d. alt. Testament, i., p. 5: 'Die heilige Sehrift ist
ja, wie Oetinger sie genannt hat, das Lagerbuch der Welt, das Lagerbuch
aller Zeiten ; sie bietet der Kirche fur jede Zeit gerade diejenigen Auf-
schliisse, deren sie besonders bedarf.'

Place in the Scheme of Revelation. 1 79
and veracity as a historic record, and its pre-Mosaic
origin, at least they weigh somewhat in the scale of
probabihty on that side, while on the other side
nothing can be alleged but the groundless inferences
and conjectures of ignorance.

180 The Israelitish Economy.

VI.
THE ISRAELITISH ECONOMY.
Nothing is more needful in order to an 'intelligent
understanding of the Word of God both as a whole, and
as to many of its most important parts, than a correct
understanding of the Israehtish economy — that pecuhar
system estabhshed by God in Israel, by which has been
coloured the whole history of that people and of the
world. To unbelievers this has furnished a favourite
and prolific source of cavil and objection ; some sincere
inquirers have found in many of the enactments of the
Jewish law, and many of the facts of Jewish history,
occasions of stumbling and of doubt ; not a few of those
who are attracted by the character and words of Jesus
Christ, and who rejoice in His grace as the means of
their personal salvation, seem to have no intelligent idea
of the purport of the preparatory dispensation, and to be
repelled from its records as if another spirit than that
of love and pity breathed there ; while students of the
Bible, otherwise weR informed, are often found unable to
render any satisfying account of the end and meaning
of the dispensation of Moses, and regard it rather as a
part of the ways of God needing to be apologised for,
than as having itself any apologetic worth, or as being of
any avail in the way of shedding lustre upon the glory of
the divine perfections.

The Israelitish Economy. 1 8 1
All this indicates, in so far as it exists, a lack in the
inteUectual equipment of the friends and advocates of
revelation. The Jewish system, I am persuaded, needs
only to be studied and understood, in order to be seen
to be, like aU the other works of God, radiant with His
glory, nay, second only to the manifestation of His own
Son in human flesh and the redemptive work which He
accomphshed for sinners, as a witness to the existence
and attributes of the Most High.
Let us attempt to obtain as full and comprehensive
a view as our hmits admit of the meaning and use of
this special dispensation. Much of course must be
assumed which, in a complete discussion of the subject,
woidd have to be considered in detail; but perhaps it
will be possible to give some views which, however
condensed, may prove not void of instruction, and serve
in some smaU degree to 'justify the ways of God to
men.' In the Israelitish economy, we find one particular
nation separated by express divine intervention from the
rest of the nations, and put under a pecuhar system
of government, the Most High visibly interposing to
take its affairs in hand, so as to direct its history
towards a special end. My object in this Essay is
simply to ascertain the main functions which this
economy was meant to fulfil, and along with this to
consider how the ends, when ascertained, justify and
explain the means employed.
In attempting to determine the functions, we dis
tinguish, first of aU, between the general and the par
ticular. In regard to the former, there can be no doubt
or difficulty whatsoever. It is written on every page of
the Bible, and on the whole constitution of the Mosaic
system, that its great function was to prepare for the

1 82 The Israelitish Economy.
coming of the Son of God in human nature, and for
the establishment among men of His spiritual kingdom.
The economy was throughout preparatory for Christ, and
prophetic of Christ. 'Had ye believed Moses,' said
Jesus to the Jews, ' ye would have believed me, for he
wrote of me.' x ' The law,' says Paul, ' was our school
master (TraiBajayos;) until Christ.' 2 And, says the Epistle
to the Hebrews, ' The law made nothing perfect, but it
was the bringing in of a better hope.' 3 On aU the
symbohc rites, the oracular utterances, the miraculous
occurrences of this pecuhar economy, its preparatory
character is stamped; and in attempting to understand
its provisions and to judge of their fitness and their
goodness, this, their proclaimed purpose, is never to be
ignored. It is ostensibly and expressly ' a shadow of
good things to come,' in itself incomplete, and by itself
inexplicable, finding its explanation and justification in its
relation to that of which it is the prelude. And if such
was its declared character, then obviously it is not to be
judged as if it had been a final and permanent thing. It
may be that those features of this economy, its material
ity, its limitations, its accommodation to human sinful
ness and error, which render it unsuited to occupy the
one place, may be altogether suitable in relation to the
other.4 Questions have been and are still asked in relation
to the propriety of occupying so many ages with such
an economy, — an economy whose existence implied re
striction, delay, imperfection, and suspense. Into these
questions I do not expressly enter. Perhaps to some
extent they will spontaneously receive an answer in the
course of these considerations.
1 John v. 46 ; cf. Luke xxiv. 27. a Gal. iii. 24.
• Heb. vii. 19 ; cf. Deut. xxx. 6. 4 Cf. Davison, Remains, p. 119.

The Israelitish Economy. 183
I go on to notice the special functions whereby
the general preparatory purpose of the economy was
wrought out. Of these may be distinguished five, all
working together like the different functions of a hving
organism, all inextricably intertwined and mutually
indispensable, all combined in each particular depart
ment and operation of the system, so that it is often
difficult or impossible to view them apart, and to define
their boundaries by precise lines. They may be con
veniently marked by the names of — 1. Revelation; 2.
Education ; 3. Demonstration ; 4. Conservation; 5. Germi
nation. These, though all essential, are not all of equal
importance, and it will be found that that which has
been placed in the middle, to which the first two are
subsidiary and from which the second two result, deserves
to be regarded as representing the backbone and marrow
of the whole organism.
Let us consider what is signified by these names : —
I. Revelation. — It needs not be said that the whole
universe is a revelation of the being and attributes of
Him who made, sustains, and governs aU. It is, of
course, not in the sense in which everything reveals God
that the word is here used. It is employed to denote
the special manifestation of the Most High in the way
of a personal recognisable and miraculous interposition
in human ¦ affairs. The withdrawal of God in conse
quence of human sin from, that ordinary personal inter
course with men which the Bible assures us once existed
on the earth, is a fact characterising the whole history
of the world, and underlying alike the Mosaic and the
Christian dispensations; while the great end of the
world's history in aU its dispensations is the subduing
and eradicating of human sin, so that the old interrupted
intercourse may be renewed, and God may again right-

184 The Israelitish Economy.
eously and rejoicingly ' dwell with men.' But there was
only one way in which sin could be overcome and
uprooted and its effects abolished, and this involved a
spontaneous personal interposition on the part of God
Himself in human affairs. Such an interposition is
found in the incarnation of the Son of God, and in His
redemptive work. This was of course essentially a
miracle — the miracle of miracles — an express and most
marvellous interference with ordinary law, a signal
violation of that disordered order, that unnatural nature,
which sin has introduced upon the earth. 1 Not by
permitting ordinary law to take its course, but only by
a manifest divine interference with law, could sin be
remedied and men redeemed.2
Now for this greatest of all the personal manifesta
tions of God on earth, the way was prepared by another
subsidiary system of objective personal manifestation.
That the Israelitish system was fundamentaUy and
throughout miraculous is a fact patent on the face of
the Old Testament, to those at least who interpret these
records as, if we' make any use of them for historic
1 Cf. Sartorius, Die Lehre von der heiligen Liebe, p. 87 : ' Diese Offen-
barung muss eine iibernaturliche, eine iiber die gesunkene menschliche
Natur erhabene sein. . . . Was fiber die herabgekommene Endlichkeit
erheben soil, muss frei iiber die Kette ihres Causalnexus erhaben sein ;
denn der Hebel hebt nicht, der innerhalb des zu Hebenden steht. Die
Unofdnung der Natur kann nicht durch die Ordnung derselben, welche
eben in Unordnung gerathen, wieder hergestellt werden, sondern bedarf
ausserordentlicher Gegenmittel ; wer dies laugnet, laugnet auch die
TJnordnung, die Siinde. '
2 See Shedd, History of Christian Doctrine, vol. i., p. 20: — 'Sacred
history is a process that results from the replacement of the original
righteousness and the original germ. It can no more be an evolution
from the corrupted human nature,, than the corruption itself can be a
development of the pure and holy humanity. . . . Sacred history is
thus differentiated from secular or profane by its underlying super-
naturalism. '

The Israelitish Economy. 185
purposes at all, they ought to be interpreted, in then-
obvious and natural sense.1 Yet this is a fact which
may to many present a difficulty, and may need some
explanation in order that its fuR import may be under
stood. At first sight, it may appear as if the miraculous
character of the economy were calculated rather to
counteract than to forward that purpose which we have
seen belongs to it. For is not this equivalent to saying
that one miraculous system needed another miraculous
system to prepare for its introduction and its reception ?
And how can the natural incredulity of men in regard
to the supernatural be met or modified by imposing
upon their faith a new and heavier burden ? How can
miracle evidence miracle ? If, as many feel, everything
miraculous is a trial to reason, how can the trial be made
less by the multiplication of the miraculous ? 2
Now, in deahng with this apparent difficulty, we do
not hesitate to lay down the proposition that miracle
is only admissible in support of miracles, and is only
then set in its proper place when it is wrought for
this end. What can be received and evidenced through
other means needs no miracle to support and prepare for
it. The conclusions of Newton's Principia have their
own necessary demonstrations to rest upon. What can
be established on human testimony ought to be thus
estabhshed. It is when a work above the thoughts and
ways of man is to be submitted to the judgment of men,
1 Cf. Oehler, Theologie d. alt. Test., i., pp. 22-24.
5 Hume (Essay on Miracles, Phil. Works, vol. iv., p. 150) expressly
allows that miracles may sometimes occur ; what he refuses to admit is
that a miracle can ever ' be proved so as to be the foundation of a system
of religion. ' I presume that his difficulty might have been formulated
as above. Every system of religion being professedly and essentially
miraculous, Hume cannot understand how any other slighter violation of
law can make the higher violation credible.

1 86 The Israelitish Economy.
that other evidence than that of demonstration and of
testimony is appropriate and requisite. To make this
clear, it is necessary to give some space to the much
discussed question, What is a miracle ? Looked at in
its most general aspect, it is the intrusion of the powers
of a higher system into a lower, so as to affect and
disturb the working of the latter. Suppose an angel to
appear on the earth endowed with powers hke those
of Jesus Christ after His resurrection, able to enter
through closed doors, to subsist without food, to move
without being embarrassed by the law of gravitation, —
this, it is plain, would in relation to the race of man
be a miraculous visitation. There exists in the world
a system of definite forces and fixed laws, which we
caR nature, in which intelligence and volition have no
place, and this system of nature is variously affected
and modified by human action. Hence, taking the
wider view of the term now in question, some, as
BushneU,1 say that man acts miraculously in relation
to nature. Or if, with others, we regard man himself
and his works and ways as embraced in and forming
part of the mundane system, then the powers of the
higher system, angehc and super-angelic, acting upon
nature and man himself, so as to secure ends beyond our
reach, are for us miraculous in their agency.
We find ourselves here in a world over whose con
stituents our power is very hmited. The amount of matter
in the world is fixed and definite, and we cannot add to
it or subtract from it an atom. The forces also by which
] BushneU, Nature and the Supernatural, p. 23 ; cf. Maclaurin, Works,
i., p. 404 : ' The state or disposition of natural objects may be changed by
the First Cause, without any greater alteration of the laws of nature than
when such changes are produced in any object by natural second causes,
and particularly by free agents.'

The Israelitish Economy. 187
these atoms of matter are arranged and held together and
moved are equally fixed and definite, and equally beyond
our power either to create or to annihilate. Again, the
laws and mutual relations of forces and atoms are fixed
and uniform, and we can influence the external world
only by discovering what these laws are and submitting to
their sway. We speedily reach the end of our hne in act
ing upon the surrounding universe, and are soon taught by
experience what is within the competence of the human
will and what hes beyond it. We know that we cannot
create and cannot annihilate either matter or force, that
we can act only by putting ourselves in the line of
natural law, and using some links of the chain of natural
causes in order to gain our purposes. Hence, for us, a
miracle is to create, or to annihilate, or to act directly
upon material things without the intervention of those
existing forces and uniform laws which gird in and
define our own activity. And as we neither, know nor
can conceive of power capable thus of acting on nature
save the power that resides in a personal will, so for us
there can be no miracle-worker save a living intelhgent
person. Now it is plain that if this be a just view of miracles,
there are, at least for those who beheve in the existence
of other inteRigences than man, many miracles in the
universe besides those recorded in the Bible. For example,
Theists beheve that- the whole chain of second causes is
fastened to the throne of the Most High, that in Him all
creatures ' live and move and have their being,' that in all
movement and in aR existence He is present, upholding,
guiding, governing all. Pursuing the hnes of causation
upwards, we find that they aR converge till they meet
in the hands of the Almighty, and we reach at last in
thought the point where the action of nature ceases, and

1 88 The Israelitish Economy.
the acting of God is apprehended. And there, of course,
is miracle ; and as God is acting everywhere, we may
legitimately say miracle is everywhere. And so to
Carlyle1 and many others, the greatest of aR miracles is
this great orderly unresting universe with its stars and fir
mament, its birds and flowers. But, again, there have been
certain crises, traceable by weR-marked signs and records
in the framework of nature, in which the activity of the
Most High has come into unusual prominence, — -starting-
points in universal history where, necessarily, there has
been a direct interference on the part of the Creator, and
a re-arranging and a new-creating of the elements of the
world. Science itself discloses that there must have been
beginnings of material existence and of living creatures.2
There have been creative weeks, as there have been miRen-
niums of orderly movement; and during these weeks of
creation the hand of God has been directly impressed
upon the atoms and the forces of nature, and has wrought
miracles of wisdom, and might, and goodness.
Absolutely considered, these creative works are truly
miraculous. They can be accounted for only as the pro
duction of a mighty, wise, beneficent, personal agent.
' The invisible things of God from the creation of the
world are clearly seen, being understood by the things
that are made.' And they serve as a demonstration of
God to those who believe in His existence. ' Through
faith we understand that the worlds were framed by
1 Sartor Resartus, Book iii. , chap. viii.
" Cf. Sartorius, Die heilige Liebe, p. 22 : ' Solcher Anfang (i.e. creation),
aus keiner Natur-TJrsache hervorgehend, sondern selbst erst die Natur,
und ihre TJrsaohlichkeit durch frei allmachtigen Willens-Act begriindend
(potentia ordinans), ist ubernaturlich, ist ein Wunder, ist das Ur-oder
Anfangs-Wunder, an dessen Natur-Begriindung sich dann die Erhalt-
wng als naturliche Fortsetzung (potentia ordinata) anreiht.' — Augustine,
City, xii. 27 : ' These seem extraordinary because they are the first works. '

The Israelitish Economy,. 189
!
the word of God, so that things which are seen were not
made of things which do appear.'1 These natural creative
miracles are our starting-point in relation to the knowledge
of God. They are the primitive manifestations of His
glory, the original products of the word of God. They are
assumed in the Bible as His works, and continually alleged
as presenting the first and fundamental revelation of His
character. And now that the question relates to the estab
lishment and verification of another and greater creative
work, the desideratum is the means of identifying the
original Former, Sustainer, and Governor of all things, —
the supreme God, whose glory is manifested in the created
universe, — with the God of the gospel, and of demonstrat
ing that the Redeemer who appears in Jesus Christ is the
Creator who formed the worlds. This identification is the
great point, and it is in the circumstances a point of diffi
culty. For, first, men in general have lost a just conception
of the character of God, and often are disposed to question
His very existence. They behold no personal manifestation
of His presence, and the very regularity of His ordinary
works acts as a veil to their minds to hide Him from their
view. They 'like not to retain God in their knowledge,'
and say, ' Depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge
of Thy ways ; ' while the sinful inchnations and guilty
fears by which their spirits are vexed inevitably lead to
the most perverse misinterpretations of His divine acts.
Then, second, the work of redemption, the new creation, is
a work unparalleled and unique, surpassing all God's other
works, the most marvellous of aR His miracles. Therein
God appears in new aspects, adopting new methods, and
working by new means towards the attainment of new
ends. Even to those who recognise and believe in the
Creator, the work of redemption may well appear strange
1 Rom. i. 20 ; Heb. xi. 3.

190 The Israelitish Economy.
and incredible, or at least in need of new evidence
and iUustration to prepare the mind for its acceptance.
The formation and government of worlds are acts which
we are prepared to expect as pertaining to the natural,
ordinary, regular procedure of the Most High ; but to pity,
to love, to redeem the fallen, and to give His Son for their
ransom-price, is above aR natural anticipation. In these
circumstances, how shaR it be demonstrated to be the
work of Him who made the worlds ? In other words, how
may the minds of men be prepared to receive it as divine,
and to ascribe it to the Creator of aR things? Should
it not suffice for this end, if the Supreme present Himself
to human view under some form of personal manifesta
tion, and then having verified by suitable works His claim
to be adored as the Creator, give assurance of His purpose
to accomphsh a new and great work, furnishing at the same
time outlines and foretokens of the nature of that which
is thus predicted ? It is not easy to see that any more
satisfying, or indeed any other, mode of demonstration is
possible. Suppose that one of those persons who will
not see God in nature had been in His presence at the
time of the creation, had been ' by Him,' like the eternal
Wisdom, when ' He stretched His compass over the deep,'
had been admitted to converse with Him, and been taken
into His counsels, — that at that great hour of the divine
activity God had said to him, — See, I form a universe, and
here is the pattern and plan of the work; mark, as I give
the word, how the actual rises into being, and answers to
the ideal, — ' Let there be hght.' Scepticism from such a
person would have been simple madness. Now this is
a representation of what God has actuaRy done in view
of His greater — His spiritual creative work. He has
taken the world into His counsels, in that selected portion
which He has chosen as the sample and representation of

The Israelitish Economy. 191
the race. To them He reveals Himself in His personal
form and glory, them He admits into His presence, to
them He declares His purpose, and unfolds in outline the
plan of His future work. In that introductory economy
He virtuaRy calls the chosen race around His feet, and
says to them, Behold and know me, your Creator and your
Lord; recognise me by the power I wield and the wonders
I perform ; and now I bid you watch and wait, for behold
I am about to do a 'new thing' in your sight, — ' I create
new heavens and a new earth.'
This, in regard to one of its main functions, is the
economy of Israehtism. Thus miracle prepares for
miracle ; one revelation of God, pointing back to the
foregoing great revelation in nature, points forward to
another and greater revelation in grace. The miraculous
element pervades the dispensation, and is inwrought
through it, for it belongs to its essential nature. Law, it
is true, prevails ; the laws of nature and of human action
are by no means overturned and thrown all into wild
disorder, but these laws are set in the hght of God's per
vading presence and activity, so as to be unmistakeably
recognisable as parts of His ways. This miraculous
revelation is the signature of God to the promise of the
coming redemption. AR truly demonstrative miracles are
of this subsidiary nature, and serve this preparatory purpose.
Always they are employed to pave the way and prepare the
minds of men for greater miracles. When Moses was sent
to deliver Israel from the iron yoke of Pharaoh, a task de
manding divine resources, he required first to prove that he
possessed divine power. When Jesus Christ would verify
His claims to be beheved in as the breaker of every yoke, He
first of aR manifested His control over the forces of nature,
and over the diseases and other bonds by which Satan had
bound his captives. A person who can do only ordinary

192 The Israelitish Economy.
works wiR not be credited when he proposes to do those
that are extraordinary. We have in the all-creating, all-
preserving, all-regulating operations of God in nature and
providence a standard of divine workmanship. He who
undertakes and claims to be trusted as the Saviour of
men, must of necessity prove his ability to meet this
standard; and this is precisely what Jehovah, the God of
Israel, has done before aR the world, in the miracles of
Israel's history.
I distinguish thus between miracles subsidiary and
principal, or miracles relative and absolute, or miracles
demonstrative and miracles needing to be demonstrated.
The distinction is important, and relieves us of many of
the perplexities by which the subject is embarrassed. E.g.,
when it is asked whether miracles are more helps to faith
or hindrances, we know at once how to answer. If, when
they are spoken of as hindrances to faith, that class be
referred to which I have called principal or absolute, then
it is at once to be allowed that these are works hard to be
believed. The thoughts of God embodied in them are far
above man's thoughts, and hence we are prone to stagger
through unbehef at their very greatness. These great
miracles are such as are in need of evidence and iRustra-
tion. But when, as is usually the case, the question
relates to the other class, the subsidiary or relative, then,
on the other hand, it is at once to be affirmed that they
are helps. For this they are meant, to this end they are
given, and he who does not recognise in such miracles as
those of Moses and of Christ the signature and seal of the
Supreme, wiR not ' be persuaded though one rose from the
dead.' Again, the objection to the fact of miracles from
the inviolability of law, at once falls away. Can God,
it is said, violate the order Himself has established, or
act capriciously, irregularly, unwisely? Truly, no. The

The Israelitish Economy. 193
only violation of order in the case is that caused by
human transgression; what God in His new creation
contemplates and accomplishes is really the repairing and
restoring of the law which this transgression has violated.
There He more gloriously than anywhere else takes the
side of order. And as for those miracles which illustrate
and evidence His redeeming work, He in them simply
gives some samples and adumbrations of that higher order
which prevails in the higher sphere where He is fully
manifested, and which no sin is permitted to disturb.
Further, it is at once plain, from the foregoing statement,
that in the case of demonstrative miracles, it is not the
miracle viewed abstractly, or merely as a work of power,
in which the evidential force resides. It is the miracle
as wrought by a person of known character, and wrought
for a certain declared end and in connection with a certain
promise or prediction, which demonstrates. Abstractly
or viewed merely as a work of power, a miracle proves
nothing. Suppose that a violation of natural law took
place, were the thing conceivable, apart from any per
sonal agent and declared end, — what then ? would it
convince of anything ? It would merely stand as an
isolated wonder, an unaccountable phenomenon, and tend
merely to evince that nature's uniformities were not
without exception or absolutely rehable. Suppose that
I experience a sensation new to me ; — I feel, say, a
shock of electricity. I am stunned and astonished,
but I can make nothing of it. But suppose that I
see the electric machine and a person operating with
it, and he explains that he has quietly brought
me into the electric circuit, and only needs to join
two bits of wire to produce the effect ; and, more
over, he bids me watch while he repeats the pheno
menon by touching the wires ; now, of course, I
N

194 The Israelitish Economy.
connect the effect with the agent, and beheve that he
is the doer. It is thus that we are assured that the
miracles of Scripture were not mere wonders, but the
work of intelligent agents. They were visibly con
nected with those agents ; the workers of them were
careful to call attention to their own activity, and to use
suitable means in .order to satisfy onlookers that it was
by the exertion of their will the effect was produced.1
Further, as agents w"ho are wise and good never act
but for a wise and good end, so it belongs to a miracle
wrought by God or by His commission that it is wrought
for a worthy purpose. It would be impossible to be
lieve that a work of power done for no sufficient reason
could be the work of God ; and the announcement of
the end contemplated, or of the doctrine which it is
wrought to support, must go along with the miracle
and be found to be in harmony with all that is other
wise known of God in order to assure us that it is His
work. The moral significance of the work is part of
the signature of God at least as ¦ much as its super
natural power. And thus, finaRy, we find our way
through the last perplexity connected with the subject.
It is asked, may not supernatural works be wrought by
angels, or creatures superior to man belonging to the
spiritual world ? and how then 'shaR we, in believing a
miracle, assure ourselves that we are trusting to the work
of God, and not to that of some seducing spirit ? I
answer, not the work only must be taken into account, but
the whole revelation; in other words, it is the work,
along with the manifested character of the agent, and the
declared purpose for which he appears and acts, which is
meant to have convincing efficacy. 'Prove aR things;
hold fast that which is good.' The Bible itself makes
1 Cf. Lyall, Propcedia Prophetica, pp. 51 f.

The Israelitish Economy. 195
provision for the possibihty of our being appealed to by
false, delusive, Satanic miracles.1 But surely the signa
ture of the great adversary, even though written in charac
ters superhuman and miraculous, must be very distin
guishable from that of God. And doubtless also the
wonders of Satan wiR always, even as wonders, be over
passed by the mightier marvels of the power that is
supreme. The rod of the great magician, the Father of
lies, wiR in due time be swahowed up by the rod of
God's true servant. Here, as everywhere else, our success
in attaining truth depends upon the temper of our own
spirits. There is no ready-made and short-hand method
of convincing men in regard to the truth, whether they
wiR or not. ' If any man will do God's wiU,' or is will
ing to follow the light He has, he shaR have more light,
and ' shaR know of the doctrine.' If any man is willing
to be deceived, assuredly he shaU not lack temptations
or be unsolicited by ' lying wonders.'
Thus, in regard to this first and fundamental function
of the Israehtish economy, we begin to perceive some
thing of the suitableness of the means employed and the
methods adopted by God. Miracle, as we have seen,
lay at the basis and pervaded the whole building. But
miracle cannot be a universal element in the world's
administration. If it were to become universal, it would
cease to be miraculous. If God, everywhere and in all
ages, revealed Himself in a personal form, and in personal
interferences with the action of mechanical forces, then
this would be recognised as a part of nature's order, and
would possess no special power to interest, to convince, or
to warn. Hence this dispensation, because miraculous,
behoved to be limited to a certain definite sphere ahke in
space and time. Selection and separation were indis-
1 Deut. xiii. 1 f . ; 2 Thess. ii. 9.

196 The Israelitish Economy.
pensable ; and those who find fault with the wisdom of
God, because He chose one nation and not all nations, and
because of the restricted character of the preparatory
dispensation, 'know neither what they say nor whereof
they affirm.' x In truth, it is sufficiently manifest that
just as light and heat are intensified by being concen
trated, the very narrowness and seclusion of the sphere
increased the impressiveness and power of this revelation.
It was the more fitted to arrest attention and to draw forth
inquiry, when it was seen that, while philosophy and art
were widely spread over the world, in Israel alone existed
a discipline and a law to whose origination philosophy
and art had not contributed, and which were at the same
time holier and purer than could elsewhere be found.
II. Education. — That miraculous revelation of which
we have spoken, was of course only an initial step. It
was to educate men, and so ' make ready a people pre
pared for the Lord,' that the Most High thus personally
revealed Himself on earth. AR that is involved in this
education, and all that the Israelitish economy did to
forward it, we cannot here take time to glance at, even
in the most cursory manner.
In every process of education, a first and principal
place .belongs to the instruction of the mind by the
impartation of knowledge. In the case before us, the
matter of the instruction, or the subject of the knowledge,
was ' the things of the Spirit of God,' the truth regarding
God, His character, His government, His relations to His
1 Garbett, Bible and its Critics, p. 120 : Lord Bolingbroke ' bases his
unbelief on the alleged absurdity of supposing that God would select a
people to Himself, among whom He would erect a peculiar constitution
for preserving His knowledge and worship among the rest of mankind.
The argument simply amounts to this, that the opinion of the objector as
to the most suitable means to accomplish a, certain end differs from that
of the God of the Bible.'

The Israelitish Economy. 1 9 7
intelligent creatures on the earth, and also regarding man
as the subject of God, and a being fallen, guilty, and
depraved. But these are things which lie beyond the
natural conceptions of the human mind. They belong to
a sphere above that in which human thought naturally
moves, and from which it draws its forms of conception
and of language. All thought and speech are moulded
upon the objects presented to our senses, and we can con
ceive and speak of the realities of the spiritual world only
under those images which the external world furnishes.
We know that there is an admirable adaptation between
the world and man, that the one in its actual state,
its objects and occurrences, its scenery and its changes,
its mingling of the beautiful and the grand, the vast and
the minute, the pleasing and the terrible, the useful and
the destructive, the solemn and the ludicrous, furnishes
to the other in his actual state an exhaustless store of
symbols and of figures wherewith to represent to himself
and to his fellows the manifold and diversified affections
of the soul, the thoughts of his mind and the experiences
of his life. But it is evident that the words and symbols
which men instinctively draw from the external world
must be inadequate for the just representation of the truth
relating to God and His kingdom on the earth. In the
first place, even had suitable symbols been at hand in nature,
men could not be trusted to select and to apply them. In
the second place, the world, though presenting an ample
store of imagery suitable for the representation of ordinary
human hfe and character and acts, possesses natively
no symbohc resources adequate to the higher demands of
the divine character and of a divine system. Hence
God, revealing Himself in a new and more glorious
manner than in nature, prepared for the revelation not
only the matter but the forms. By His personal mani-

198 The Israelitish Economy.
festation in His Son, and His great work of redemption
for men, He furnished the facts which it was indispensable
for the world to learn ; and in the preliminary dispensa
tion, He furnished the light in which these facts were
to be read, and the means of understanding their spiritual
significance. The lesson was new which was to be taught,
and hence the apparatus for teaching it was new also. The
Teacher, indeed, was too wise to break altogether with the
old ; rather we find occasion continuaRy to admire the skill
wTith which He turns the old to account, accommodating
Himself to men's actual condition, and availing Him
self as far as possible of their existing stores of language,
symbol, rite, tradition, custom, feeling. Yet, if the stones
were such as were actuaRy existent, the architecture was
of God's own devising. From among natural objects
and ancient customs and accredited religious rites, He
selected those elements which suited His divine purpose,
arranged them into new combinations and informed them
with a new meaning, and. thus drew out a new iRus-
trated lesson-book for the instruction of His pupils.
What has been already remarked of the miraculous in
relation to the economy of which we are speaking is
equally to be remarked of the symbohc. It is thoroughly
pervaded by the one as well as by the other, and the one,
hke the other, has often been to those ' who seek occa
sion ' against it a ground of disparagement and of cavil.
Even by many of those who believe in its divinity and
undertake to be its expositors this distinguishing feature
seems inadequately appreciated. It has been common
to say1 that God adopted this symbolic mode of repre
senting truth in His dealings with the Israehtish people,
because that people were peculiarly ignorant and rude,
and because this mode of representation makes, especially
1 See e.g., Witsius, Misc. Sac, ii., p. 927 ; Lowman, Heb. Ritual, p. 49.

The Israelitish Economy. 199
upon uncultured minds, a more vivid impression than
'•any other. Now I see no reason for thinking that the
Israelites, either at the time of the Exodus or at any
subsequent period, were, in any pertinent sense, a people
distinguished by barbarism and ignorance. That they
were spiritually bhnd, unbelieving, hard of heart, and
obstinately rebellious, is abundantly testified, but such
moral quahties as these they possessed in common with
all nations. That at the time of the Sinaitic legislation
some of these evil qualities existed in higher than the
usual degree, in consequence mainly of the bondage in
Egypt, may also be allowed ; but that they were degraded
below the general level, so as to be more incapable than
other people of apprehending spiritual truth, and to re
quire to be treated and taught hke children, has yet to
be proved. If they were children, they were children as
aR men are apart from the special teaching of the Word
and Spirit of God.
It is equally inadequate to find an explanation of the
symbolism of this economy by reference to the pecuhar im-
pressiveness belonging to the objects of sensuous percep
tion.1 The fact is unquestionable, but is here inappropriate.
It is to go aside into an erroneous path to represent the rites
and observances of the Israehtes as ordained and arranged
by Jehovah by way of visible show or dramatic representa
tion, like the mysteries of the Greeks or the miracle-plays
of the Middle Ages, in order to impress the minds of the
onlookers by a surprising and withal instructive and
edifying spectacle. The excitement of the emotions of
wonder, and the attracting and impressing by a sensuous
entertainment, can hardly be supposed to come within
the scope of this divine system. The use of the symbolic
1 See e.g., Alexander, Connection of Old and New Testaments (2d ed.),
p. 303.

2.oo The Israelitish Economy.
element in the Israelitish system is more vital and pro
found than these theories represent. It was not got up
to effect results which could not be produced by words —
the suitable words themselves were yet awanting, and
the symbohc economy was set up to serve as the founda
tion of a new and adequate language for the embodiment
of the revelation of divine grace. Thereby God prepared
the suitable forms of thought and of speech for the
embodiment in after ages and for all time of the facts and
doctrines of that divine rehgion which He was about to
estabhsh in the world. Thereby he educated the minds
of men for the apprehension and the reception of the
gifts of the spiritual dispensation.
The fact is fully recognised by philosophy, that truth
pertaining to the spiritual world can be apprehended by
the human mind only when it is embodied in objective
facts and forms and presented to the senses.1 Every
1 One large department of human knowledge is named by Leibnitz the
symbolical ; see his Meditationes de Cognitione Veritate et Ideis. Cf.
Carus, Organon des Erkenntniss, p. 127 : ' Durch und durch sind wir an
bildliche, an figiirliche Worte gebunden wenn wir das reine Schauen des
Geistes mitzutheilen unternehmen, und wie denn Dies die Philosophie
vollkommen mit der Religion gemein hat, als welche im Lehren von den
gbttlichen Dingen doch gleicherweise iiberall auf Symbole sich gewiesen
findet, — so hat sie aueh Das mit ihr gemein dass in ihren Ausdriicken
durchgangig das Bediirfniss sich zeigt das Unzulangliche der Sprache
an sich durch Wiirde und Reinheit der Gestaltung der Sprache selbst nach
Mbglichkeit zu ersetzen, indem eben nur dadurch es gelingen wird, den
Geist zu jener Hbhe und Klarheit zu erheben, auf welcher die Erkenntniss
sich leichter in sich selbst erschliesst und das von Andern Erkannte allem
voUstandiger wiedergespiegelt werden kann. Mit einem Worte, Philo
sophie sowol als Religion bediirfen durchaus der Weihe der Form, da ihr
Wesen in so vieler- Beziehung unsaglich ist, ' etc. Muller, Scientific Mytho
logy, p. 197 (Eng. Tr.): 'Symbols are evidently coeval with the human
race, they result from the union of the soul with the body in man, ' etc.
H. Spencer, Essays, vol. i., p. 187: 'All language consists at the begin
ning of symbols, which are as like to the things symbolised as it is prac
ticable to make them.'

The Israelitish Economy. 201
religion which has found acceptance in the world has
been clothed in its own proper symbolic representations ;
and when the Most High apphed Himself to the estab
lishment of His own divine religion, He followed in this
respect the way of all religious founders and teachers,
in accommodation, not to the Israelites and their peculiar
needs, but to man.1 That the symbols of Israehtism
were caRed for. by a universal human, and not by a parti
cular national, want is proved by this, that they in their
spiritual efficacy, though not in their outward material
forms, were carried forward into Christianity, and thus
made part of the spiritual furnishing of the world. The
language which originated with and was formed upon the
rites, customs, and polity of Israel is the language in which
the revelation of Jesus Christ is clothed, and only by
faithful reference to its source can that language be safely
and correctly interpreted. What, in regard to this mat
ter, was temporary was simply the outward machinery ;
the thoughts, and imagery, and words which that ma
chinery originated continued, and abide stiR2
It is now also recognised by philosophers,3 that for all
systems of truth an appropriate language is of essential
importance. This is pre-eminently the case with such a
1 Cf. Bacon, De Aug., lib. vi., c. 2 : ' Regula qusedam est traditiva, quod
scientia omnis qua? anticipationibus sive prsesuppositionibus non est con-
sona, a similitudinibus suppetias petere debeat. ' — Smith, Select Discourses
by Williams, p. 388.
2 Stier, apud Auberlen, Offenbarwng, i., p. 367 : ' Gott hat desswegen den
Propheten und uns die ewigen Wahrheiten des Geistes audi zugleich in
israelitischen Bildern gegeben, weil dies Israel gerade die dazu bereitete
Bilder-und Typenwelt im kleinen, das Elementarlexicon aller gbttlichen
Sprache mit Menschen sein und bleiben soil, weil wir auf diesem Wege die
hochnothige, den abstrakten Denkern umsonst gegebene Weisung emp-
fangen, das Typische aller Natur und Geschichte iiberhaupt verstehen zu
lernen. '
3 See e.g., Mill, Logic, vol. ii., p. 201 (4th ed.); Spencer, Essays, i., p. 195.

202 The Israelitish Economy.
system' of truth as that embodied in the revelation of
Jesus Christ. There is, as I have said, much in this
foreign to the ordinary thoughts of the human mind, and
for which ordinary speech has no suitable expression. It
is weR known that one of the main difficulties to be
encountered by the missionaries of Christianity among
those peoples to whom the Bible has been an unknown
book, and whose culture is entirely a natural growth, ,
arises from the absence of conceptions corresponding to
those on which the Christian rehgion is based and to
which it appeals, and the consequent absence of words
in their dialects suitable to the expression of the ideas
requiring to be conveyed.1 Of course the more deeply
sunk a nation is in sensualism and barbarity, the more
entirely the thoughts of its people revolve round the
material and the gross, so much the more unfit must their
dialect be for the expression, and their minds for the
reception, of such truths as those of the New Testament.2
It is an evidence of the overruling wisdom of the Most
High that He chose a people, in view of the coming of
His Son, to be first educated themselves and then to be
the educators of the world, who were neither sunk in
barbarism nor yet exalted by a false, superstitious, pomp
ous civilisation. Though not peculiarly ignorant or rude,
they were distinguished from many of the peoples around
them by the simplicity of their social and pohtical habi
tudes, and by freedom from pronounced and imposing ido-
1 See illustrations in Garbett, Divine Plan of Revelation, pp. 125 f. ;
Waddel, Twenty-nine Years in Africa, p. 278 ; Spencer, Psychology (1st
ed. ) : ' In the Australian language there are no words answering to justice,
sin, guilt. Among various of the lower races, acts of generosity or mercy
are utterly incomprehensible. '
2 Humboldt has somewhere said : ' Language is the outward appearance
of the intellect of nations. Their language is their intellect, and their
intellect their language. '

The Israelitish Economy. 203
latrous rites. Such a people it was comparatively easy to
educate, and upon their existing habits and conceptions to
graft what of new and special was needful in view of the
peculiar functions which they were destined to perform.
The ideas native to the human mind in an unsophisticated
and undebased condition were native to them ; the sense
of the right, the just, the true, the good, was compara
tively fresh and pure within them. Reverence, obliga
tion, responsibility, were familiar conceptions, and the
simple procedure of their patriarchal judicatures made
them clearly understand the significance of guilt, con
demnation, punishment, acquittal, reward. Upon this
sound substratum of natural conceptions, with its appro
priate language, did Jehovah found in proceeding to
reveal to them the new facts, and to set before them the
new sensuous imagery, by which their thoughts and
language might be formed to higher and nobler things.
As to the subject-matter of this divine teaching, it is
not necessary that much should be said. The leading and
essential elements start at once into view. The instruc
tion related to two points, — what men are before God, and
what was being prepared for them by God. On the
one hand, in order to appreciate the grace of God in the
gift of His own Son as a Redeemer from sin, it was
indispensable that men should have the means of under
standing the truth regarding their actual condition as
guilty, as justly condemned, and as utterly impure and
unworthy of divine favour. In order to this, it was
evidently a primary condition that they should know
the true standard of human duty,1 and the relation which
1 See Macdonald, Pentateuch, i., p. 328 ; Walker, Phil, of Divine Opera
tions, p. 59. Plato (Republic, Book ii.) enjoins that all impure and de
basing representations of the gods be excluded from his model republic,
and requires his philosopher to begin with a clean canvas. This is impos-

204 The Israelitish Economy.
men naturally bear to this standard. Hence, first of all,
the perfect law of God was presented to their view and
enjoined upon them as a law to which they were subject
and which they were bound to obey. Hence, too, the
fact of their violation of this law, and of their state of
guilt and liabihty to punishment under its sanctions, was
pressed constantly upon their mind in those bloody sacri
fices which predominated so largely in their appointed
ordinances of worship. They were not aRowed to forget
that God, though ' delighting in mercy,' is a Being of purer
eyes than to behold iniquity, and who cannot look upon
sin ; who, if He dwelt among men, dwelt in sacred and
awful seclusion and sanctity, unapproachable, or approach
able only by a chosen mediator, with solemn rites and
with trembhng of heart. Thus around the fact of human
sin the teachings of this economy revolved. All that
God showed them of Himself, His infinite holiness, His
infinite mercy ; all that He taught them of His rights
and claims as their Lawgiver and King; all that He
revealed to them of the spirituality of His nature and of
the greatness and glory of His works ; all that He dis
closed to them of the past history of the world ; — all
centred in this, that they were guilty, condemned crea
tures, whom God pitied, and for whom He was preparing
a great salvation.
For, on the other hand, the system was distinctively of
a preparatory character ; it was dyed throughout its whole
texture, as it behoved to be, with the hues of prophecy.
In it God drew out by practical adumbrations, as weR as
by oracles or spoken words, a sketch or plan of His great
coming self-revelation. The outlines, indeed, in order to
sible practically, but as far as possible the requirement was met in Israel.
Cf. Palgrave (Journey through Arabia, i., pp. 370 f.), on the Wahhabee
• reformation of Mahometanism.

The Israelitish Economy. 205
take away all ground for the suspicion of the prophecy
being devised after the event or giving occasion to its
own fulfilment, were purposely left somewhat dim and
indeterminate and liable to misinterpretation. It was
sufficiently clear, however, to fiR the imagination, to excite
the hope, and to stir the desire of men. And this, it is
evident, was an important element in the educational
power of the Israehtish economy. Just as the heir to a
high position is trained for it, not only by suitable in
struction and the formation of right habits, but also by
his being informed of the exalted destiny that awaits
him, and thus having imparted a sense of the superiority
of his station, with the view of effecting a suitable exalta
tion in his mind and in his conduct, so were men trained
to understand and feel that ' some better thing ' than
their actual possession was in store for them. There was
imparted to their spirits a forward and an upward look.
They were habituated to an attitude of desire and of
expectancy. They were set like those that ' watch for
the morning;' for though it was the time of darkness
and the sun was still below the horizon, yet the sky was
streaked with his rays, and the objects around were
already discernible in their just positions and relative
magnitudes. In this process of education it was needful that care
should be taken not only that the requisite knowledge
should be offered, but also that it should be acquired.
And as aR knowledge of a vital kind is fitted and in
tended for embodiment in action, so only by its being
applied to action can it be thoroughly learnt. The school
boy does not learn arithmetic by committing to memory
a series of rules ; he must be set to apply the rules and
work out his sums. An apprentice is not effectually
taught by mere oral instructions ; the instructions must

206 The Israelitish Economy.
be put to use^ and be inwrought into the strongest habits
of his life. The truth which required to be imparted to
men, and for which the appropriate intelligential forms
required to be prepared, was directly and intensely prac
tical, and hence behoved somehow to be embodied and
represented in a practical system, and used for the pur
poses of life in order that it might be duly learned.
Not only is aR truth most thoroughly learned when
learned by practice, — much truth, and aR that is most
vitally important for the purposes of life, can be learned
in no other way. It becomes known to us only through
means of experience. We cannot know, for instance, that
a person is trustworthy and amiable but by the facts of
actual intercourse with him. We cannot know with assured
conviction whether a certain course of conduct is pleasur
able and profitable or not, save by actual trial. SpeciaRy
manifest is this in regard to those truths which are on
any account unwelcome to us. Suppose that on any
ground we have come to entertain a feeling of dislike and
mistrust towards an individual, then it requires a some
what lengthened process of experience to convince us
that our feehngs are unjust, and to bring us to cherish
the opposite sentiments. We will not believe without
trial that he is another kind of person than we imagine,
and even many trials, all yielding the same result, wiR be
needed to eradicate our original prejudice. Or suppose
that we entertain exaggerated views of our own talents
and capacities,- — we ' think of ourselves more highly than
we ought to think,' — then I know of no means of dis
lodging from our minds the groundless but agreeable mis-
appreciation save the hard discipline of actual trial, by
being set to measure our strength with problems that
prove too hard for us.
Now, in view of the coming of the Son of God to earth,

The Israelitish Economy. 207
it was needful that those convictions should be formed in
men which were suited to render Him welcome to them,
and to prepare them for becoming His disciples and agents.
If men are prone to judge God falsely, and to form wrong
conceptions of His character, it was needful that He
should take measures to convince them of their error,
and to show them the truth in regard to Himself, so that
they might appreciate the character and claims of Him who
comes as the Son of God. Or if men are prone to enter
tain unfounded views in regard to their own resources as
means of securing true and abiding wellbeing, it was also
needful that measures should be taken to convince them
of the insufficiency of their powers, so that they might
be shut up to faith in Christ as the only way open to
them of true salvation. Whatever else might pertain to
the preparatory economy, it was indispensable that it should
include the means of our acquiring just convictions of
God, and just convictions of ourselves. So also, if we are
prone to place undue dependence upon outward resources,
upon material, worldly, political strength, as the means
of weRbeing, it was indispensable that this dependence
should be destroyed, and that the lesson should be
clearly taught, that only in the good of the spirit can
true good be found. In aR educational processes the
special tendencies of the pupils must be taken account of,
and the wise teacher will accommodate his apphances to
the character, the temper, the talents, the infirmities, and
the vices of those whom he endeavours to instruct.
If now we attempt to gather up the various views thus
presented in regard to the proprieties and exigencies of
this preparatory discipline, we shaR find that the whole
points to this, as what in the circumstances was needful,
— the establishment, on a narrow sphere and in a material
visible form, of a practical governmental system, present-

208 The Israelitish Economy.
ing an outline or picture of the principles and procedure
of that large universal system, that kingdom of God on
earth, which the Son of God was to introduce. It was
needful that the new truth relating to this universal
system should be first represented and embodied in an
outward symbolic form ; that this truth should be incul
cated upon the minds of the chosen people by a course of
practical training ; that this truth should be of a kind
fitted to correct natural errors and misconceptions, and
specially should set their own spiritual condition and the
character of God and the principles of His government in
a just hght, — in other words, should be essentially the
same truth ultimately and more adequately represented in
the permanent' divine economy. And the Most High, in.
meeting these combined exigencies, has really set up in
Israel a symbolic practical governmental system, — a
system in which, while the forms and ends are peculiar,
the regulative principles and spiritual significance are of
universal import.1 Estabhshed on a natural basis, con
fined within narrow limits both of- space and time, super
intended and conducted by a visible divine King, the
government of Israel was a microcosm, an epitome and
picture of God's universal rule, a sketch or model of the
1 Cf. Cappe, Critical Remarks, vol. ii., pp. 195 f. : 'That the Jews in
their character and fate, and the correspondence of these to one another,
might be an exhibition of the moral government of God, it was necessary
that their law and their circumstances should appear to be the work of
God ; that their obedience to God should be in such things as are obvious
and sensible, in respect to which all men might judge of their character,
whether it was correspondent to the law or not ; and that their circum
stances, in like manner, and their correspondence to the' respect they paid
to the law, should be obvious and observable, ' etc. Preiswerk, Zur Verdnt-
wortlichung, p. 216 : ' Das alte Testament ist der Ausdruck des Grundge-
dankens Gottesherrschaft. Es sollte ein Reich zur Darstellung gebracht
werden deren Gott selber Konig, die Menschen sein Volk, seien, ' etc. See
also Miall, Bases of Belief (3d ed.), p. 253.

The Israelitish Economy. 209
world's general providence. There, as the Sovereign Ruler
of the universe was visibly present on earth and objec
tively revealed to men, so also His divine jurisdiction is
represented as in miniature, exhibited in actual operation
in human sight and in compressed outline. God there
provided for Himself a sphere on which, to the best ad
vantage, He might educate the chosen race to a just
appreciation of His character, His claims, His laws, His
purposes. There on a limited scale, and in a palpable
unmistakeable way, He re-enacted the history of the race
of men in their relations to Himself; while, at the same
time, by a wonderful adaptation and combination of con
trivances, in the same system was presented a prefigura-
tion, on a humble scale and in a material earthly way, of
that spiritual empire over which the sway of Jesus Christ
shall extend, and which is to embrace all nations. Thus
we understand how it should be that in this economy the
symbols most largely employed should be men them
selves, their social relations, their pohtical dignities, their
characters and their destinies. It is true that the usual
symbolism of nature is here also employed, and a rich
store of images and pictures is drawn from the aspects
and objects of the visible universe. But this material
natural symbolism, common to this with all other sys
tems, forms here but the groundwork. What is distinctive
is of another and a higher kind. The Most High takes
men themselves, and employs them to be symbols of
men, — men, on the one hand, engaged with interests
social, pohtical, secular, — representing men, on the other
hand, occupied with interests spiritual and eternal. Thus,
too, we see how this dispensation may fitly be called the
intermediate economy. It was the line of stepping-stones
between the original and the final dispensations, between
the age of the First and that of the Second Adam, joining
0

210 The Israelitish Economy.
together the beginning and the end of the world's history.
Its symbols were also types, — referring to the past, they
referred also to the future ; replete with instruction in
regard to man's fallen and helpless state, they were not
less so in regard to the coming and divine redemption.
It hardly needs to be pointed out here, in conclusion,
how the consideration of this function confirms the pro
priety of the means adopted by God in the selection of a
particular nation, and in the careful separation of this
nation from those around. Just as scholars best learn
their lessons when secluded and un distracted, so was it
indispensable in this process of education that the chosen
people should be kept as free as possible from all disturbing
influences, whether of a harassing or a seductive kind.
III. Demonstration. — It has been above remarked
that there is a kind of truth which cannot be taught by
any process merely intellectual, and which requires for
its inculcation the discipline of actual experience. All
truth which is most important and which most vitally
pertains to life and weRbeing is of this character ; and
it is of a certain portion of such truth that we have to
speak under the present head. If the previous name —
Education — were taken in its utmost extent of signifi
cance, it might fairly be held to cover the ground now
before us. What is here called Demonstration belongs
to that process of education, taken in its widest sense, by
which men were prepared for Christ's appearing ; at the
same time, it is an element in this process so marked
and so momentous, as to render it eminently convenient
and fitting to assign to it a separate discussion.
The incarnation of. the Son of God, with all its con
sequences, did not take place at the time and in the
manner in which it occurred, as an unexplained, arbitrary,
and uncalled for visitation. In this, as in all the divine

The Israelitish Economy. 211
procedure, and in this pre-eminently, care was taken by
God that His intervention in human affairs should be
recognisable as a necessity, and means were provided
whereby ' wisdom should be justified of her children.'
It is quite true, indeed, as some one has said, that ' God
does not make Himself wiser by trying experiments ;' but
it was indispensable that what God did in His redemptive
work by His Son, as it was meant for human acceptance
and salvation, should also commend itseR to their ac
ceptance as the only adequate means of salvation. Not
for His own information or instruction was the pre
paratory economy instituted, but for the satisfaction of
those for whom the benefits of His great work of love
were designed. This work took place only when it had
been clearly demonstrated that the world was helpless in
its spiritual bondage, and that the help of God, in the
very form which it assumed in the redemption by Christ
Jesus, was the world's only hope.
The Word of God ascribes such a task of demonstra
tion to the Mosaic system ; as when Paul writes to the
Galatians,1 ' If a law had been given which could have
given life, verily righteousness should have been by the
law ; ' or as when in Hebrews it is said of the Mosaic
covenant,2 ' If that first covenant had been faultless, then
should no place have been found for the second : For
finding fault with them, He saith, Behold the days come,
saith the Lord, when I wiR make a new covenant,' etc.
We do not hesitate, indeed, to say that this work of de
monstration formed the chief task and highest achieve
ment of the Mosaic system.3 Much that is pecuhar in
1 Gal. iii. 21. 2 Heb. viii. 7, 8.
3 This function of the Israelitish economy is often referred to, yet scarcely
anywhere brought out with the prominence and emphasis it seems to me
to deserve; see, e.g., Drechsler, Jesaia, i., p. 15, 'Der ganze grosse

212 The Israelitish Economy.
that system, and that has been to the minds of many an
occasion of objection and offence, finds its explanation
and ceases to be strange when this essential function is
weR understood. It is this mainly which vindicates the
wisdom and goodness of the Most High, in instituting,
presiding over, and operating by means of, a system fuR
of accommodations to man's fallen state and sinful cus
toms. It is this which affords the rationale of that
feature of the procedure of God, under the Israelitish
economy, which has been called the Law of Postponement,1
whereby for 'so many ages the full realisation of the
promised blessings seemed ever to be put off, and to
elude the grasp of those who were ' looking for redemp
tion.' It is this which explains the so-called double
sense of prophecy, and teaches us to understand how
every particular crisis in Israel's history and every
special transient deliverance is fitly used as type and
pledge of the great crisis and the final deliverance. It
is this, above all, which takes from the visible issues of
this economy their anomalous and disappointing character,
which, in regard to this divine work, enables us to recog
nise true success in apparent failure, and shows how the
whole dispensation reached its proper and destined
climax just then when it appeared to have most igno-
miniously broken down, and as a thing ' waxen old ' and
obsolete, to be ' ready to vanish away' For the dispen
sation was essentially of the nature of an elaborate ex
periment, "devised and conducted by the only- wise God,
Zeitraum zwischen der Siindflut und Christus stellt das Schauspiel dar des
Durchsuchens aller Gebiete, des Versuchens aller mbglichen Wege nach
alien mbglichen Richtungen, 'etc. ; Garbett, Bible and its Critics, p. 46 ;
Brit, and For. Evang. Review, April 1870, pp. 287 ff. ; Palfrey, Led. on
Jewish Scriptures, i., p. 165 ; Maurice, Prophets and Kings, p. 10 ; cf.
Smith, Select Discourses, p. 330 ; Gladstone, Studies on Homer, ii., p. 528.
1 Ebrard, Der Brief an die Hebraer, p. 3.

The Israelitish Economy. 2 1 3
and directed towards this end — the practical demonstra
tion of the utter inadequacy of human resources and of
human plans to meet the world's needs and secure true
wellbeing to men, — nay, even of all expedients but one,
the expedient which was introduced upon the stage of
time, when He sent His only-begotten Son into the
world. We shall find, too, that the true stages in
Israel's history, the beginnings and endings of the
different acts of the divine drama, are clearly marked
by the successive steps taken towards the complete
working out of this problem of demonstration.
Let us briefly glance at some of the main factors in
this spiritual process. The end was to set in clear
light the world's needs, which the world's inhabitants
are without exception exceedingly unwilling, through
the natural operation of selfishness and pride, to recog
nise, and which at the same time behoved to be clearly
demonstrated in order to the vindication of the interven
tion and the appreciation of the help of the Most High
in the provision of His saving grace. Now the spiritual
need of mankind springs from sin, and the great require
ment of mankind is an effective remedy for sin. These
two points, therefore, embrace the objects of this demon
stration — sin and its- remedy — and towards the clear
resistless evincing of the truth on these two points, all
the arrangements of the Mosaic economy are directed.
Sin is a fact in the moral state of the world which
cannot be hidden and refuses to be ignored. Men uni
versally give tokens that they feel its presence. All
hearts are burdened more or less heavily with a sense of
guilt. All languages contain terms answering to right
and wrong, good and bad. All persons ' accuse or else
excuse one another ; ' and in their mutual recrimina
tions and terms of abuse, as well as in their codes of

214 The Israelitish Economy.
law and processes of judicature, they testify that they are
alive to the fact of human wrong-doing and guiltiness.
With all this it is at the same time universally true that
men have no sufficient, no just sense even of the guilt of
sin, still less of the moral helplessness which it has
entailed upon the race ; while the knowledge of both
is indispensable in order to understand and to appreciate
the redemption of Jesus Christ. The necessity for the
demonstration of the guiltiness of sin accounts for the
peculiarly legal character of the institution. ' Where no
law is, there is no transgression ; ' * and that the people's
transgressions might be recognised in their true aspect as
opposed to the character and authority of God, He Him
self, as already said, appeared among them in His divine
majesty, — a perfect God, ruling by means of a perfect
law, — keeping Himself sacredly apart from men, though
dwelling among them, manifesting utter abhorrence of all
uncleanness, approachable only with fitting acknowledg
ment of their sin, and visiting with swift and terrible
destruction all open perverse violations of His ordinances
and intrusions upon His holiness. His law was one
which was approved by their own consciences, and which,
at the same time, absolutely reproved their conduct,
which they could not but commend, and by which they
could not but feel condemned ; and in all the provisions
of their peculiar system they had their guilt set before
their eyes, and were reminded continually of the fact that
God held them liable to punishment.
The demonstration of the depraving and enslaving
power of sin is even more important. And as all men
and the world at large are disposed to ' think of them
selves more highly than they ought to think,' this can
only be effected by allowing them to experience their
1 Rom. iv. 15.

The Israelitish Economy. 2 1 5
slavery, and by giving their corruptions play.1. It was
something towards the end in view that the law of per
fection was openly held by God as a law which they had
irremediably broken, to which their relation was simply
that of persons condemned, whose claims might be de
ferred indeed but could never by them be satisfied. But
it served stiR further to gain the same purpose that the
Most High instituted another system of law, gave them
statutes, ' not good,' 2 accommodated in many ways to
their enfeebled moral state, — a law requiring simply out
ward observance, with whatever of inward reverence and
affection this outward observance might imply, holding
out inducements to obedience and deterring by menaces
from disobedience such as the natural heart is able to
appreciate, marked in all its arrangements by the fairness,
the justice, the fitness and adaptedness to their circum
stances as subjects, which are requisite in a suitable
national system, appealing to motives selfish and worldly,
but appealing also to every generous feeling, every grate-.
ful affection, every pure impulse and elevating principle
that yet holds a place in the soul of fallen man, and in
every form of address then competent before the time
when the strong persuasions of the gospel of Christ
should be provided. And under this admirable, and, in
a sense, perfect system of accommodation, they were tried
in an almost infinite variety of circumstances, with an
infinite practical display of ' goodness, forbearance, and
long-suffering ' on the part of Him who was their ' Judge,
Lawgiver, and King,' so as to entitle Him to use the
1 Cf. MrOler, Doctrine of Sin (Eng. Tr.), Book v., pp. 458 f. ; Mill,
Dissertations, ii., p. 182 . . . 'the dictum of Fontenelle that mankind
only settle into the right course after passing through and exhausting all
the varieties of error.' See also, Origen, De Principiis, iii., 1, 13, 17.
2 Ezek. xx. 25.

2 1 6 The Israelitish Economy.
challenge, ' What could have been done more to my vine
yard that I have not done in it ? ' And what was the
result of this trial ? They broke their covenant. They
became transgressors not only of the perfect but of the
accommodated law. They were found guilty in relation not
only to the Adamic but to the Mosaic dispensation. Being
confessedly unable to reach up to the height of the pure
and spiritual standard, the law of love, they proved them
selves so utterly depraved as to be unable even to render
to Jehovah, their national God, the modified service and
obedience which, as King in Jeshurun, He required. And
as no reasons for obedience could be stronger than those
by which they were urged to obey their national code save
the reasons that now press on men to obey the gospel of
Christ, so, save in failing to obey this gospel, no demon
stration can be more convincing and more adequate of the
utter enslavement of men by the principles of evil.
Not less sadly satisfactory was the demonstration in
relation to the remedy of sin. The fact that men are
thus spiritually enslaved is of itself sufficient to prove
that the discovery and application of a remedy are not in
their own power. They are helpless in their bondage ;
how can it be supposed possible for them to devise the
proper means for the breaking of their fetters and effecting
their escape ? Even such help and such hope as were
offered to them in the appliances of the Mosaic system
they resolutely refused or perverted. But the divine
conductor of this experiment, not content with this
general finding, drew out the demonstration into a great
variety of detail by way of overthrowing the various 'refuges
of lies ' to which men are prone to betake themselves.
For example, it is common to have faith in know
ledge as a remedy for sin. Let men be taught what is
right and good, and they will do it. Let education be

The Israelitish Economy. 217
universal, and virtue and peace and happiness will come
in its train. It is common to have faith in the power of
self-interest, in appeals to hope and fear. Let men have
motive enough for pursuing a certain course, and they
will no doubt pursue it ; let them clearly understand
that obedience is for their own good, and they will obey.
Many have faith in model repubhcs, favourable external
circumstances, wise laws, the drill of outward regulations,
and the power of general public opinion. Let a com
munity be laid hold of ah initio and in its infancy, and
let it all through its growth be carefully superintended
and wisely governed ; let the people be put under laws
suitable to their circumstances and their character, and
allowed the free development of their national life, and
no doubt they wiR grow to be prevailingly virtuous and
happy. Many have faith in the vulgar appliances of
wealth and material resources, armies and commerce and
political influence. Many counsel solemn pubhc covenant
ing,1 and urge that men should pledge themselves to
one another by promises and vows, confirmed by sacred
religious rites. These are among the devices of human
wisdom to which, m all ages, men have had recourse as
remedies for the evils of sin and means of general
amelioration and happiness. It need not be said that
aR these and other similar means were put under pro
bation in the history of the Israehtes, and have already
aR been found wanting ; so that one of their prophets
was constrained sadly to say, ' We have not wrought any
deliverance in the earth, neither have the inhabitants of
the world fallen.'2 There, in Israel, the favourite schemes
of earthly wisdom had their trial ; there a people was set
1 The Scotch and the French national covenants are instances. Cf.
Carlyle, French Revolution, Book i., chap. 8.
2 Isa. xxvi. 18.

2 1 8 The Israelitish Economy.
apart before whom, in their ancestors, the highest examples
of piety and virtue were placed, — who were knit together
into one compact society not only by community of
descent, but also by community of ennobling memories,
of hard endurances, and of glorious deliverances, — who
were planted in the most favourable circumstances of soil,
climate, and geographical position, — were formed into the
most happy social system, marked by hberty, equality,
and fraternity, — were subjected to the wisest and most
suitable laws, and were urged to obedience by the most
powerful motives, the most solemn promises, the most
persuasive and urgent appeals, — and the result is written
in the intestine wars, the foreign overthrow and captivity,
the utter political ruin of the nation.
The demonstration went still further. Men often
confess their own impotency, and call on God for help in
forms in which they suppose He is able to render it, and
which are more grateful to natural inclination than the
grace which He offers in Christ. When at last convinced
that they themselves can do nothing, they are prone to
take refuge in the fact that God can do everything, and
to throw upon Him the responsibility of their salvation.
Now, the economy of which we are speaking, among its
other purposes, secured this, — the demonstration how far
the Most High can go in the way of working out the
true dehverance of men by those modes of operation
which men are apt to impose upon Him. God Himself
became a factor in this great experiment, and, for the
world's satisfaction, deigned to show by actual trial what,
and what not, His power is able to effect.1
We know how overweening is the faith which the
world in general reposes in naked strength. In some
1 Garbett, Bible and its Critics, p. 120 : ' Lord Bolingbroke argued that
revelation cannot be true, because in his opinion divine omnipotence

The Israelitish Economy. 1 1 9
pretentious systems of philosophy, force is set in the
place of the living God, and is represented as the for
mative principle of the universe. In practical life, it
is force, or those things which are its embodiments and
representatives, which are most sought after and relied
upon as the guarantee of all wellbeing. Now, in the
Israelitish system, trial was made of the capabilities of
force in its highest degree, and in its most regulated and
best applied form. Almighty strength was there at com
mand. The Most High not only showed Himself well-
disposed to advance His people's good, but again and
again, and on all occasions of special distress and need,
interposed with the resources of His omnipotence on their
behalf. But the frequent miracles wrought in them no
permanently good result,1 the outward prosperity thus
secured seemed only to furnish scope and incentive to the
evd rooted in their principles and habits, and they
speedily brought again upon themselves the penalties of
transgression. It was thus clearly evinced that men
cannot be saved by power alone, and that if they are
impotent in their sin, so God likewise is impotent, because
of their sin, to save them against themselves, and without
those influences which reach and renew the heart.
The whole apphances used by God under that dispen
sation were as, till Christ came, they could not but be, of
a prevailingly external character.2 Audible words, visible
miracles, formal enactments, outward restraints, — in general,
appeals to sense and to self-interest, — these formed the
marked features of the system. Doubtless higher principles
ought to have imposed it upon mankind, so as necessarily to engage their
assent to it. '
1 Cf. Walker, Philosophy of Divine Operations, p. 166.
2 Cf. Litton, Mosaic Dispensation, pp. 41, 64 ; Macdonald, ^Pentateuch,
ii., p. 363.

220 The Israelitish Economy.
were also appealed to, admiration, gratitude, fidelity,
reverence, love, — but of necessity the former predomi
nated. God then manifested Himself in many wonderful
ways, and bestowed upon His people many valuable gifts ;
but the most wonderful manifestation and the most valu
able gift of aR were held in reserve against the time when
they should be proved to be indispensable.1 All that
love, and that in its very highest exercise, can do was not
proved ; but it was proved that nothing else, nothing less,
is of any avail. As men were thus, by that process of
experimenting, shut up to God, so God Himself was shut
up to the one form of operation which the gospel reveals :
' Last of all He sent His Son also.'
The history of Israel is the demonstration of the insuf
ficiency of that very economy, divine as it was, under
which Israel was placed'. And as it proved that this
system was ineffectual as the remedy of sin and the
means of the world's regeneration, so it proved along with
this, as has been shown, many other things — as, that
knowledge of duty, the drill of education, the restraints
of law, the advantages of wealth, of climate, of sod, of
political security, the most powerful appeals to hope and
fear, nay, even Almighty Power,- — all will not avail ; and
in its termination it proclaimed that if divine resources
had yet any further appliance, now at last the time was
come for this being produced. Thus, to revert to a point
already touched on, in this work failure proved to be
success. The law of progress through unsuccessful ex
perimenting underlies the whole course of the world's
history, and is manifested in aR the distinguished attain-
1 There is some foundation for the distinction taken by Milman and
others, — ' God is Power in the old religion, He is Love under the new.'
(Hist, of Christianity, vol. i., p. 21.) It is, however, much too broadly
stated.

The Israelitish Economy. 2 2 1
ments of our modern culture ; x and this law found its
most marked exemplification when the spiritual economy
was brought in to supersede the material and the outward.
The system of trial wrought, as it could work, no effectual
permanent wide regeneration. It was the failure of man,
but more, let it be reverently spoken and considerately
understood, it was the failure of God also.2 Were not
the tears shed by the Son of God, as ' He beheld the city
and wept over it,' the tears of disappointed hope and of
frustrated love ? And through many a sad prophetic
complaint and appeal in the Old Testament, may we not
catch the tones of yearning, but grieved and despairing,
affection ? The Most High, judging, as we are bound to
do, by His own words and deeds, had thrown His heart
into His deahngs with His chosen Israel. He did all
for them that love could do, save one thing, and had
drawn them to Himself with ' cords of a man, with bands
of love.' How overcoming is the emotion expressed in
such language as, ' How shaR I give thee up, Ephraim?
how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I make thee
1 As e.g. in mechanical inventions and in scientific discovery. Says
Mill, Dissertations, iii., p. 278, in reference to the early attempts of the
Greeks in philosophy : ' Multiplied failures have taught the unwelcome
lesson that man can only arrive at an understanding of nature by a very
circuitous route, that the great questions are not accessible directly, that
through a multitude of smaller ones,' etc. etc. Cf. .Bacon, Novum Or-
ganum, lib. i., aph. xciv. : . . . ' Itaque optimum fuerit iUosipsos errores
proponere ; quot enim fuerint errorum impedimenta in prseterito, tot
sunt spei argumenta in futurum. '
2 Cf. Bost, Maccabies, p. 40 : ' Dieu choisissait dans l'humanite le sujet,
l'echantillon le plus propre a faire reussir l'experience, et l'experience a
rnanque\ Ou, pour mieux dire l'experience a reussi ; elle a prouve que la
loi n'a rien amene a la perfection (Heb. vii. 19) et que la recherche du
bien, du devoir ... est completement insuffisante a preserver l'homme
du mal, a le faire marcher dans la route royale du bien absolu. ' See also
Kelly, Covenants, pp. 205 f., 212 ; Craven, Dispensations, p. 119 ; Smith,
The Hebrew People, p. 754.

222 The Israelitish Economy.
as Admah ? how shall I set thee as Zeboim ?' and pro
portioned to the strength of the affection which is poured
forth in such utterances, was the strength of the recoil
and the revulsion when all was proved unavailing to re
generate and to save. His love was baffled, His strong
yearnings were unsatisfied, His wise plans and powerful
persuasives were defeated. The Almighty, operating on
these hnes and in this outward way, was discomfited.
Let no one allege the omniscience of God by way
of casting suspicion upon the reahty of the trial and
the sincerity of the love. We do not thus bring into
collision the perfections of the Supreme. At the same
time, if His omniscience by no means interferes with His
absolute, most single-hearted sincerity and truthfulness,
it infallibly secures Him against ultimate discomfiture
and turns the defeat into a triumph. I do not here
undertake to cope with the difficulty of the two ends and
the two wiUs which so often meets us in studying the
ways of God. It is to be held as unquestionable, that a
higher end than the prosperity and the salvation of Israel
was before the mind of God, in taking that people under
His special government, — -the end, viz., of preparing for
the manifestation of His Son in the flesh, when once the
need of this manifestation had been fully demonstrated.
And it is evident that His own immediate defeat, the
disappointment of His hopes for Israel, the frustration of
His efforts and plans, were just the signs that His higher
end had been secured. There is a sense in which His
promises to Israel were absolute promises,1 and in which
it was impossible for the purposes and desires of God to
be frustrated. The Most High knows to 'make the wrath
of man to praise Him,' and the very sin of man, in its
1 So Maimonides, Porta Mosis, ap. Pococke, Theological Works, i.,
p. 16 ; cf. Alexander, Isaiah, i., p. 56.

The Israelitish Economy. 223
most stubborn tenacity, to minister to His designs. And
thus it was, in the issue of this elaborate process of trial.
Israel as a nation was undone, the great majority of the
people were found hardened and bigoted, selfish and
sensual ; and in this very state of things was proof given
that ' the fulness of the time was come ' when God should
send into the world His only-begotten Son. Mathema
ticians have a plan of procedure applicable often when
other methods will not apply, whereby they make sup
positions and set out on courses which they know
beforehand are unsuitable and unsound, and by the de
monstration of the false they prove the true. The Mosaic
economy was God's grand reductio ad absurdum, applied
to the favourite thoughts and plans of men, applied also
to the imperfect methods which for the time then present
He Himself chose to adopt. Everything most strange
incomprehensible and offensive to natural conceptions in
the new dispensation, finds its reason and explanation
when viewed in the light of this foregoing demonstration.
It has, e.g., been found fault with, because of its being so
long deferred. But plainly, the delay was indispensable ;
for to men, as they originally stood, full of self-sufficiency
and vain conceit, it would have presented no attractive
ness, and must have appeared a superfluity and a mon
strosity. Again it has been blamed, because of its repre
sentation of the divine Father as subjecting to the deepest
and darkest doom His own innocent and well-beloved
Son. But it had been clearly proved that no method of
procedure remained to God in seeking scope for His love
towards a perishing world, but the method of self-
sacrificing love. Again it has been an occasion of offence
that God now, by the Holy Spirit, exerts a secret spiritual
influence upon the souls of men, to enlighten their minds
and regenerate their hearts. But aR merely external

224 The Israelitish Economy.
appliances and merely inteRectual persuasives had been
tried and found wanting ; and it had become certain to all
thoughtful men, that access to, and power of control over,
the very springs of human thought and action were an
indispensable condition of human salvation.
This function of the Mosaic economy, hke the preceding,
furnishes abundant illustration of the wisdom of the Most
High in relation to the means employed, and especially
in relation to those features of selection and exclusiveness
by which the means are marked. The method of repre
sentative trial has been more than once adopted in the
government of the race. Mankind as a whole was thus
tried in its first ancestor, as one in whom all the natural
powers and capacities of humanity were in their highest,
— their pristine purity and perfection. In the economy of
Israel, the Most High recurred to the same method.
Again He chose a representative portion of the whole
race j1 and that the trial might be unchallengeably fair,
He endowed them with ah appropriate external advantages.
The chemist takes a small and manageable quantity of
the material whose composition he is desirous to ascertain,
puts it by itself in a separate vessel, and applies to it
special tests and peculiar processes of examination. Thus
did God proceed in publicly testing and proving what was
in man, in view of His introducing His only-begotton Son
into the world. He broke off a small portion from the
general mass, that with this He might experiment, and
that He might apply it to the special uses which the
exigencies of the world demanded. The very smaRness
of the portion aRowed the greater variety and freedom in
manipulation. It was mankind's experimentum crucis.
1 Chateaubriand, Genie du Christ., Liv. v., chap. i. : ¦ ' Le peuple juif est
un abrege symbolique de la race humaine representant dans ses aventures
tout se qui est arrive et tout ce qui doit arriver dans l'univers.'

The Israelitish. Economy. 225
While the whole general history of the world is the trial
of the world, it is plain that without such selection and
separation and special management, there could have been
no crucial testing, no exhaustive demonstration. More
over, by the careful exclusion of disturbing elements, the
divine process was rendered the more satisfactory. It
has been often remarked, that the more purely a people is
left to work out the special problems of its own history,
so much the more valuable are the lessons which its
history teaches.1 Now, in no other historical experience has
there been so perfect an elimination of aR heterogeneous
and disturbing influences as in that of Israel ; and for
this, among other reasons, no other yields so important
results, or is of so great moment in relation to the general
progress of the world.
When we reflect that the special trial of the world,
conducted in the history of the selected nation, was
accompanied by a general trial in the history of aR its
various tribes and families, the demonstration as a whole
becomes the most adequate and convincing which it is
possible to conceive of. Men usually prefer to gain their
experience Ri their own way. However complete the
demonstration furnished by the hves and destinies of
others, they wiR but rarely accept of this as instruction
for themselves. Their own plans generally appear to
them better than the plans adopted by others, and they
trust to their own skiR and prudence to enable them to
1 Cf. Buckle, Hist, of Civilisation, vol. i., p. 212 (1st ed.) : 'The im
portance of the history of a country depends not upon the splendour of its
exploits, but on the degree to which its actions were due to causes spring
ing out of itself. ' P. 211 : ' Every foreign or external influence which is
brought to bear upon a nation is an interference with its natural develop
ment, and therefore complicates the circumstances which we seek to
investigate. To simplify complications is, in all branches of knowledge,
the first essential of success,' etc. Cf. p. 460.
P

226 The Israelitish Economy.
avert the evils which others may have incurred. On this
ground, therefore, it was also most fitting that the experi
ment which God saw fit to institute and conduct should
be an exceptional thing, confined to a smaR section of the
community of mankind. By taking a portion and using
upon it His own appliances, He secured express and de
cisive results, while at the same time, by leaving aR other
nations to walk after their own ways,1 He took away aR
ground for cavil, and provided the means of proving that
the results He had speciaRy obtained were the very results
springing from their own multiform experiences. The more
numerous the sections of the human race, and the more
diversified their circumstances and histories, just so much
the more complete and decisive are the lessons to be drawn
from the world's general history.2 The nations of man
kind have ultroneously chosen their own courses, and have
made the best they could of their possessions and means ;
and every several nation has diversified the experiment
by some particular determination of self-will, by some
special method of worldly wisdom, under an infinitely
varied combination of outward circumstances, connected
with time and place, climate, country, and condition. And
in addition God has taken in hand one particular nation,
and put it through a course of His own choosing, marked
by all His own divine skiR. The results accruing from this
combination of trials may weR be regarded as irrefragable.
If this function of demonstration be, as I have said,
that which is principal among the functions of the
Israehtish system, then it is evident that by reference to
this should its history be written and the stages of its
1 Cf. Trench, Hulsean Led., pp. 281 f.
2 Cf. Mill, On Liberty, chap, iii., p. 33 (people's ed.) : 'As it is useful that
while mankind are imperfect there should be different opinions, so it is
that there should be different experiments of living. '

The Israelitish Economy. 227
progress determined. We may anticipate that the suc
cessive steps in the process of trial wiR mark the true
divisions in the history ; and if, when this function is kept
in view, we find that the history divides itself spontaneously
into marked periods, we may safely conclude that the
principle of the division is sound and important.
The whole history of Israel, as a preparatory economy,
extends from the call of Abraham to the destruction of
Jerusalem by the Romans. Taking the principle referred
to as guide, this period falls naturally into the foRowing
divisions1 : —
I. From the CaR of Abraham to the Bondage in Egypt.
II. From Moses to Samuel.
III. From Saul to the Babylonian Captivity.
IV. From Ezra to the Idunisean Dynasty.
V From Jesus Christ to the Destruction of Jerusalem.
Of these periods it is to be observed in general that
they form a succession of trials, in which, as in aR God's
other works, while there is no idle uniformity or vain
repetition,2 there are apparent the same fundamental
principles and the same typical methods ; and through
aR of which, whatever the variety of outward circum
stances, the same grand process of demonstration is carried
forward to the conclusive and infinitely impressive finale.
As Israelitish history forms a system complete in itself,
1 Cf. Stanley, Jewish Church, i. , p. 31, whose division is threefold \ 1.
Abraham to Samuel ; 2. The period of the Monarchy ; 3. The Captivity to
the Destruction of the Temple.
2 Cf. Breckinridge, Knowledge of God objectively considered, p. 39 : 'It
is a universal rule of the divine procedure from which God never departs,
and from which He would not then depart even to extricate the universe
from sin and death, not to repeat a second time precisely what had failed
before ; not to allow a, second opportunity, so to speak, precisely on the
same conditions which were despised and rejected before. Even when the
fundamental principle is the same, the circumstances or the method of its
application are changed.'

228 The Israelitish Economy.
so each of these subordinate periods forms another sub
sidiary system complete in itself. In each the same
course substantially is run and the same goal attained.1
There is, first, a signal gracious interposition on the part of
the Most High, of the nature of a work of deliverance or
rescue, — the' dehverance of each period being the special
promise and typical salvation' of the preceding. Connected
with the deliverance there is the establishment of new or
newly-modified institutions, and new adaptations of polity
and worship. Each successive trial is found to end in
failure and corruption, and in a more or less signal
exercise of judgment npon the erring people ; while each
also yields its own proper lesson in promotion of the
general purpose of the whole economy. And thus each
system of trial, ere it terminates and is superseded by the
succeeding, proves the necessity for the system being
changed and some other course entered upon.2
The first period is introductory in its character, yet
presents, in perhaps a less marked way, the same
general features as the others. At the commencement
God is to be seen signally interposing in the call of
Abraham, thus rescuing him and his family from the
1 Cf. Robinson, Discourses of Redemption, p. 23 : ' The entire revelation
may be analyzed as consisting of three classes of truths : — First, the record
of historic events, which prepared the way for certain covenants; next,
the covenant, and revelation connected with it, ; and next, the history and
revelations connected with the development of that covenant, ' etc.
2 Cf. BushneU, Nature and the Supernatural, p. 288 : . . . ' the regenera
tive action of supernatural forces, that in spite of the downward tendency
of mere nature under sin are creating always a new heaven and earth out
of the ruins of the former beauty, and making even the living experiences
of evil conditions of spiritual and social progress. ' Cf. ibid., -p. 76. Harris,
Patriarchy, p. 465 : ' Man, if treated as a free being, must be allowed a
sufficient period for repairing the past by turning to account his dear-bought
experiences.' Breckinridge, Knowledge of God subjectively considered,
p. 91.

The Israelitish Economy. 229
deepening • corruption and idolatry of the world, and
making with him a special covenant conveying special
promises and ratified with its appropriate rites and forms
of observance. The promise peculiar to this period was
that relating to the multiplication of the family into a
nation, and the occupation of the land of Canaan as their
national possession. By the progress of the history, it
was made evident that the arrangements and institutes of
the Abrahamic covenant, and of the family or patriarchal
system, were inadequate to preserve the chosen seed un-
contaminated by the heathenism around. They forgot to
a great extent the God of their fathers ; circumcision, the
seal of their pecuhar relation to God, was neglected ; they
participated in the rites and indulgences of heathen
worship. It was shown to be indispensable, in pursuance
of His great and as yet distant end, that God should lay
them under greater restrictions and stiR weightier obliga
tions ; and ' the law ' of Moses ' was added, because of
transgressions.' The second period is that of the first trial of the chosen
people under the properly national system of which Moses
was the mediator. It was a system more restrictive than
the patriarchal, and more elaborately formal, yet replete
with privilege and with encouragement. The period was
opened with the signal intervention of Jehovah on His
people's behalf in securing their deliverance from the
bondage of Egypt and putting them in possession of the
land of their inheritance. Thus was fulfilled, in this
national typical redemption, the special promise of the
preceding period. In the sequel of this redemption there
was framed a new covenant, and an elaborate national
poRty was instituted, and obedience was enforced by the
most solemn obhgations, by the most earnest appeals, and
by arraying on the one side the national evils that should

230 The Israelitish Economy.
follow transgression, and the national prosperity and glory
that should accompany obedience. It was as a period
distinguished by direct and visible theocratic rule. God
was present in an objective form of glory in His taber
nacle-palace, and the human leaders or judges were indi
viduals whom he called by express appointment to the
special work which the time might require. We know
how through the perversity of the people this elabo
rate economy speedily proved a failure. The covenants
solemnly ratified at Sinai and Shechem were forgotten
and violated The Canaanites were not completely cast
out of their inheritance. The idolatries and evil customs
of the heathen found acceptance in Israel. There sprang
up tribal divisions and jealousies, and internecine wars
broke out, and horrid deeds of impurity and violence were
enacted. The advancing corruption reached even to the
family of God's high priest, and there ceased to be
reasonable hope of progress or of triumph for Israel
under that form of pohty. The close of the period was
marked by the decisive victory of the Philistines, the
captivity of the ark, and the desertion or destruction of
the sanctuary at Shiloh.1 It was the period of single-
handed heroism, and of the display of individual skill
and courage and strength ; and of the many lessons with
which the trial is pregnant the most prominent is this,
that mere corporeal strength, hardihood, and other personal
qualities, though they may effect distinguished partial
and outward dehverances, can secure for their possessor
and for the world no permanent good.
The third period is that of indirect theocratic rule, by
means of hereditary kings, of whom only the first or the
head of the dynasty was ordained by . express divine
1 1 Sam. iv. 10, 11; cf. Judg. xviii. 30; Ps. lxxviii. 59-64 ; Jer. vii. 12 ;
Graf, Jeremias, p. 116 ; Ewald, Hist, of Israel, ii., p. 414 (Eng. Tr.).

The Israelitish Economy. 231
appointment. Again the period was introduced by acts
of dehverance and of gracious interposition on the part of
the Most High. By the hands first of Saul and then
specially of David, the Philistines and other enemies
were subdued, and Israel was rescued from the foreign yoke.
Not only so, the nation was raised to a high condition of
national security and splendour. The special promise of
the Mosaic covenant, in regard to the extent of their
dominion, their triumph over their enemies, and their
secure and peaceful enjoyment of their country, was
realised. The Mosaic institutes were in several respects
enlarged to meet the enlargement of the nation and their
settled condition. A temple was built in room of the
tabernacle, the priests were divided into regular courses,
arrangements for enhancing the gorgeousness and solemnity
of the worship were made, and the universal peace and
abundance seemed to give pledge and foretoken of a
lengthened period of progress and of virtue. But again
there was disappointment, and again postponement. The
prosperity proved only outward, temporary, and typical.
If Joshua did not give the people true rest, neither did
Solomon. The same reign that saw the culmination of
the nation's glory saw also the beginning of a new de
cline. The idolatries of Solomon led to the division of
the tribes, the open backsliding of Jeroboam and his suc
cessors, and the deepening corruption ahke of the northern
and of the southern kingdoms. Then came the tokens
of the divine displeasure, and the chastisements of the
divine hand, intestine war succeeded by foreign invasion,
which became ever more and more cruel and unsparing,
till first Samaria was overthrown and the northern tribes
were carried away captive, and then Jerusalem too was
subjected to the same fate, and Judah was emptied of its
inhabitants and left ruined and desolate. Thus was this

232 The Israelitish Economy.
lesson among others impressively taught, that in wise
laws, able warlike gifted rulers, political wealth and
prosperity, an imposing ritual of worship, security against
external invasion, and such things, is not to be found the
secret of true and abiding peace.
The fourth period is that of theocratic rule conditioned
by subjection more or less absolute to foreign government.
The external bonds and restrictions which had been in
creased with every succeeding trial, were rendered during
this period stiR heavier. There was as usual at its com
mencement divine intervention and gracious dehverance.
The promise so often held forth by the prophets of res
toration and of enlargement was fulfiRed. The people
were brought back from exile, and again planted in their
own land. The city and the temple were rebuilt, and
their national polity and worship were re-arranged and
re-adapted to their new and altered circumstances. It
seemed as if the nation had made a fresh and promising
start in the path of obedience and of weRbeing. At last
the perverse inchnation to imitate the fashions of the
heathen and to share in their idolatrous rites was eradi
cated ; at last they seemed to reahse the fact that their
glory lay in their relation to God, in their possession of
His law, in their observance of His ordinances ; at last
they seemed to have discovered that their safety was to
be found in keeping themselves apart, and avoiding as far
as possible all contact with the heathen. But the
hopeful reformation proved superficial and transient. The
people soon divided into a variety of parties and sects,
each looking for hght and succour in its own direction.
Even among those of them who were zealous for God and
for His law, their zeal was ' not according to knowledge,'
and bigotry, formality, and spiritual pride corroded hke a
canker the very heart of the nation. Then came the

The Israelitish Economy. 233
natural, the inevitable judgments, family feuds, civil
broils, party strifes, and general lawlessness, foreign
invasion, persecution, and overthrow ; tiR they were given
over, bound hand and foot, by a double bond, and sold
into a double slavery, the subjects of Herod the Edomite,
the virtual subject and instrument of Rome. If there be
any lesson taught by this cycle of trial more prominent
than another, it is that the possession of truth, and even
a zealous and bigoted adherence to the power of godli
ness, may only cover over spiritual unsoundness and
moral impurity, and can give no security for individual
and social wellbeing.
The fifth and final trial is that in which was concen
trated and brought to a point the whole demonstration.
If the first, or patriarchal, was introductory and prepara
tory for what was to follow, this was supplementary and
inclusive of all that had preceded. It was the bringing
together and summing up and exhibiting to the world
of the real results of the whole history. The trial was
virtually over ere Christ appeared. It was ' the fulness
of the time ' when ' God sent forth His Son ' to redeem
men. The chosen people had already rejected God,
and in many ways spurned away His holy and good laws.
For the world the time had come that a new course should
be adopted, by the bestowments of seR-sacrificing divine
love; but for the Jews themselves, it was needful and
fitting to bring their guiltiness to a' point, and to prove
that it was not dishke to this or that particular law, or
institute, or ordinance, that stood in the way of their
abiding prosperity, but dislike to goodness itself, in other
words, to God Himself. And thus it was that He came
no more asking subjection to positive enactments, but to
the very spirit of law, to the very soul of goodness, to
love itself, in a living person. In this period God spoke

234 The Israelitish Economy.
not by His prophets, but by His Son, — claimed submission
and service not by a human representative, but by Him
who is God manifest in flesh., The original eternal
spiritual law to which that of Moses had been super
added was again presented in its most pure and, at the
same time, its most attractive and persuasive form. The
obedience of the heart and the worship of the spirit were
held forth as what was due to the Father of spirits and
indispensable to human weRbeing. I need not say what
was the result of this final trial. Perfect goodness in the
person of the heir of David's royal rights, clothed with
all the attributes of incarnate God, claimed the trust of
their hearts and the allegiance of their lives ; and, with
the exception of ' a very small remnant,' they rose up
against Him and cried, ' Away with Him, crucify Him.'
' He came unto His own, and His own received Him
not. But as many as received Him, to them gave He power
to become the sons of God, even to them that beheve
on His name.' It was the conclusive demonstration
that the nation as a nation was unprepared for the ac
ceptance of true salvation, and was unable to appre
ciate spiritual blessings. The rejection of Christ left
them under the load of an inevitable doom, and the over
throw of Jerusalem and its temple, and the slaughter
and exile of the people were the natural close of this
great experiment.
IV. Conseevation. — This designates another element
in the task assigned to the economy of Israel, an element
which has often indeed had a certain exclusive pro
minence and emphasis assigned to it,1 as if it were the
only element, which assuredly it is not. But though not
the sole or the chief, it is an important function of the
1 See e.g., Witsius, Egyptiaca, p. 286 ; Gladstone, Studies on Homer,
vol. ii., p. 525.

The Israelitish Economy. 235
system, and is obviously implied in various passages
of the Word of God ; as when Paul represents the law as
a peedagogue until Christ, and speaks of the law being
' added because of transgressions, till the seed should
come.' x The propriety and need of powerful conserva
tive influences being contained in this economy are obvious.
It pointed, as has been said, to the future, its operation
was of necessity protracted through a lengthened period,
and its fruit was to be gathered in a distant age. Hence
it was indispensable that appropriate means should be
adopted to maintain the continuity of the process, to per
petuate the tradition, and to hand on to the generations
following the findings and the results.
This statement is sufficient to prove how indispensable
to the attainment of the ends for which the economy was
instituted was the continuous and contemporaneous
recording of the events of its history. We obviously err
if we conceive of the books of the Old Testament as an
accidental and separable adjunct of the system to which
they belong. They are, in truth, a vital part of the
economy, a member essential to the efficient working of
the whole organisation. Inasmuch as the truth revealed
to Israel behoved to be not only preserved throughout the
period of the nation's existence, but also perpetuated for
the instruction of the subsequent ages, and handed on as
credentials and introduction to the spiritual dispensation,
it was indispensable that the revelations of God and the
behaviour of the people under these should be committed
to permanent and authentic record. For those who
aRow this Book to be its own interpreter, an argument
of obvious and indeed resistless force may be drawn from
this consideration, in opposition to much of the deceptive
criticism that prevails regarding the Old Testament, and
1 Gal. iii. 19- 24.

236 The Israelitish Economy.

in support of -the contemporaneousness and the inspira
tion of these Hebrew writings.
The influences tending to destroy continuity and to inter
rupt and mar the divine work were not merely the lapse
of time, the brevity of human life, and the infirmity of
human memory, but also the corrupting, dissolving energy
of sin, and the pressure from without of heathen in
fluences. A twofold end was to be secured, the warding off and
minimising of the evil, and the preservation and fostering
of the good. At the time when the system was set up,
there existed in the world, among some of the tribes of
men, a comparatively pure faith, and a simple and suit
able mode of worship, — rehcs of the primeval rehgion of
mankind. It was of essential importance that these relics
should be preserved, and that the stiR glowing embers of
the world's old altar fire should be gathered together ahd
saved from extinction. The old family faith and worship
were left like Noah and his household among the sinners
of the antediluvian age, and a special intervention was
needful to save them from extinction amid the sweRing
waters of human corruption and divine judgment. Accord
ingly an ark was prepared into which the rehgion of the
patriarchs was taken up, in which it was shut in and
confined, and in which it floated in safety amid the
wreckage and upheayings of heathenism, tiR the time
came when it was caRed forth to enlargement, was
hallowed by a new consecration, and was sent to occupy
the world. And this ark was the system established by
God in Israel, in the whole structure and arrangements
of which a conservative purpose is clearly manifest.
On the one hand, ab extra, it bore conspicuously in
scribed upon it, separateness from the world lying in
wickedness. The world in general was fast lapsing into

The Israelitish Economy. 237
utter spiritual darkness when God interposed, and by
selecting one particular nation, and setting it apart
for HimseR, He secured for HimseR a special organ and
a distinct sphere. The very smallness of the selected
nation tended to secure it against prevailing corruption ;
for the smaller a minority, the more tenacious it is of its
distinctive position. Its physical, political, social circum
stances, aR contributed towards its conservative energy
PhysicaRy, in the geographical position and configuration
of its land, the nation was removed as far as possible,
in consistency with preserving a position of centrality,
from intercourse with surrounding peoples.1 Politically,
they were, in virtue of the fertihty of their soil, rendered
independent of foreign supplies, while the lack of har
bours on their coast, and the purely agricultural cha
racter of their social system, reduced to a minimum the
temptations to engage in foreign commerce.2 The laws,
moreover, under which they were placed, positively dis
countenanced intercourse with surrounding nations, by the
prohibition of intermarriage, of joining in rehgious festivals,
and of indulgence in those luxuries which would have
rendered them dependent on importations from abroad.
They were distinguished from other nations by many pecu
liarities of custom, of observance, and of behef and senti
ment, aR tending to keep them apart and to raise up
barriers of estrangement and of jealousy between them
and others.
On the other hand, ab intra, the same conservative
tendency was everywhere prominent. The very character
1 Cf. Palgrave, Journey, i., 185, ii., 142 ; Alcoek, Capital of the Tycoon,
ii., p. 275. 'Andorre is the Japan of Europe, and Japan is another ex
ample of the power of isolation to produce stationary types of civilisation
and forms of government. ' — See also Miiller, Scientific Mythology, p. 179.
2 Cf. Laing, on the isolation of Denmark, Denmark and the Duchies, p.
196.

238 The Israelitish Economy.
of nationality belonging to the divinely - chosen organ
imparts to it a high degree of power in this direction.
The nation has naturaRy a long Rfe, spanning millen
niums, and binding together distant ages. We know how
tenacious is a nation's memory, how its traditions are
held as a sacred deposit, how old habits endure, how
the wonderful events of its history, embodied in its cus
toms and in its songs, are held with a grasp which never
relaxes. The smaller a nation is, and the more dis
tinguished from those around by peculiarities of rite, of
history, and of feeling, so much the more is it dis
tinguished by this tenacity of national memory, and so
much the more firmly do its members chng to their
national treasures.
A nation is not to be regarded as a mere aggregation
and succession of transient individuals. It has a quasi-
personahty, and forms a living whole.1 It is a complex
organism, in which many subsidiary organisms act their
several parts, which has a life made up of many lives,
and which is possessed of a certain common character
composed of knowledge, sentiment, habit. There is an
interdependence among aR its parts, and it advances or
retrogrades by one consent, in obedience to one and the
same general impulse. Hence the fact of a nation's
growth, and hence the possibihty of a nation's education.
Not only has it a long hfe compared with the individual,
it has also a growing and progressive life. It has a
capacity of being laid hold of, and taught, and trained, in
1 Cf. Bunsen, Hippolytus and Us Age, ii., pp. 32 f. ; God inllistory, i.,
pp. 36 f. ; Irving, Collected Writings, i., p. 34. The family constitution lies
at the root of this unity of natural life ; see Harris, Patriarchy, p. 378 ;
Spencer, Psychology, i., p. 422. It has, been justly remarked that 'this
sense of the corporate unity of a nation was much stronger among the
ancients, as it was in the Middle Ages, than anything we feel now in our
political communities. ' — Strachey, Hebrew Politics, p. 181.

The Israelitish Economy. 239
view of some coming destiny. And this is what He who
is from everlasting to everlasting has really done with this
selected portion of the world's inhabitants. He took it
in its childhood, when it was most receptive of external
impression. He imparted to it a store of knowledge,
the common spiritual furnishing of the community. He
set Himself to form the pubhc opinion and prevailing
sentiment and practical habits of the community, and all
on the side of goodness, and in the direction of an out-look
for the promised salvation. Thus Israel, in its economy
and its history, by divine arrangement, forms the cause
way cast up across the slough of the world's1 heathen error
and corruption, along which were borne securely the ancient
remembrances of primeval revelation and the enlarging
stores of divine truth. Like an isthmus connecting two
great continents, it is a passage, narrow indeed, and
restricted in its particularism, yet in its very narrow
ness the better fitted to restrain men from wandering,
and to confine them to the straight path which connects
the universal patriarchal and the universal Christian
dispensations. It is hard to conceive of any arrangements better
adapted to serve the purposes of retention and conserva
tion than those actually employed among the selected
people. The various facts and elements of the divine
revelation of which they were the organ, were not only
made known to them, — they were stamped upon their
national customs, they were symbolised in their sacred
rites, they were inscribed upon their family, social, politi
cal, religious constitution, they were commemorated in
their national ballads and popular chants, they were
written down in their sacred books ; — the routine of their
daily lives, the various seasons of the year, their public
1 Cf. in Rose, Hulsean Led., p. 12.

240 The Israelitish Economy.
festivals and holidays, aR were eloquent of what God
had been to them and to their fathers. The feelings of
patriotic pride and affection, the associations that appealed
most strongly to national honour, their disposition to
glory in what was distinctive in their history and polity,
aR had been laid hold of and turned to account by
Jehovah, in the way of rendering more secure in their
keeping the sacred trust of revealed truth.
It is weR known that the more isolated, compact,
homogeneous a community is, so much the more powerful
within it is the force of public opinion and of general
fashion. A viRage is more intolerant of deviation from
the common standard than a city, and a . smaR country
like Scotland more conservative in its tendency than a
vast union of States hke America. The country in which
each household forms an important item, and in which
by frequent gatherings and common festivals the various
households are constantly brought together, and thus
made to realise and feel their mutual brotherhood, is
naturally in the highest degree tenacious of its customs
and traditions. Now in Israel such conservative influ
ences as these were as nearly as possible at a maximum.
Every household formed an important factor in the
nation ; its family registers were sacredly kept ; its an
cestral allotment was jealously guarded ; the glorious
events in its history were never forgotten ; its extinction
— if at any time through feud or war such a thing
took place — was mourned as a pubhc calamity. Each
family lived surrounded by their kindred, in the presence
of all their brethren ; while their pubhc festivals at
Jerusalem, gathering together so regularly and so fre
quently the representatives of every household from
the remotest corners of the 'land, secured that the
sacred and ennobling facts upon which their national

The Israelitish Economy. 241
pohty was based, were kept fresh and clear before every
mind.1 Probably there has been no other example of a nation
in which history and rehgion have been so intertwined
and rendered so mutually dependent. All their national
associations, the ' famous events of their career, the
triumphs and deliverances which were most deeply
imprinted in popular memory and tradition, and which
stirred to the greatest depths popular enthusiasm, were
the events in which the Most High had been most
gloriously revealed, and which were most fraught with
rehgious instruction and stimulation. The various cords
which ran through their national system, and bound them
into one living organism, found their common centre in
Jehovah, the head and heart of the whole body ; and
tribe was not more firmly bound to tribe, family to
fanrily, man to man, than all were ahke bound to Him
who had made them what they were, and who said of
the whole race, ' Israel is my son, my first-born.'2 Their
code of law and their social constitution contributed to
the same result. Their laws, though ineffective, as all
law must be, to renew, tended powerfully to restrain and
hold in check the dissolving and disintegrating influence
of sin. They were aR wise and just and good, they all
' made. for righteousness,' and they tended, as far as legal
enactments and sanctions can do, to maintain and per
petuate righteousness. The very multiplicity of the
enactments of the Mosaic code, and the minuteness with
which it regulated the detail of daily hfe, contributed
greatly to its restrictive and conservative power. The
mighty' force of habit was thus laid hold of and enlisted
1 Cf. Grote, History of Greece, iv., p. 95, on the influence of the
Grecian festivals.
• Exod. iv. 22.

242 The Israelitish Economy.
in the service of virtue and rehgion. God would keep
them moving in the tracks which He HimseR marked
out, in which, so long as they persevered, they would at
once be preserved from the contaminating influence of
surrounding heathenism, and have their own evil ten
dencies powerfuRy repressed. Their social condition, as
a nation of agriculturists and of yeomen, — of whom each
family lived on its own allotment, and each held its
land expressly of Jehovah the Supreme Proprietor, — exer
cised the same preservative influence. No condition was
more favourable, alike to the formation of an independent,
manly, intelligent, reflective, virtuous people, and to the
maintenance in uncorrupted purity of the precious heir
looms of the race.1
The small amount of change undergone by the Hebrew
language during the lengthened period covered by the
Old Testament writings has often been remarked upon.2
This fixity of language is easily explicable, when account
is taken of their social organisation and of their constantly
recurring religious gatherings, in which the representa
tives of aR their families were brought together. In
such a system it would have been the unaccountable
thing, if the language had undergone any material change.3
And when we reflect that their language had been so
largely moulded by their history and their religious rites,

1 Cf. on the agricultural life, Trendelenburg, Naturrecht, pp. 104, 366 f.,
369 (there Cato and Aristotle) ; Wines, Commentaries, p. 415 ; Salvador,
Institutions de Moise, i., 245; Mill, Dissertations, ii., p. 74. Zoroaster
is said to have emphatically recommended agriculture, — Duncker, Ge
schichte des Alterthums, ii., p. 498.
2 See, e.g., Palfrey, Jewish Scriptures and Antiquities, vol. i., p. 83 ;
Gesenius, Gesch. d. hebr. Sprache, p. 20. Cf. in regard to Arabic, Pal
grave, Journey, vol. i., p. 311.
3 See on the causes of linguistic change, Miiller, Science of Language,
vol. i., p. 57 f. (6th ed.).

The Israelitish Economy. 243
and contained the forms of expression selected and
prepared by God for the truths which He communicated,
it is evident that this very circumstance is of no little
importance as a condition of transmitting that truth in
purity to succeeding times. And this fixity of language
is but a reflection of the character of their whole national
life. These slight illustrations of the conservative function
of this economy may suffice to indicate its nature and its
utility. Some one l has compared the conscience of man,
in our present fallen condition, to the jury-mast set up,
as a temporary expedient, on a dismantled and imperilled
vessel. The comparison may be extended to all that is
not yet utterly corrupt in man's spiritual nature and
social instincts and habits. The vessel of humanity is
sore broken and damaged ; but if only it can be kept for
a time afloat, the adequate succour may arrive, and the
harbour may be gained. And in a very signal manner in
the system of which we speak, the Most High has made
use of the materials yet serviceable in our fallen nature,
the undamaged spars and cordage and canvas of the ship,
applying them to stop the leaks, to undergird the hull,
and to form temporary masts and sails, that, R it be pos
sible, the period of danger may be tided over, and safety
at last be reached.
V Germination.- — I have already remarked, that in
viewing the results of the Israelitish economy we must
keep in mind the fact that failure here means true success.
But this is a paradox which needs more illustration than
has yet been given to it, and which can only be fully
understood when the character of the success is rightly
appreciated. It is certain that its apparent unsuccess has formed a
' Dallas, Poetics.

244 The Israelitish Economy.
standing difficulty in connection with the system we are
considering, and has furnished much occasion for scepti
cism and cavil. It has been again and again urged that
the preparatory system, after all, seemed to produce no
decisive influence, and reaRy came to nothing. And it is
asked, ' What was the preparation actuaRy effected by this
protracted course of training ? what was the improve
ment accomphshed ? and were the Jews much better
prepared for the reception of the Messiah at the period
of His appearance than they were in the days of King
David ? ' x But the difficulty here expressed proceeds
upon a misconception. This economy was meant to pre
pare for Christ, in the sense that it should subserve and
effect the introduction and estabhshment of Christianity
in the world, not in the sense that it should itself produce
a whole community of pious believers. Its end was not to
secure that the nation embraced within its sphere should,
as a nation, be found ready to recognise the divine
Redeemer and to yield to Him immediate universal
subjection, but to provide for the implantation, through
the grace of the Most High, in the bosom of humanity,
of a hving seed or germ out of which should grow the
imiversal family of God ; and, along with this, for the
furnishing of whatever might be needful for the nursing
and rearing and ministering to this divine seed. This
was the preparation which was contemplated by God,
which was alone suitable for a spiritual system hke that
established by Jesus Christ, and which, indeed, was alone
possible in the nature of things.
It was to such a preparation as this that prophecy had
pointed. Thus, after setting forth the impending desola
tions of Israel, Isaiah says, ' As a teil-tree, and as an oak,
whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves,
1 British Critic, vol. viii., p. 372, in Rose, Hulsean Led., p. 12.

The Israelitish Economy. 245
so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof;' and
again, ' And there shaR come forth a rod out of the stem
of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots.' x
According to these and other similar oracles, the pohtical
power and splendour of David's throne and of Israel's
dominion were destined to pass away, and it was declared
that, hke a tree that had reached maturity, it should shed
its foliage, nay, should wither in all its branches and die
down to the ground; and then out of the ground and
from the stock or root left there, there should spring forth
a new shoot, which should grow to another more impos
ing tree, far surpassing its predecessor in amphtude and
beauty. The ' preparation involves a winter time of
apparent torpor and death, which is essential to the
spring, and out of which the new life bursts. The
pregnant words of Jesus Christ, spoken in immediate
reference to His own career, convey a great general prin
ciple, which finds its exemplification also in the career of
His nation : ' Except a corn of wheat faR into the ground
and die, it abideth alone ; but if it die, it bringeth forth
much fruit.' 2 The history of Israel was, spirituaRy
viewed, a process of dying, — a dying to the present, for
the sake of the future, — a dying to the outward, the
pohtical, the national, for the sake of the spiritual and
the personal,3 — a dying to the human and the transient,
for the sake of the divine and the enduring. The woman
who so long travailed with the man-child, if she did not
1 Isa. vi. 13, xi. 1. 2 John xii. 24.
3 Cf. Irenajus, Ag. Heresies, iv. 4. 1 (Eng. Tr.) : 'The fruit, therefore,
having been sown throughout all the world, she (Jerusalem) was deservedly
forsaken, and those things, which had formerly brought forth fruit abun
dantly, were taken away ; for from these, according to the flesh, were
Christ and the apostles enabled to bring forth fruit. But now these are
no longer useful for bringing forth fruit. For aU things, which have a
beginning in time, must of course have an end in time also. '

246 The Israelitish Economy.
absolutely perish at his birth, ' fled away into the wil
derness,' where she has ever since been hid.1 It is a
history in which a double progress rules, and in which,
as with the two quantities in logic, the one movement
is exactly the inverse of the other, — advance in legal
obedience, and in resulting national peace and splendour,
implying retrogression in the attainment of those spiritual
ends which formed the ultimate purpose of the whole
dispensation. It is scarcely necessary to point out that,
as in the case of every true legal probation, so in the
trial of the chosen people by means of their national
covenant, there were involved two possibilities, — on the
one hand, that of obedience and of consequent national
reward, and, on the other hand, that of disobedience and
of national punishment and calamity ; while only in the
event of the latter possibility being realised, could the
grace of the Most High suitably and effectively interpose
in its new and highest exercise in the redemptive work
of Christ. It is manifest that attainment in the line of
outward legal obedience was reaRy exclusive of attain
ment in the line of owing all to God's gracious bestow-
ments, and that progress in sin and in outward decadence
was really the indispensable condition of becoming pre
pared for the giving and receiving of God's greatest gift.
The double movement is patent to the attentive reader,
on the very face of the Old Testament record. In the
days of Israel's national virtue and prosperity under
Joshua and Solomon, there was comparatively little pro
phesying of the dawning of a brighter day, and the appear
ing of a Dehverer for the world ; while, in the days of
darkness and decline in the times of the later kings, the
intimations waxed loud and clear of the new covenant,
1 Cf. Hofmann, Weissagung u. Erfullung, i., p. 39 : 'In dem Schooss
der sterblichen zeugt er (Gott) seinen sohn, ' etc.

The Israelitish Economy. 247
and of the going forth of the promised Ruler of Israel.
The light of hope grew brighter just as the darkness of
despair settled upon the national prospects. This pro
gress in defeat is based upon the deepest laws in fallen
human nature. So long as men seem to be advancing
towards the happiness they seek by the path of their
own obedience, they are at the furthest remove from
spiritual preparedness for a system which is all of grace ;
only as they learn to despair of themselves, will they
learn to look to and to hope in God.1
This leads to the next step. As this kind of prepara
tion was that which God contemplated, so it was that
which was alone suitable. It needs but little considera
tion to satisfy us that such a universal national acceptance
of the divine Redeemer as that which the objection now
contemplated desiderates, would have been a kind of
acceptance inappropriate to the nature of the spiritual
economy, and even counteractive of its true influence.
' The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.'
Jesus Christ Himself resolutely refused to be put in
possession of ' all the kingdoms of the world, and the
glory of them ;' and as often as His countrymen, in their
outbursts of transient enthusiasm in His favour, offered
to lead Him away and ' make Him a king,' He hid Himself
from them. In the subsequent development of this
spiritual system, nothing has proved so great a hindrance
to its real prevalence in the world, nothing so prolific of
formahty, hypocrisy, and moral corruption, as the attempt

1 Breckinridge, Knowledge of God subjectively considered, p. 91 : ' As
the total inefficacy of any law, any rite, any type, any shadow, to supply
completely the place of grace and truth, in leading fallen men to believe
in the Saviour unto life everlasting, was more copiously exhibited, the
real power whereby sinners do believe on the Lord Jesus Christ is more
explicitly held forth in the demonstration of the Holy Ghost. '

248 The Israelitish Economy.
to invest the Church of Christ with outward and political
power, and to gain the subjection of souls by the bribes
of wealth and the terrors of force. What was alone
appropriate, at the introduction of the better dispensation,
was not the suffrage and support of a multitude endowed
with the attributes of worldly influence and power, but
the existence of a few persons in humble places, spiritually
ready to welcome the present salvation. A few souls
convinced of sin, consciously self-helpless and seff-dis-
trustful, watching for the rising of the, promised Light,
' waiting for redemption in Israel ; ' — this, along with
whatever of outward national advantages, of prevailing
habits and customs, of intellectual forms and modes of
thought and speech, of argumentative and evidential
equipment, was needful in order that the new system
might be in a position to establish itself in the world,
among reasonable beings, was the great desideratum.
It has been often remarked, as it has been above, that
the appliances of the Almighty in the Israelitish economy
were, as till Christ came they could not but be, of a
pre-eminently external, objective, sensuous, and national
character, and with such outward appliances He instituted
and prosecuted the trial of which I have spoken. But in
this trial, the object of the Most High was through the
outward to reach the inward, and by means of the sense
to affect the soul. It is through objective appliances
that He seeks to gain the heart of the individual man ;
and it was by means of national and external laws and
ordinances that He sought to gain the heart of the chosen
race. 'All were not Israel who were of Israel.' 'Neither
because they were the children of Abraham were they all
the seed.' That which was the objective possession of
the many, behoved to be the subjective treasure of the
few. That which to the mass was only an outward show

The Israelitish Economy. 249
or a vain boast, behoved to be to the elect remnant a
principle of life and hope. And just as Gideon, by a
series of trials and of separations, reduced the numbers of
his army till he reached at last the three hundred valiant
men fit to be the deliverers of their country, so God, by
a corresponding series, did at last reach and bring to view
the true seed, the elect of Israel, the living heart of the
nation. And in that living heart, the living germinant
core was the Holy Child Jesus. In Him was found at
last the ripe fruit of the old world, and the living seed of
the new. He is the individual man towards whom all
previous national and collective movements had been
tending, and out of whom have sprung those hving
influences and impulses that shaR ultimately regenerate
aR the nations of the earth. He who is the Son of man
is at the same time the Father of the ages. We thus
discern in the world's whole history one complete and
mighty osciRation.1 The movement of its progress is
first centripetal inward to the centre, Jesus Christ, then
centrifugal outward to the world's circumference ; down
ward, from the eminence and glory of the earthly Paradise
to that terrible depth of sin and guilt where stands the
cross of- the Son of God, and upward, from that lowest pit
tiR it rises and rests in the new heavens and the new
earth, the Paradise where God again and for ever dwells
with man.

1 Hofmann, Weissagung u. Erfiillung, i., p. 58 : 'Jesus ist Schluss, aber
auch Mitte der Geschichte ; seine Erscheinung im Fleische is der Anfang
des Endes. ' Ebrard, Ebraer, p. 1 : ' Der Weg des menschlichen Gesch-
Iechts muss erst tief abwarts gehen, um aufwarts steigen zu kbnnen — ja er
muss in einem fort abwarts gehen, alles menschlich Hohe muss geniedrigt
werden, bis die Menschheit so gedemiithigt ist, dass sie fahig wird, sich
rein weiblich, rein empfangend zu verhalten gegen das Heil ; dann erst
wird ihr der Weibessame geschenkt ; denn zu erzeugen vermag sie ihn
nicht. '

250 The Israelitish Economy.
It cannot need much to show that only this spiritual
preparation of the comparatively few was in the nature
of things possible. The true marvel in the moral issues
of the Old Testament system is not that so many were
found hardened and worldly, but that a few were found
spirituaRy receptive of Christ's salvation. I shall not
venture to propound any theory in explanation of this
fact, or enter into a discussion of the question as to the
saving operations of the Holy Ghost under the ancient
covenant.1 Meanwhile, it may suffice to record the fact,
so amply illustrated by the Apostle Paul, that 'no law
can give hfe,' and that therefore the more devoted the
Israehtes grew in their attachment to their national law,
the more scrupulously they set themselves to obey its
precepts, the higher their attainments became in the
externalities of divine service, just so much the more
unimpressible did they also become to spiritual influences,
and the more dead to the appeals of the gospel of grace.
The scribes and Pharisees, as they were highest in moral
attainment among Christ's contemporaries, so they were
lowest in genuine piety towards God and His Son. And
the witness was true which was borne of these: 'Publicans
and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you ;' ' Ye
say, We see, therefore your sin remaineth.' 2
I have attempted to dispose of the difficulty felt by
many in reference to the preparatory function of Israelit-
ism, arising from the fact that apparently Israel was at
1 See Litton, BamptonLect., pp. 198 f. ; Duncan, Law of Moses, pp.
312 f. ; Breckinridge, Knowledge of God subjectively considered, p. 503.
2 Cf. Palfrey, Lowell Led., i., p. 283. 'How could the fact have
been otherwise than it was ? Because men were blind and wilful, and
indifferent to their highest interests, they were in desperate want of
Christianity ; and because they were blind and wilful, and indifferent to
their highest interests, they had no sense of the beauty of Christianity
when it wooed them. '

The Israelitish Economy. 251
Christ's coming not prepared, and have endeavoured to
show that the true preparation was not of a national
kind, leading to national recognition and allegiance, but
lay mainly in the receptivity of a few self-despairing
hearts. I have said that what was indispensable was that
the generation to which the Son of God appeared should
furnish at least some ready to welcome that Saviour, and
to embrace His salvation, and this along with a larger
circle to whom the proclamation of the gospel might be
hopefuRy addressed. To prepare such a generation, if it
seem a small thing in relation to the elaborateness of the
means employed, was in reahty a great and precious
result. It is to be borne in mind that the problem
related to the maintenance and quickening of spiritual
life in a long succession of generations, in the face of the
mighty and all but resistless operation of the forces of
prevalent iniquity, and while as yet the true source of
spiritual life was only a promise or a prefiguration, not
an accomphshed and influential fact. When a human
hfe is sinking under a fever, it is deemed no small
triumph of the physician's skill if he succeeds in preserv
ing unquenched the vital spark, and maintains alive the
hope of future restoration to complete health. When we
mark the terrible destruction that sin is ever working in
the earth, when we see how the communities abandoned
to their own resources have sunk into the abyss of utter
corruption, when we consider how much is yet lacking to
the complete conquest of the world to the divine Re
deemer, we may well wonder at the wisdom of those
divine operations, and the fertility of those divine re
sources, which availed to stem in one community the
flowing tide of a world's corruption, and to prepare in
that community an elect Israel, ready to receive the pure
blessings of salvation.

252 The Israelitish Economy.
Let Christianity not forget the debt which it owes to
the rehgion out of which it sprang, and which it displaced.
All that it needed in order to its introduction as a living,
spiritual power amid the forces of the world, it received
from its forerunner. It had its own foes to fight, its own
trials to encounter, its own conquests to gain, its own
course to run in order to its ultimate universal triumph ;
but at least from its predecessor it obtained estabhshment
and position on the earth, and the opportunity of achiev
ing its destined victories. ' Salvation is of the Jews.'
' Out of Zion ' goes forth ' the rod' of the universal Con
queror. If the field and empire of Christ's religion is the
world, its birth-place is the city of David. If its origin
is to be traced ultimately to heaven itself, yet it came
from heaven through David's line. There in Israel it
found its womb, its cradle, its foster-parent, its childhood's
home, its human agents and ministers. There, too, it
received the clothing and equipment which fitted this
divine system for its presentation to the world and its
triumphant progress over the earth. Even its outward
form was here impressed upon it, and we may safely
affirm that Christianity would not have proved the religion
for man had it not been cast in those moulds prepared for
it by the system of Israel.
Among the special departments in this function of
germination, I briefly note the following : —
1. The personal. — It belonged to the essence of the
spiritual dispensation, that He who could say, ' Before
Abraham was, I am,' should appear not in ' the form of
God,' nor yet in the form of some angelic or super
human order of beings, but ' in the likeness of man ; '
that He should have a human mother, an earthly home,
a point of attachment to the race of man, as son and heir
of a certain family, and thus a position and rights and

The Israelitish Economy. 253
responsibilities among men. And if this was indis
pensable, it was found in the bosom of the Israelitish
people. We do not feel it too bold to say, that in no
other nation under heaven, at that age of the world's
history, could a woman have been found prepared as
Mary of Nazareth was for the honour and responsibility
of being the mother of the incarnate Son of God, ready
to meet the angelic announcement with the pure and
humble faith expressed in the words, ' Behold the hand
maid of the Lord, be it unto me according to thy word.'
And that holy child, of whom we read that ' He increased
in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and men,'
— did He not grow up spiritually under holy influences
such as could then be found only in .a pure and pious
Jewish home ? And did He not also grow up intellec
tually into the possession of a store of ideas, of senti
ments, of words, all suitable for His office and His work,
such as He could have obtained from none of the schools
or philosophies of heathendom ? SpeeiaRy, did He not,
under the same influences, grow into the consciousness
of His position and His caUing as the Son of God ; x and
how could this have been possible elsewhere than in the
heart of the chosen race, and through means of that
inspired Book which is the record of God's dealings with
Israel, and of His promises of mercy to mankind ? Had
Israel and its Bible done nothing more for the world than
ministered to the spiritual growth of the man Christ
Jesus, how infinite the debt under which the world would
have been laid ! Among His fellow-countrymen, too, it
was that the Son of Man found friends, disciples, helpers,
and apostles. From this recruiting ground did the Cap
tain of Salvation draw His first and most illustrious band
of soldiers ; and if they formed but a little flock, we are
1 Cf. Ebrard, Dogmatik, ii., sec. 410 ; Auberlen, Ofenbarung, i., p. 49.

254 The Israelitish Economy.
sure that such a company could have been gathered from
amid no other people than that of Israel. There, amid
the decay and rottenness of a dying national and ecclesi
astical system, sprang up in new life and vigour the chosen
grain of mustard-seed which is destined to overshadow
all the earth.
2. The formal. — The Christian Church derived not
only its personal originators, but also its outward forms,
from Judaism. It inherited and turned to use as far as
was suitable the old bottles in order to pour into them
and convey to the world the new wine of the gospel.
As Jesus Himself was a Jew, and as those who rallied
round Him as His disciples and friends were Jews, they
brought with them their Jewish sentiments, habits, and
customs ; and the system which they established bore in
its outward shape the feature of a general similarity to
that in which they had been reared. The rites, the
modes of worship, the methods of operation, even the
ecclesiastical organisation, baptism, the eucharist, the
sacred day, the congregational assemblies, the reading
and preaching of the word, the institution of elders or
bishops in the new system, aR were heritages of the
' dead past.' Just as ' every seed hath its own body,'
and mysteriously bears within it the form which, when
developed, wiR recall the parent plant, so on the living,
germinant seed of Christianity was impressed the form
which answered to and reproduced the decaying stock
out of which it grew.
3. The intellectual. — I have already had occasion to
remark that the forms of thought and of language gene
rated within the old, passed over to the new economy.1
As the child is not only nourished of the substance and
supported by the strength of its mother, but is also
1 Cf. Alexander, Connexion, p. 12 ; Duncan, Law of Moses, p. 96.

The Israelitish Economy. 255
trained by her mind, learns her speech, and inherits her
mental stores, so to its Israelitish mother did the living
child, Christianity, owe not only its embodiment and form,
but also its intellectual equipment and furnishing. Our
God is the Jehovah of the Old Testament, our Bible
includes the Bible of the Jews, our conceptions of sin
and of atonement, of grace and of hohness, are all such
as have been formed and made current by the institutions
of Israehtism. To attempt, as some would have us, to
cast off this intellectual equipment as only ' old Jew
clothes,' is as if a child should disown its mother, and
forget her teaching, and all the homely and approved
truths which have come to it by tradition, and attempt
to form for itself a new creed and a new language, in the
seR-sufficiency of its intellectual pride. This is per
versely to cast away the most suitable means for qualify
ing us to understand the religion of Jesus Christ. It is
a self-evident truth, that no fact is understood if viewed
only by itself ; that to be known properly, it must be
known in its relations to other facts. And unless it be
the light of our awakened conscience, there exists no
better light by which to read and interpret the greatest
fact in the world's history — the appearing of Jesus
Christ — than that which proceeds from the records of the
Old Testament. It might be historically established,
that whenever the organic connection between the two
portions of the Bible has been severed, the latter has
been misinterpreted ; and that this ignoring the key put
into our hand in the Old Testament, for the opening of
the meaning of the New, has been perhaps the most prolific
source of the heresies which have troubled the Church
of Christ.1 4. The evidential. — The gospel of Jesus Christ comes
1 Cf. Origen, in Alexander, Connexion, p. 383.

256 The Israelitish Economy.
not forth to the world as a bare record of certain won
derful facts, accompanied with a certain divine appeal.
Were it thus to present itseR, it could reasonably hope
for no acceptance ; — its facts are elevated so far above
the natural anticipation of men, that, by themselves, they
could never gain access to human minds. But it is not
in this bare and isolated manner that the gospel makes its
approach to men. In the antecedent system of Israel, it
had its introduction to the world's notice, and in the
records of Israel's history, bound up with its own, it
presents its credentials. It does not appear on the stage
of time suddenly, unexpectedly, arbitrarily, a Deus ex
machind, as if it had dropped from the clouds. Its
' goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.' Jesus
is the ' Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.'
Its way was prepared through the long antecedent ages,
a birth-place and a home were made ready for it, ex
pectation was excited and kept alive as to its coming by
a lengthened succession of prophecies and an imposing
array of types ahd foreshadowings; and when it did come,
it came as the great birth of time, the offspring with
which all the previous ages had been in labour. To
this, its preparatory and introductory economy, the gospel
points, and virtuaRy says to man, ' If you would know
this Jesus, who He , is, and why He appears, consult the
annals of Israel's history ; if you would know that God
by whom He is sent, and what His purpose is in sending
Him, look on aR that God has done and spoken in the
theatre of the old national dispensation ; if it seem to
you too marvellous to be believed that the Son of God
should assume a human body, and tabernacle in mortal
flesh, it should at least take off the edge of your incre
dulity to learn that God Himself once dwelt in visible
form with men upon the earth ; or if the strange conde-

The Israelitish Economy. 257
scension and love of God in not sparing His own Son for
the redemption of guilty creatures, seem to you a thing
incredible, then reflect upon the strange condescension,
the patient attachment, the pleading, yearning love which
the same God manifested towards His chosen Israel,
and learn to see in the love of God towards a lost world
only a fuller and grander display of that affection
towards a perverse nation ; or if the miracles wrought by
Christ and accompanying His appearing seem to you not
strange merely, but so strange and so unexplained as to
have no convincing power, then let them be viewed in
their connection with the declared purpose of God, and
with the whole cycle of miracles wrought of old by God's
earher prophets and servants for purposes which have
been realised, and in connection with systems which have
run their course, and it will be seen that they no longer
stand alone in history as mere inexplicable phenomena
and inscrutable mysteries ; or if, yet again, it seems to
you that these same miracles of Christ are not miracles
at all, but are rather to be - compared with the common
place feats of jugglery or the recondite facts of mes
merism, then let them be regarded not only as the works
of the man Jesus, but as the long-contemplated and pre
dicted consummation of a lengthened work, all essentially
miraculous, occupying many centuries in its development,
and surely you will ask, What juggler or mesmerist has
ever wrought wonders which have been of old predicted,
and whieh the world has long been waiting to witness ? '
When we remember that the Israelitish system not
only contained a long series of prophetic utterances,
but consisted of a lengthened succession of prophetic
facts or picture types, rising graduaRy in distinctness
and impressiveness tiR they culminated in Jesus
Christ and His spiritual kingdom, in whom aR previous
R

258 The Israelitish Economy.
prophesyings and f or esh ado wings found their realisa
tion, the evidential power of the preparatory economy
will be seen to be the strongest possible. Like the
parables of Christ, these ancient types were as riddles
to the men to whom they were exhibited — ' seeing,
they saw not ; hearing, they heard not.' Through their
instrumentality, the truth to be afterwards clearly re
vealed was laid up in secret, stored away against the
future. In them the seeds of future revelation were
cast into the soil of the world's life. But when the
season of their spring arrived, when they felt the
vivifying power of the gospel age and of the rising of
the Sun of righteousness, then they lay hid no longer,
but burst their sheR and became instinct with active
life.1 These commend the system to which they point
as beyond all contradiction the work of Him who seeth
the end from the beginning, and is from everlasting to
everlasting God. What is thus shadowed forth in out
line ages before it is realised in fact, must be the
product of divine wisdom. None but He whose life
and whose designs span the ages, and form the uni
verse in space and time into one organised whole,
could be Author of a system whose foundations were
laid at the beginning of the world's history, whose
structure has been rising through the passing ages,
and whose highest pinnacles occupy 'the end of the
world.' 2
1 Cf. Davison, Prophecy, p. 139 : 'Its (the Mosaic ritual) dumb
elements are made animated and eloquent when the truth comes to act
upon them with its light. They are like the statue which had its chords
wrought within, but mute till the morning sun struck upon them. ' See
also Trench, Parables, p. 26 ; Dove, Logic of Christian Faith, p. 394.
2 Cf. in regard to natural types, Coleridge, Aids to Reflection, p. Ill ;
Harris, Pre-Adamite Ea.rth, pp. 336 f. ; Agassiz, On Classification, p. 30 :
' Nothing seems to me to prove more directly and more fully the action

The Israelitish Economy. 259
5. There is another influence exerted by the
Israehtish system in this its germinative capacity, for
which I can find no better name than the hope-inspir
ing. AR the arrangements of this dispensation were
fitted to create a desire and to excite an expectation
of that which it introduced. The more inadequate it
was proved by experience to be in itself to meet the
spiritual wants of man, to satisfy his conscience, to
subdue his evR passions, to give peace to his heart, or
to secure social weRbeing and happiness, so much the
more did it stir the desire for the better system in
which it was to issue. And, as I have said, in propor
tion as its own inadequacy became manifest, in the
same proportion did it, by the growing brightness of
its prophetic intimations, give foretoken that the redemp
tion was drawing nigh. Under its appliances the
minds of men were kept in a condition of expectancy.
The shadows cast before them gave them assurance
that there was a substance, and led them to long for
its realisation. In an Eastern regal procession, a
herald goes before the hero of the pageant, proclaiming
his names, titles, and achievements, and summoning
the bystanders to do homage. The whole Israelitish
economy, hke the Baptist John, the last and greatest
of its prophets, was the herald of the divine King of
of a reflective mind, to indicate more plainly a deliberate consideration of
the subject, than the different categories upon which species, genera,
families, orders, classes, and branches are founded in nature, and mani
fested as material reality in a succession of individuals, the life of which
is limited in its character to comparatively very short periods.' P. 176 :
1 There are entire families, among the representatives of older periods, of
nearly every class of animals which, in the state of their perfect develop
ment, exemplify such prophetic relations, and afford, within the limits of
the animal kingdom at least, the most unexpected evidence that the plan
of the" whole creation had been maturely considered long before it was
executed. '

260 The Israelitish Economy.
Zion, announcing His approach, keeping expectation
awake, and proclaiming His claims to universal obedi
ence. We know as a fact that, at the very epoch of
the birth of Jesus, an eager hope in regard to the
immediate appearing of the great King of Israel was
widely excited, that it fiRed the soul of the pious
Jews, and that it was widely spread throughout surround
ing nations.1 And we know also how important was
the influence exerted by this general expectation in
regard to the acknowledgment of Jesus Christ as the
Messiah, and how many were thereby led to hear with
open ears and willing minds the testimony of His
disciples, ' The Lord hath visited His people.'
I have thus rapidly traversed the ground which at
the beginning of the Essay was marked out for con
sideration. The argument pursued admits of indefinite
expansion and illustration ; but perhaps, even in this
brief outline, it may somewhat avail to remove the
reproach which, in the estimation of many, chngs to
the economy of Israel, and to show that it was an
institution which, like all the works of the ' only wise
God,' possesses in its own admirable structure the best
evidence of its divine origin.
1 See e.g., Merivale, Roman Empire, i., p. 46. It has often been his
torically proved what power a prophecy believed in exerts in inclining to
the reception of a new system. The Karens in Burmah were prepared to
receive Christianity by the influence of traditional prophecies and expecta
tions. There are similar facts among the Chinese (see Liiken, Tradi-
tionen, pp. 329, 334, 349) and elsewhere.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 261

VII.
INVASIONS OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL.
The stores of new information relating to the ancient
kingdoms of the East, which have been recently opened,
are of vast extent, and bear upon almost every point of
importance in Hebrew antiquity. Many years must
elapse and many volumes be written ere they are either
fuRy explored or completely applied to the illustration
of the Old Testament ; but meanwhile every year, almost
every month, sees some fresh light from these contem
poraneous documents thrown upon the Book of God.
NaturaRy, it is the directly historical illustrations which
first arrest attention. Records of the very events which
Scripture relates, composed by Assyrian and Egyptian
scribes under royal supervision at the very time when
the events happened, are justly reckoned to have &
pecuhar interest and importance ; and an eager desire is
universaRy felt to bring into comparison accounts which,
as alike contemporaneous, stand on the same level of
historic credibility, and which, at the same time, have
been written from standpoints so far apart, and represent
interests so different.
In this Essay I purpose to bring together two or three
of these directly historical illustrations of Scripture nar
ratives, selecting as among the most interesting those
which relate to the foreign invasions to which the
Israelitish territory was subjected. All the invasions,
indeed, which are recorded in the Old Testament cannot

262 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
as yet be thus Rlustrated. Of those, for example, by
the Babylonian armies under Nebuchadnezzar no native
record has hitherto been found. But it is otherwise in
regard to several of the other cases, and of those upon
which hght from this quarter has been thrown I select
the invasions by Shishak, by Tiglathpileser, by Shal-
maneser and Sargon, and by Sennacherib.
I. Shishak. — Of the expedition against the kingdom
of Judah conducted by this monarch we have two
accounts in the sacred volume. In 1 Kings xiv. 25, 26,
we are told : ' It came to pass, in the 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.' In 2 Chron. xii. 2-9
we have a more detailed account : ' 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, and threescore thousand horsemen: and the
people were without number that came with him out of
Egypt ; the Lubims, the Sukkiims, and the Ethiopians.
And he took the fenced cities which pertained to Judah,
and came to Jerusalem.' After describing the interposi
tion of the prophet Shemaiah, and the confessions and
self-abasement of Rehoboam and his princes, the narrative
proceeds : ' So Shishak king of Egypt came against
Jerusalem, and took away the treasures of the house of
the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house ; he took
all : he carried away also the shields of gold which
Solomon had made.'
This was the first inroad by conquering foes to which
the land had been subjected since the times of the Judges

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 263
and the domination of the Philistines. It was evidently
of the character of a rapid and overwhelming invasion,- —
the vast host of the Egyptian king spreading itself in
different divisions over the whole country, and taking
possession, apparently without resistance, of every place
of importance, gathering together and sweeping off a vast
booty, but estabhshing no permanent dominion in the
land. Moreover, so far at least as can be ascertained
from the narrative, it was the kingdom of Judah only
that was visited with this hostile aggression. It is
expressly represented as a judgment upon Rehoboam and
upon his people, on account of their sin;1 and as Jeroboam,
the rival sovereign of the kingdom of the Ten Tribes, had
been long a refugee in Egypt at the court of Shishak,2
and was doubtless estabhshed upon his throne with the
concurrence and support of his protector, it is altogether
likely that this expedition was intended to be in his
interest, and for the weakening of his rival.
Turning to the Egyptian sources, we find the name
represented by the Bibhcal Shishak,3 — in Egyptian, Sha-
shank,ov Sheshonk, as variously transcribed by Egyptologers,

1 See 1 Kings xiv. 22-24 ; 2 Chron. xii. 1.
2 1 Kings xi. 40. ' II est bien remarquable que l'Egypte a cette epoque,
sans doute par suite de ses relations intimes et des mariages reciproques de
ses families royales avec les rois de l'Asie anterieure, offrit g^neralement son
hospitality aux refugies etrangers. Hadad, le fils du roi d'Idumee, s'en-
fuit avec son parti en Lgypte lorsque David s'empara du royaume de son
pere. . . . L'ldumee, en egyptien Adouma, appartenait au temps de la
dix-neuvieme dynastie, au royaume Egyptien. II parait done que le prince
Hadad eut de bons droits pour s'enfuir en Egypte. L'hospitalite envers
I'etranger 6tait, du reste, du nombre des presents religieux. Dans le livre
des morts, le defunct prononce ces paroles : " J'ai donne du pain a celui qui
avait faim, et de l'eau a celui qui avait soif et des habits k celui qui etait
nu et un hospice au pterin " (chap. exxv. col. 38).' — Brugsch, Histoire
d'Egypte, l, p. 225.
3 The name is written in the Hebrew variously, pvhw an<i pKW, in

264 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
— borne by four kings of the twenty-second Manethonian
dynasty. This dynasty was descended from a priestly
family, related by marriage with that which preceded
it and to which the wife of Solomon belonged. The
family belonged to Bubastis, or Pi-bast (the modern Tell-
Bastah), the capital of the eighteenth Nome, in the
eastern part of the Delta; and it is obvious from the
names belonging to it that it was of foreign extraction.1
One of these names is of very great interest, Namurot, the
Egyptian form of the Bibhcal Nimrod, a name which
has hitherto been sought in vain in the ancient monu
ments of Babylonia and Assyria. Among the others,
several have also been plausibly compared with royal
names found in the Asiatic empires. Thus, Osorkon, it is
thought, is the equivalent of Sargon, well known as a
royal name both in Babylon and Assyria; Takelot resembles
Tiglath, the first part of the name Tiglathpileser ; 2 and
Nebonesa obviously contains the divine name Nebo, which
also occurs in Nabonassar, Nabonadius, and others.3 Other
names found in this royal house, as Buiuwawa, Mawasen,
Patut, Suwaput, and Karoamat (a female), have no possible
Egyptian derivation; and it is a question, which we
the LXX. ^murix and 'Shuim.xuf., the latter of which forms is also that of
Syncellus. Josephus (Ant. Jud., viii., 1, 2) writes Swosicos. Africanus
gives the form "Zitruyx's, — Eusebius, ~2,ieuyx<»<"s.
1 According to Pierret (Diclionnaire d'arcMologie Egyptienne, p. 510),
the cartouches of the Shishaks are chiseUed out upon the monuments, — ¦
another fact indicating the foreign and intrusive character of the dynasty.
2 In connection with this it is interesting to find a person called Sheshonk
living at Nineveh in the days of Sennacherib ; see Rawlinson, Jour. Asiatic
Soc, i. (new ser.), p. 237.
sCf. Lenormant, Manual of Ane. Hist., i., p. 273 (Eng. Tr.) : —
' Henceforth the kings (of Egypt) are real Mamelukes, such as those who
governed Moslem Egypt in the Middle Ages, all sprung from bodies of
foreign soldiers, whom we find from this time exclusively employed as
body-guards to the sovereigns who reigned on the banks of the Nile. '

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 265
have as yet no means of determinately solving, to what
language these terms belong, and to what race this
dynasty is to be assigned. Lepsius and others endeavour
to prove them Shemitic.1 Brugsch believes that they
belong to the people called in the Egyptian inscriptions
the Rutennu, and adds, ' I hope one day to be able to
prove that the language is not different from the ancient
Chaldean tongue, from which a great multitude of words
are preserved in Egyptian itself.' 2 The only point that
appears to me to rest on tolerably sufficient evidence is
that this twenty-second dynasty belongs to the Cushite
stock ; 3 and if Brugsch-Bey confines himself to the Kassite
or Cushite element in the Chaldean monuments, supposing
it possible to discriminate this, he may probably succeed.
The occurrence Of the marked name Nimrod as a family-
name among them points in this direction. There are
many indications, moreover, of a large admixture of
Cushites along with Shemites in Lower Egypt generally,
but particularly in the eastern portion of the Delta, and
about Bubastis, to which this house belonged. Of special
importance is the fact that a military title peculiar to this
dynasty is ' leader or chief of the Mashuasha' a Libyan
race often mentioned in the monuments, and almost cer
tainly of Cushite origin.4 Of these and kindred races the
armies of these kings were mainly composed, a fact which
1 See Lepsius, The Twenty-Second Royal Egyptian Dynasty, by Bell,
p. 23 ; Ebers, AUgyptenu. d. Bilcher Mose's, i., p. 232 ; Maspero, Histoire
Ancienne, p. 339.
2 Brugsch, Histoire, i., p. 220.
3 See Ebers, AUgypten u. d. Biicher Mose's, pp. 208, 221, 230 f. The
argument involves the question as to the nationality of the Hyksos, and
has been touched on above (p. 97).
4 See Brugsch, Geog. Inschriften, ii., p. 81 ; Histoire, i., pp. 234, 240. 'Les
rois Bubastites avaient comme soldiers des Libyens et les membres de leur
famille commandaient ces gardes etrangeres dont la troupe principale fut
cette des Masawasa, nom porte par une peuplade Libyenne. ' Abundant

266 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
exceRently iRustrates the description given by the sacred
writer of the army of Shishak : ' Lubims, Sukkiims, and
Ethiopians,' x i.e. Cushites ; and it seems to me clear that
the great dependence placed by Shishak and the other
monarchs of his house upon these non -Egyptian and
Cushite troops implies that they were of kindred
descent. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that
one of the kings of Ethiopia, or Cush, in the south of
Egypt, called Piankhi, who hved after the twenty-second
Egyptian dynasty, takes the titles, ' The loved of Bast,' and
' The Son of Bast,' titles which are understood to indicate
that this king claimed to be the representative and heir of
the Bubastite sovereigns.2
It was the first of the Shisha'ks, who was also the first
evidence of this is found in the Piankhi- Stele, discovered a few years ago
by Mariette-Bey at Jebel Barkal ; see Ebers, op. cit. , p. 229. In the
time of Ramses in. the Mashuasha are found established in Lower Egypt,
and organising a formidable rebellion against that monarch, which was
with difficulty subdued (Chabas, Etudes sur I'antiquite, p. 230). The
name is usually compared with Mifyis, in Herod., iv., 191, a Libyan race
who had a tradition that they had come from Troy.
1 The Lubim are of course the Lubu of the Egyptian records, the Libyans
of the Greeks and Romans, who lived to the west of Lower Egypt (see
Ebers, AUgypten u. d. Biicher Mose's, i., p. 107).' In regard to the Ethio
pians or Cushim, they are found both in the south of Egypt and in Arabia
(see above, p. 97, and cf. Ebers, op. cit., p. 85). The Sukkiim are very
problematical. Their territory has ordinarily been sought in Africa, and
Ewald calls to mind a place mentioned in Pomponius Mela, i. 8, by the
name of Suche, near Adule, on the western coast of the Red Sea. I venture
to suggest the Sukki of the Assyrian inscriptions, known from this source
as dwelling about the northern outskirts of the Arabian desert. It was
apparently from Arabia that Zerah the Cushite led his invading army in
the days of Asa (2 Chron. xiv. 9 f.) ; cf. Poole, in Smith's Diet, of the
Bible, s. v.
2 Pierret, op. cit., p. 439. In an inscription found by Brugsch-Bey at
Abydos, Sheshonk I. speaks of Khal as the native country of his family.
This name is commonly understood to refer to Syria, and certainly belongs
to an Asiatic country (see Zeitschrift d. aegypt. Sprache, 1871, p. 86). 1
am disposed to place in connection with this the statement in Num. xiii.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 267
sovereign of the Bubastite dynasty, that conducted the
expedition against Judah in the days of Rehoboam. His
father's -name was Nimrod, and in one of his monuments
he records the arrangements made by him that divine
honours might be permanently rendered to his father's
memory. He is known to have reigned at least twenty-
one years, and as it is probable that his reign did not
extend much beyond that period, and as he had received
Jeroboam to his court some years before the death of
Solomon, it is evident that his invasion of Judah must
have taken place near the close of his life. On his return
from this expedition, Shishak erected, doubtless with the
spoils of his conquest, a portico to the famous temple of
the god Ammon at Thebes, the modern ¦ Karnak, recording
his conquests; and there, on the outer wall of the temple,
in the neighbourhood of this portico, the record may still
be seen. The king is represented of gigantic size, and
appears adorned with the two crowns of the Upper and
Lower Egypt, and he lifts his right arm, which holds the
Egyptian sword, in order to slay a crowd of foreign
enemies who are kneeling before him. Legends engraved
upon the wall inform us that the Pharaoh is no other
than the victorious son of the Sun, the beloved child of
Amon, Sheshonk. The names of the cities, fortresses, and
foreign countries captured by the monarch, are enclosed
in 133 crenulated cartouches, surmounted by figures of a
haR size, representing each the locahty personified.1 It
was during his residence in Egypt, in 1828-29, that
22, when we read that at Hebron, ' Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the
children of Anak, were. (Now Hebron was built seven years before Zoan
in Egypt. )' The words seem to imply that Zoan was built by the same race
as Hebron, viz., by the Anakim, and the names given are certainly non-
Shemitic, while one of them has a remarkable similarity to Shishak ; cf.
above, p. 109.
1 Brugsch, Histoire, i., p. 226.

268 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
ChampoRion the younger recognised, in the name of the
Pharaoh here represented, the Shishak of the Bible, and
read also in the cartouche on the breast of one of the
figures, the words, ' Joudaha-malek,' which he translated,
' the kingdom of Judah.'1 In his Egyptian Grammar,
pubhshed posthumously, the same great pioneer in Egypto
logy gives decipherments of three of the other cartouches,
which he reads, Maktaa, Beithuaren, and Mahanma, and
identifies respectively with Megiddo, Beth-horon, and
Mahanaim. Since then this hst of names has been often
and carefully studied, and interpretations, with com
mentary, have been furnished by some of the leading
students of Egyptian antiquity.2
It is simply in the names of the places which Shishak
professes to have conquered that the historical importance
of this record consists. There is no account of the pro
cess of conquest. The first nine rings are occupied with
a stereotyped hst of subject countries, over which aR the
later Pharaohs claim dominion, — the rest of the 133, of
which, unfortunately, a number are defaced and illegible,
consist of the names of places more or less clearly recog
nisable as Palestinian and Israehtish. Without attempt
ing an exhaustive enumeration, I shaR set down those
which can with most, certainty be identified.
It is interesting to find that, of the list of fifteen fenced
cities belonging to the kingdom of Judah given in
2 Chron. xi. 6-10, at least the half can be recognised
among the conquests of Shishak. The list is as follows : —
' Beth-lehem, and Etam, and Tekoa, and Beth-zur, and
1 Champollion, Lettres ecrites d'Egypte et de Nubie. Cf. Wilkinson,
Modern Egypt and Thebes, ii., p. 263.
2 Especially Brugsch, in his Geog. Inschriften, vol. ii. ; De Rouge
in the Revue Archeologique, 1861 ; Blau in the Zeitschrift d. morg.
Gesellsehaft, vol. xv. ; and Poole, in Smith's Diet, of the Bible, s. v.
Shishak.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 269
Shoco, and Adullam, and Gath, and Mareshah, and Ziph,
and Adoraim, and Lachish, and Azekah, and Zorah, and
Aijalon, and Hebron.' Of these occur Beth-lehem, under
the older name Ephratah, Beth-zur, Shoco, Adullam,. Gath,
Adoraim, Aijalon, and probably Mareshah. The occurrence
of. so many of the Jewish strongholds leads us to suspect
that the others are either unrecognised under their Egyp
tian translation, or obhterated in the illegible cartouches.
Among the towns in the tribe of Benjamin, or its borders
(Josh, xviii. 11-28), we find the foRowing: — Beth-hoglah,
Zemaraim, Ophni, Gibeon, Ramah or Ramathaim, Taralah,
and probably Keziz, or Amaq-Keziz, and Adummim,
with Almon or Alemeth (Josh. xxi. 18 ; 1 Chron. vi.
60), and Neballat (Neh. xi. 34). In the tribe of Judah
(Josh. xv. 20-62) we recognise, in addition to those
fenced towns above mentioned : — Azem, Lebaoth or Beth-
lebaoth, Rimmon, Enam, Adithaim, Naamah, Makkedah,
Ashan, Keilah, Ekron, Ashdod, Aphekah, Beth-tappuah,
Beth-anoth, with Arad (Josh, xii; 14), and perhaps Baalah,
Bethel, and Hormah. Some of the remaining names are
stiR of problematical reference. Among these is that
already mentioned, which was first read by Champolhon,
and which is written, according to Brugsch, with the
letters Judhmalk. That this should mean the kingdom
of Judah, standing where it does in a series of names
of towns, seems highly improbable j1 and it has been
suggested by Brugsch that it may be represented by the
-modern Jehudia, to which Blau has added the remark
that the same name Jehud occurs in the Old Testament
as one of the towns in the tribe of Dan.2 To this identi-
1 Lenormant, however, renders it, ' Royalty of Judah.' — Manual of
Ane. Hist., i., 274; cf. Poole, op. cit., p. 1293.
2 Josh. xix. 45. See Robinson, Researches, ii., p. 242 ; Palestine Ex
ploration Fund Statements, April 1872, p. 39.

2 70 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
fication it is no objection that the place is not expressly
assigned either to Judah or Benjamin, several of Reho-
boam's cities, as Aijalon, Ekron, and Zorah being found
in the aRotment of Dan. The appendix to the name,
however (malk), is stiR without explanation. Again,
some of the names have been supposed to represent towns
belonging to the northern tribes, and to the kingdom of
Jeroboam.1 Two of the identifications of Champolhon
given above, Megiddo and Mahanaim, take us to the
territory of Manasseh, and even to the country beyond
Jordan ; and others, advocated by Brugsch and Poole, as
Rabbith, Taanach, Shunem, Rehob, Hapharaim, Kedemoth,
are likewise far beyond the boundaries of the southern
kingdom. But the supposition that the expedition of
Shishak took so wide a range is, as we have seen, unsup
ported by Scripture, and improbable in itself ; nor is the
evidence of these names, as they stand in the original
record, of a kind that constrains to this interpretation.
It has been shown by Blau, that they may, without
exception, be brought within the hmits of the kingdom
of Judah. Thus, the word read Rabbith is the name
already given as Lebaoth; that read Taanach2 may perhaps
be referred to Tochen, of the tribe of Simeon (1 Chron.
iv. 32) ; that rendered Shunem may be understood to be
the Ashan of the same tribe (Josh. xix. 7) ; Rehob is
probably to be altered into Rehoboth ; Hapharaim finds
1 So Brugsch and Poole. The latter supposes that a number of the
Levitical cities in the northern kingdom were held in the interests of Reho
boam., But this seems inconsistent with 2 Chron. xi. 13-17, where we
are told that 'the Levites left their suburbs, and their possession, and
came to Judah and Jerusalem, ' etc.
2 It is to be granted that the Egyptian word, thus read, seems the exact
transcript of the Hebrew Taanach, which belonged to Manasseh, and thus
strongly favours the idea that Shishak's conquests extended into the
northern kingdom.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 271
its identification in ' the land of Hepher,' in the south of
Judah (1 Kings iv. 1 0) ; Kedemoth depends, we are told,
upon a misreading of one of the characters of the inscrip
tion, which, when rectified, yields the Adithaim of the
above list ; while Megiddo is equally identifiable with
Makkedah, and Mahanaim with Mahaneh-clan (Judg.
xviii. 12).1 More certainty in regard to the reading and
the reference of the names wiR doubtless be by and by
attained, but meanwhile we do not seem compelled, in
any case, to go beyond the dominion of Rehoboam to seek
for the Hebrew equivalents.
One other interesting question remains, — Does Jeru
salem, which Scripture affirms to have been opened to
the arms of Shishak, occur in the Egyptian list ? If
it occurs, it must be in one of the defaced or illegible
shields. On the last, or 133d, the commencing letters of
the name Jula . . ., or Jura . . ., are still recognisable, and
there is great probability in the conjecture of Blau, that
¦ we have here a fragment of the name of the metropolis 2
inscribed in the most fitting place at the close of the
enumeration.3 Such, in substance, is the instruction, so far as it bears
1 Duncker, Geschichte des Alterthums, i., pp. 644, 910 (3d ed.), accepts
Blau's identifications, only expressing a doubt whether the Philistine
towns Ashdod and Ekron can be understood to have been at the time
under the dominion of Rehoboam. Probably, as Poole thinks, the list
includes the names of places or tribes in the south of Palestine, not
mentioned in Scripture. One name occurring several times is read by
him, the Negeb, or< south country ; and another, also repeated, the
Hagarites. 2 Another of the names rendered Jericho by Blau and Jerahmeelites by
Poole also begins with Jur . . ., and the Assyrian form of Jerusalem —
Ursalimma — presents a similar mode of transcription.
3 Probably the name stands last because Jerusalem was captured last.
See 2 Chron. xii. 4, 9, and cf. Josephus, Ant. Jud., viii., 10, 2, — 'He came
last of all to Jerusalem.' So also Sennacherib deferred the siege of the
capital till he had conquered the rest of the country.

272 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
upon the narratives in the Hebrew Scriptures, to be
derived, with our present knowledge, from this record,
engraved in the ninth century B.C., on the granite wall of
the great Theban temple. It is highly interesting to
catch this clear echo, after so many centuries have passed
away and from a quarter so remote, of the statements, of
Holy Writ. It is as if Shishak himself had come forth
from his coffin and borne such testimony as this,— I knew
not that that httle kingdom over which the rival of my
friend Jeroboam reigned would ever be famous in the
world ; I knew not that, in my expedition against Jeru
salem and its neighbour cities, I was executing the judg
ments of the Eternal upon His chosen people for their
sin ; but I attest the truth of the account, and present
here the list of the cities I captured.
II. Tiglathpileser. — -Of this Assyrian monarch, we
learn from the Hebrew Scriptures that he acted an im
portant part in relation to the chosen people, specially
in serving as the instrument of divine judgment upon the
idolatrous northern kingdom which Jeroboam the son of
Nebat had founded. One important expedition conducted
by him against Israel is thus described in 2 Kings xv.
29: 'In the days of Pekah king of Israel, came Tiglath
pileser king of Assyria, and took Ijon, and Abel-beth-
maachah, and Janoah, and Kedesh, and Hazor, and Gilead,
and Galilee, all the land of Naphtali, and carried them
captive to Assyria.' There is a statement of similar
purport in 1 Chron. v. 26 : ' The God of Israel stirred up
the spirit of Pul king of Assyria, and the spirit of .Tilgath-
pilneser king of Assyria, and he carried them away (even
the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half-tribe of
M'anasseh), and brought them unto Halah, and Habor, and
Hara, and to the river Gozan, unto this day.' It is
further told us that Ahaz king of Judah was Tiglath-

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 273
pileser's tributary, and that it was specially at the instance
of this Jewish sovereign that the Assyrian was led to
invade the land of Israel (2 Kings xvi. 7-18 ; 2 Chron.
xxviii. 19-21).
Tiglathpileser1 is now known from native sources to
have been the name of two kings of Assyria, both of
them, judging from their own account, distinguished for
their conquests ; and of these it is the second who is
mentioned in the Old Testament. Of the annals of this
monarch considerable portions have been recovered, un
fortunately in a very mutilated condition, — the slabs on
which they were chiseRed having been appropriated by a
later king, Esarhaddon, to the construction of his palace,
and largely destroyed and defaced.2 By this circumstance
we have been deprived of much of the instruction which
in their complete condition they would have yielded. No
fewer than five Hebrew kings are mentioned in them ;
and since the points of contact between Tiglathpileser and
the Israelitish kingdoms were so numerous, it is the more
to be regretted that we lack the full record of the events
of his reign.
We learn from the Assyrian Canon that he ascended
the throne in 745 B.C., and that his reign continued for
eighteen years.3 The Hebrew king whose name first occurs
in his annals is Azriyahu, or Azariah, king of Yahudu,
or Judah, and there is no sufficient reason for doubting
1 The name has been variously written by Assyriologers, Tigulti-pal-tsira,
Tiglat-palli-sihr, Tuklat-habal-asar, etc. In the LXX. it appears as
6iy\cc0<pxXu<rip, and in later writers it undergoes various other transfor
mations. 2 See Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, ii. , p. 24 ; Nineveh and Babylon,
p. 617. From this and other circumstances it has been inferred that
Tiglathpileser was not of the royal line, and obtained the throne by ' suc
cessful revolution. ' — Rawlinson, Ane. Monarchies, ii., p. 394.
3 See Smith, Ass. Canon, p. 64. S

2 74 Invasions of the Land of Israel,.
that this is the weR-known Azariah or Uzziah of the Old
Testament.1 This monarch is presented to us in the
Scriptures as, up to a certain period in his career, warhke,
aggressive, and prosperous. We are told that he warred
against the Philistines, against certain Arabians, and
against the Mehunims ; that the Ammonites paid him
tribute; that he strengthened the fortifications of Jerusa
lem, and not only increased but thoroughly organised and
equipped his army, so that ' his name spread far abroad,
for he was wonderfully helped till he was strong.'2 What
we read in the Assyrian record sheds upon this account
an interesting and remarkable light. Notwithstanding its
deplorable mutilations, it exhibits Azariah, quite unmis
takeably, as not only a powerful sovereign, but even the
most powerful, and to the Assyrian king the most formi
dable, on the Mediterranean coast. Of this the evidence
is as follows. In an inscription of Tiglathpileser, belong
ing to an early period of his reign (743-740 B.C.), this
monarch appears leading an expedition to Syria and
Phoenicia, and receiving while in the city of Arpad tribute
1 See 2 Kings xv. 1 f. ; 2 Chron. xxvi. 1 f. Oppert, pressed by the
necessities of his chronological system, believes this Azariah to be the ' son
of Tabeal' mentioned in Isa. vii. 6. See his Chronologic Biblique, p. 30.
But the son of Tabeal was never king of Judah, which this Azariah is
expressly called. Smith, in his most recent work on the subject, in opposi
tion to his former opinion, believes the Assyrian scribe to have mistaken
the name of the Jewish sovereign as well as of his Israelitish contem
porary, and thinks that by Azariah and Menahem we are to understand
Ahaz and Pekah. See Ass. Canon, p. 181. This too is proposed in
virtue of a supposed chronological necessity, arising from the dates furnished
by the Hebrew Scriptures. But it appears to me more reasonable to believe
that the dates in the Bible are either corrupt or misunderstood and mis
construed, than to believe that two monarchs repeatedly mentioned in an
Assyrian public document have been put by a blunder for other two, their
successors, especially when both the latter are found elsewhere in the
records of the same king under their own proper names.
2 See 2 Chron. xxvi. 6-15.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 275
from Rezin of Damascus, Hiram of Tyre, and several
other kings.1 A year or two later, he appears again in the
same region, but now it is to encounter opposition and
war, and the tribute he seeks he is compelled to employ
force in order to obtain. And from the broken sentences
of the record, it is plain that the head and soul of the
opposition was Azariah of Judah. Some, we are told, ' to
Azariah turned and strengthened him ;' 2 and in another
place we seem to ascertain the fact and some of the
details of a powerful anti- Assyrian confederacy. Hatarika
or Hadrach 3 is mentioned, then a number of other places
which we fail to recognise, but which seem to have been
situated on Mount Lebanon ; then it is added, — ' Nineteen
districts of Hanimatti, or Hamath,4 and the cities which
are around them, which are beside the sea of the setting
sun, in sin and defiance to Azariah had turned.' 5 Having
narrated his subjugation of those who had refused him
homage in consequence of turning to Azariah, he proceeds
to give a list of the kings who at last paid him tribute,
1 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 274.
2 Smith, op. cit, p. 275.
3 This name, which occurs once in the Bible, in connection with Damas
cus (Zech. ix. 1), is of common occurrence in the Assyrian records, as the
name of a district of Syria.
4 It would thus seem that Hamath was specially implicated in this
rebeUion against Assyria, in connection with which may be placed the
expression in 2 Kings xiv. 28.
5 Smith, op. dt., p. 276. Rodwell, Records of the Past, v., p. 46: ' In
seditious rebellion to Azariah had gone over. ' I am unable to understand
how Mr. Smith, in view of these passages, could write that ' when Tiglath
Pileser came to Palestine in B. o. 738, he found a war going on against the
king of Judah, in which the people, even as far as Hamath, joined '
(Ass. Canon, p. 181). The fact seems exactly the reverse. He has
himself given a different and more correct representation in the Zeitschrift
der osgypt. Sprache, 1869, p. 12, where he says, 'the people of Hamath
refused to submit (to Tiglathpileser), and were supported by Azariah king
of Judah.' So also Lenormant, Manual of Ane. Hist., i., p. 389.

276 Invasions of the L and of Israel.
among whom mention is made, along with many others,
of Razinu, or Rezin of Syria ; Minnihimmi, or Menahem
of Samaria; Hirummu, or Hiram of Tyre; Sibitti-bahal of
Gebal; and Eniel of Hamath. It is evident' from aR
this that there had been a wide-spread combination and
rebellion against Assyrian domination ; and it is a signal
illustration of the account given by the Chronicler of
Azariah's power, to find that not only is the rebellion
ascribed to his influence, but also that, when it is subdued,
and among the rest Menahem the king of Samaria is
reduced under tribute,1 Azariah remains both unsubdued
and unassailed. It is important to observe that we have
in this part of the Assyrian annals, distinct historical
attestation to the contemporaneousness of Azariah of
Judah, Menahem of Samaria, and Rezin of Damascus
1 In 2 Kings xv. 19, we are told that Menahem paid tribute to Pul king
of Assyria, and as the object of this payment is expressly said to have been
that the kingdom might be confirmed in his hand, it took place most
probably near the beginning of Menahem's reign. No name answering to
Pul has yet been found in the Assyrian records. A king whose name is
read Vulnirari, reigned, according to the Canon, from 810 to 782 B.C., and
some are disposed to identify this sovereign with Pul. But besides that
the reading Vul is disputed, it seems a fatal objection that the date is
much too early for one who received tribute from a contemporary of
Tiglathpileser. Others, as Schrader (die Keilinschriften u. d. alt. Testa
ment, p. 132), identify Pul with the Porus of Ptolemy's Canon, and believe
him to be the same person as Tiglathpileser — the one name being the brief
and conventional form of the other. But this view again is hard to recon
cile with the statement in 1 Chron. v. 26, where Pul king of Assyria and
Tiglathpileser king of Assyria stand beside one another as different
persons ; and the reasoning of Schrader on this point (op. cit., p. 133, n.)
cannot be regarded as satisfactory. It has also been suggested (by Smith,
Zeitschrift d. cegypt. Sprache, 1869, p. 9) that Pul was Tiglathpileser's
immediate predecessor, whose name is commonly written Assur-nirari.
' I have some grounds,' says Mr. Smith, ' for thinking it ought to be Vul
nirari. ' If this reading were established, the difficulty would probably be
at an end. Meanwhile the data seem to point in another direction. The
only two books in which express mention is made of Pul are the Bible and

Invasions of the Laud of Israel. 277
with Tiglathpileser, and this at about the eighth year
of his reign.1
Turning now to the Book of Isaiah (7th and 8th
chapters), we have again the kingdom of Judah set before
us at a somewhat later date than that to which we are
referred by the account of Azariah's prosperity. Azariah
and his son Jotham, the co-regent of his father for a
number of years, are both dead, and Ahaz, the son of Jo
tham, occupies the throne. Menahem too has disappeared,
and it is Pekah, son of Remahah, who reigns in Samaria.
Rezin, however, is still king in Damascus, and is not only
powerful, but is also ambitious of extending his influence,
and especially, now that an unwarlike youth is on the
throne of Jerusalem, of breaking the pride of the intract
able kingdom of Judah. This was a project equally
agreeable to Judah's rival,. Samaria, and a confederacy was
formed for the purpose of conquering Jerusalem and of
Berosus. In the former he is named twice (2 Kings xv. 19 ; 1 Chron. v.
26), as receiving tribute from Menahem, and as, along with Tiglathpileser,
carrying the t'rans-Jordanic tribes of Israel into captivity. In the latter
(Berosus, ed. Richter, p. 62) he is spoken of as a king of the Chaldeans.
.Further, in Ptolemy's Canon for the years 731-726 B.C. appear two names,
Xivglpeu xxi Tlufov. This has commonly been regarded as merely a cor
ruption of the original entry. But perhaps it is not. At least a 'name
Kinziru is found in Tiglathpileser's inscriptions, as that of a Chaldean
king against whom he wars (Smith, Ass. Discoveries, pp. 255-259). If this
be the name represented by Ptolemy's Chinzirus, perhaps his Porus repre
sents the Pul of Berosus ; and the supposition that seems needful to
reconcile the facts at present known is, that Pul was co-regent at Nineveh
with Tiglathpileser, and after the complete conquest of Chaldea by the
Assyrians was set by him upon the throne of Babylon. Another fact
which seems worth mentioning in this connection is, that when Ahaz
sought help against Rezin and Pekah, he is said by the Chronicler to have
sent to 'the kings of Assyria' (2 Chron.. xxviii. 16).
1 The chronological questions to which this fact leads, as well as the
chronological questions generally connected with the events touched on in
this Essay, I purposely pass by. It would be impossible with the space
here at command to do them justice.

278 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
setting their own nominee, 'the son of Tabeal,' upon the
throne. When this was reported to Ahaz, we are "told
that ' his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as
the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.' The
prophet is sent to meet the trembling and faithless king,
and delivers to him an oracle of mingled mercy and judg
ment. On the one hand, in regard to the hopeful project
of the confederate kings, it was declared, ' It shall not
stand, neither shall it come to pass;' 'for before the child
(with whom the prophet's wife was already pregnant)
shaR have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother,
the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be
taken away before the king of Assyria ;' while, in regard
to the fate of the confederate kings themselves, it was
declared, ' Before the child shall , know to refuse the evil
and to choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall
be forsaken of both her kings.' On the other hand, it
was also declared that for the ungodliness of Ahaz him
self and of his people, ' The Lord shall bring upon thee,
and upon thy people, and upon thy father's house, days
that have not come, from the day that Ephraim departed
from- Judah ; even the king of Assyria.' This oracle in
both its elements finds iRustration in the subsequent
parts of the present Essay.
When we take up the next intelligible fragment of the
annals of Tiglathpileser, we find that it sets forth the
very process of judgment upon the enemies of Judah of
which Isaiah spoke. To the king of Assyria, rather than
to Jehovah, Ahaz sent supphcation for help in his ex
tremity, and moved by his request and, doubtless, stiR
more by desire both to chastise rebeRion and to curb the
growing power of Damascus, Tiglathpileser advanced with
his army against Rezin. Of the latter, we read that after
suffering defeat in the open field, 'he, to save his life, fled

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 279
away alone, like a deer, and into the great gate of his city
he entered . . . Damascus, his city, I besieged, and like a
caged bird I enclosed him.' ' His forests . . . the trees of
which were without number, I cut down, and I did not
leave one ... 5 9 1 cities ... of sixteen districts of Syria,
like a flood I swept.'1 Moreover, we are told, though the
passage cannot now be quoted, that it is known that the
death of Rezin was recorded in the same annals.2 We have
thus independent authority in confirmation of almost every
point in the Scriptural account of the faR of the Syrian
capital: 'The king of Assyria went up against Damascus
and took it, and carried the people captive to Kir, and
slew Rezin.' 3
Probably, while the siege of Damascus was going forward,
a portion of the Assyrian force was led southwards against
Pekah, the confederate of Rezin. There is some evidence,
indeed, that more than one expedition was despatched
during this period into the Israehte territory ; and the
comparison of the two passages above quoted from 2 Kings
xv. 29 and 1 Chron. v. 26 seems to bring to view the
same fact.4 Though the Assyrian account is in a sadly
1 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 282. In the above paragraph is a mutilated
passage, in which mention is made of the name of the father of Rezin.
Only the latter half of the name remains . . . hadara, which, however,
seems to indicate that it was Benhadar ; cf. 2 Kings xiii. 25.
2 Smith, Zeitsch. der cegypt. Sprache, 1869, p. 14: 'One valuable frag
ment discovered by Sir H. Rawlinson, which contained a notice of the
death of Rezin, has been left in Assyria and lost ; ' cf. Rawlinson, Ane.
Monarchies, ii., p. 398, n.
3 2 Kings xvi. 9. Kir is probably the river Kur and the region around,
between the Caspian and the Black Sea. See R. K. Porter's Travels, i.,
pp. 107 f.
4 I do not appeal with Canon Rawlinson (Smith's Did. of the Bible, s.v.
Tiglathpileser), in support of the view that Tiglathpileser made more than
one invasion of Israel, to Isa. ix. 1. The Authorised Version there probably
contains a mistranslation.

280 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
fragmentary state, yet we are able to make out not only
the fact of such an invasion, but also some of the details.
Thus, in one passage relating to the conquests in Palestine,
we read of many districts being depopulated, and a vast
number of women carried off (13,520 are specified, and
it is left uncertain whether this is the total or only one
of the items of the amount). The names are unfor
tunately almost aR mutilated. Aruma and Marum are
mentioned, and may represent Horem in Naphtali and
Merom ; . . . hinatuna may be Hannathon in Zebulon, and
Beth-gu . . . Beth-gamul on the east of the Jordan. In
another passage, after a detail of conquests about Mount
Lebanon, in which occur the names of Hadrach, Zimirra,
and Arqu} the record proceeds : ' The cities . . . niti,
Galhi . . . Abil . . . which is the boundary of the land
of Beth-Omri . . . wide, the whole of it to the borders
of Assyria I joined.' 2 There can be no doubt that we
have here also a broken account of his invasion of the
north .and east of the kingdom of Israel. The ordinary
name of that kingdom in the Assyrian records of this and
the preceding reigns is Bit-Humri or Beth-Omri, derived
obviously from the name of the famous king Omri, who
had built Samaria and established there a new dynasty.3
Two of the places given may also with confidence be read
Gilead and Abel-beth-maachah, both, according to the
1 Hadrach has been referred to. Zimirra and Arqa are probably the
Zemarite and the Arkite of Gen. x. 17, 18.
2 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 284. In another little fragment we read
the words : ' Samaria alone I left ; Pekah their king. . . . ' — Id. Ass.
Canon, p. 124.
3 1 Kings xvi. 24. Beth-Omri agrees in form with such names as Beth-
Rehob, Beth-Maachah, Beth-Zobah, and in Assyi'ian Beth-Ammon, and
many others ; cf. Rawlinson's Bampton Led., p. 403. In the inscrip
tions of Shalmaneser il., Jehu, king of Samaria, is called the son of Omri,
and the kingdom of Samaria, the land of Omri.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 281
Scripture account, included in the conquests of Tiglath
pileser.1 Further on, the record continues: 'The land
of Beth - Omri . . . the goods of its people and their
furniture to Assyria I sent. Pakaha (or Pekah) their
king . . . and Husih (or Hoshea) to the kingdom
over them I appointed . . . their tribute of them I
received and to Assyria I sent.' 2 Thus, just as in
Scripture, we have here indicated, in connection with
the invasion of the Assyi'ian king, the displacement of
Pekah and the accession of Hoshea, in the charaoter of
subject and tributary;3 while, as the result of this inva
sion, the country in its northern and eastern portions
was depopulated, and the thousands of the inhabitants,
in accordance with the barbarous practice then introduced
into the pohcy of Assyria, were in a wholesale fashion
led away, and widely strewn throughout the East.4
Ahaz was thus relieved of the severe pressure to which
he and his kingdom had been subjected from the side of
Samaria and Damascus. But his cowardice had stirred
up against him other enemies. On the south, he had
1 The letters nili may represent the Beth- Anath of the tribe of Naphtali,
Josh. xix. 38.
2 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 285. According to Schrader (Keilinschriften
u. a. Test., p. 145), the original warrants a fuller translation : 'Pekah
their king they slew, Hosea I appointed to the kingdom over them ; 10
talents of gold, 1000 talents of silver with their ... I received from them
as tribute.'
3 See 2 Kings xv. 30, xvii. 2.
4 Tiglathpileser, it is said, was the first of the Assyrian kings, so far as
the monuments show, to practise this system of tribal and national depor
tation. See Lenormant, Manual of Ane. Hist., i., p. 390. The following
are other examples from his records : . . . ' of one speech I caused them to
be, and with the men of Assyria I placed them ' . . . ' Their people
without number I carried off. ' ' People, the conquest of my hand, in it
I placed.' Smith, Ass. Discoveries, pp. 268, 269, 272. See on these
violent transplantations of people in general, M. v. Niebuhr, Ass. u.
Bab., pp. 22 f.

282 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
been invaded both by the Edomites and the Philistines, the
hereditary foes of Israel, and some of his more important
border towns had been captured. That the Assyrian
monarch did something for his submissive tributary in this
quarter also is indicated in Scripture, though the details
are withheld.1 His own annals, however, furnish a few
of the particulars. Two, at least, of the Philistine lords
were visited with Tiglathpileser's vengeance. Of Gaza
we read that it. was captured, and that its king, Hanun,'
escaped by flight into Egypt. The king of Askelon,
Mitinti, on hearing of the fate of Rezin, was overcome
with fear, and died or was deposed, while his son was set
up in his stead as tributary to Assyria. Certain Arabian
tribes, and probably the Edomites also, whose king appears
in another place among Tiglathpileser's tributaries, were
subdued on the same occasion.
The only other record, which it is of interest here to
mention, is the hst just referred to, of Tiglathpileser's
tributaries,2 drawn up, we are told, in his seventeenth
year, or near the close of his reign, which shows how
completely the spirit of revolt in Syria had been for the
time subdued. In this list, besides the names of the
kings of Gebal, Hamath, Arvad, and a number of others
not found in Scripture, we find also Sanipu of Beth-
Ammon, Salamanu or Solomon of Moab, Mitinti of Askelon,
Qavus-malaka or Chemosh-melek of Edom, Hanun of
Gaza, and Yauhazi of Judah.3 The last, unquestionably,
1 2 Chron. xxviii. 20 : ' And Tilgath-pilneser king of Assyria came
unto him.'
2 Mr. Smith tells us that there is evidence that after the capture of
Damascus, Tiglathpileser ' held a court there, to which all the kings of
Syria were summoned' (Zeitschrift d. cegypt. Sprache, 1868, p. 14) ; and if
so, this gives us the occasion of that visit of Ahaz to Damascus mentioned
2 Kings xvi. 10.
3 Smith, Ass. Discoveries, p. 263.

Invasions of the L and of Israel. 283
represents the Ahaz of our Hebrew Scriptures, and seems
to prove that another and fuller form of his name was Jeho-
ahaz. How it came to be popularly shortened into Ahaz1
we have nothing to show, though we may suppose that
the retrenchment of the sacred name Jehovah from the
ordinary designation of this king stands in connection
with his open and shameless idolatry2
Thus the annals of Tiglathpileser, which, in their
Syrian portion, open with the exhibition of one king
of Judah leading a general and stout resistance to the
advancing might of Assyria, close with the exhibition of
another king of Judah among his tributary and attendant
kings. III. Shalmaneser and Sargon. — These Assyrian
monarchs are both recorded in Scripture as having con
ducted expeditions into the land of Israel, and for reasons
that wiR immediately appear, it is convenient to take
them together. The former name appears in the account
of the capture of Samaria and deportation of its inha
bitants. In 2 Kings xvi. 3-6 we read : ' Against him
(Hoshea) came up Shalmaneser 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. Then the king of Assyria came
up throughout all the land, and went up to Samaria, and
besieged it three years. In the ninth year of Hoshea
the king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel
away into Assyria, and placed them in Halah, and in
1 The name Joahaz in 2 Chron. xxxiv. 8, in some mss. appears as Ahaz.
See Smith's Did. of ihe Bible, s.v. Joahaz.
2 So Talbot, Jour. Asiatic Soc, iii. (new series), p. 60.

284 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the
Medes.' Again, in 2 Kings xviii. 9, 10, it is said: 'And
it came to pass, in the fourth year of king Hezekiah,
which was the seventh year of Hoshea son of Elah king
of Israel, that Shalmaneser king of Assyria came up
against Samaria, and besieged it. And at the end of
three years they took it : even in the sixth year of Heze
kiah, that is the ninth year of Hoshea, king of Israel,
Samaria was taken.' The only place where Sargon is
named in Scripture is in Isa. xx. 1, where we read
that ' Sargon the king of Assyria sent' Tartan against
Ashdod. The latter name, Sargon, has been long familiarly
known to the students of cuneiform literature, while, on
the other hand, that of Shalmaneser had, up to a very-
recent period, eluded research. Now, however, especially
by the discovery of the Eponym Canon, aR occasion for
question as to the existence of Shalmaneser has been
removed, and his proper position in the hne of Assyrian
kings definitely settled. He is the fourth monarch of
the name now recognised in Assyrian history,1 and is
recorded to have come between Tiglathpileser and Sargon,
to have ascended the throne in 727 B.C., and to have
occupied it for five years. It happens, however, that
except one tablet dated in his eponymy, and the notice
in the Canon, no record of this king has yet been dis
covered,2 and though in the latter warlike expeditions are
ascribed to his reign, yet the names of the places to which
these were conducted are obhterated.
1 The Assyrian form of the name is Sahnanu-asir.
2 There are some Assyrian weights in, the British Museum which bear
the name of Shalmaneser, and probably also belong to this king. See
Schrader, Ass.-bab. Keilinschriften, p. 176 ; Rawlinson, Jour. Asiatic
Soc, i. (new series)* p. 244. He is mentioned in an extract from the
Phoenician History of Menander, in Josephus, Ant. Jud., ix., 14, 2.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 285
With the king whom I have conjoiued with Shal
maneser it is altogether different. Of Sargon,1 very
abundant memorials have been recovered. He was the
builder of the ruined palace at Khorsabad, excavated by
Botta and Place, and there as weR as elsewhere great
abundance of materials illustrative of his reign have
been found. He is known from the Canon to have reigned
for seventeen years, from 722 to 705 B.C.
Now in the annals of Sargon occurs the following
statement in regard to Samaria : ' In the commencement
of my reign . . . Samaria . . . with the help ' of the
Sun, who causes me to triumph over my enemies, I
besieged, I captured the city of Samaria, and I reduced
to captivity 27,280 of the inhabitants. I exacted of
them fifty chariots, a portion for my royalty. I led them
into Assyria, and I caused to dwell there in their stead
the men whom my hand had conquered. I have set
over them my generals as their governors, and I have
imposed upon them tribute as on the Assyrians.' 2 We
have here irrefragable testimony to the fact that Samaria
was besieged and taken by Sargon, and that its inhabit
ants, to the large number stated, were carried away into
captivity. The question remains, — Is this the siege and
capture referred to in the passages from 2 Kings above
quoted ? Looking back at the words of the sacred
writer, we find that they contain nothing that forbids us
1 Sargon's name occurs in more than one form in the original, and is
very variously transcribed by Assyriologers — Sargina, Sarrukinu, Saryu-
kin, Sarkayan, etc. It is certain that he was not the direct heir of the
throne, and probably obtained his position by usurpation, though ap
parently belonging to some coUateral branch of the royal line. See Smith,
Zeitschrift d. cegypt. Sprache, 1869, p. 93.
2 Oppert, Les inscriptions de Dour-Sarkayan, p. 30 ; cf. Oppert et
Menant, Les 'Pastes de Sargon, lines 23-25. Mr. Smith, Ass. Canon,
apparently 'by mistake, gives the number of captives as 27,290.

286 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
to entertain this supposition, while more than one cir
cumstance speak in its favour. It is indeed said that
Shalmaneser came against Hoshea and received tribute
from him, which was manifestly an earlier invasion than
that with which the siege and capture of Samaria were
associated. It is also said that ' Shalmaneser came up
against Samaria and besieged it,' but when the capture
of the city is spoken of, the expression is changed ;— ' The
king of Assyria took Samaria,' or, even more significantly,
— ' they took it.' This change of expression is, at least,
not adverse to the thought that another king than he
who commenced the siege had begun to reign when it was
finished. Moreover, Hoshea is said to have been shut
up in prison by the king of Assyria, a fact which stands
in agreement with the circumstance that his name is
not mentioned by Sargon on occasion of the taking of
the city.1 Now, as he is said to have reigned nine years,
and as he was set upon the throne of Samaria by Tig
lathpileser, near the close of that monarch's reign,
probably in the year 732 B.C., his dethronement and
imprisonment took place probably in 723 B.C., which
was Shalmaneser's last regnal year. But the Scripture
narrative implies that it was the same year or the begin
ning of the following that the capture of Samaria took
place, in exact conformity with which Sargon teRs us
that, 'in the commencement of his reign,' he took the
city. Thus the prevalent notion that Shalmaneser was
the captor of Samaria is shown, from this authentic
extraneous source, to be only a hasty and erroneous in-
1 Schrader finds a fragment of the adjective Samarian in the mutilated
commencement of Sargon's account of his capture of the city, and is confi
dent that we have here the remains of a notice of Hoshea the Samarian,
presumably to the effect that he had been deposed and imprisoned by his
predecessor (Keilinschriften u. d. alt. Test., p. 159).

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 287
ference from the words of the sacred writer, and new
light is thrown upon the meaning of Scripture.1
The other data furnished by the inscriptions of Sargon
bearing upon the event before us are similarly confir
matory and iRustrative of the Hebrew narration. Thus,
we are told that it was the proposal on the part of
Hoshea to throw off the Assyrian yoke, and to seek the
alliance and help of So king of Egypt, which led to
this invasion by the Assyrian monarch. We learn from
Sargon's annals 2 that others in the same region besides
Hoshea were joined in this alliance. Apparently the
leader in the combination against Assyria was the king
of Hamath, Ilubihid or Yahubihid, as his name is vari
ously given, of whom we are told that he caused Arpad,
Zimirra, Damascus, and Samaria to revolt against Sargon.
Gaza also, and its ruler Hanun, were implicated, and of
him we read that he, along with Sibakki or Sabii, the
sultan or ruler of the land of Egypt, offered battle to
the Assyrian army at Raphia, a place on the coast of
Philistia towards Egypt. The issue was the defeat of the
allies, the flight and escape of the Egyptian leader, and
the capture of Hanun. The Egyptian prince here named
is doubtless the So, or rather Seve,3 of the Hebrew record,
called Sevechus in Manetho, and here, as in Scripture,
1 In another of Sargon's inscriptions, which gives a summary of
his conquests, occur the words, ' He overthrew the city of Samaria,
and the whole house of Omri.' — Menant, Annates des rois d'Assyrie,
p. 192.
2 See Smith, Ass. Canon, pp. 125 f.
3 The name in the original should probably be printed thus, ^1D.
The Vulgate has Sua, and in the LXX. stands the corrupt form Stiyap.
Cf. Oppert, Rapports de I'Egypte et d'Assyrie, p. 12. The Egyptian king
Shebek, or Shabaka, probably identical with Seve, speaks in an inscription
at Karnak of tributes brought to him from the country of Khal or Syria.
Brugsch, Hist. d'Egypte, i., p. 244.

288 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
he is represented as yielding help to the enemies of Assyria.
Another point of some consequence is that relating to
the pohtical condition of Samaria, subsequent to this over
throw and the deportation of its inhabitants. Sargon
says thati he set his generals, or, according to another
passage, his general, over them to be their governor. In
agreement with this, we have mention made in the annals
of Sennacherib of a Menahem, king of Samaria, and in
those of Esarhaddon of Abibaal, king of Samaria ; from
which notices it appears that though the population of
the northern kingdom had been to a great extent
changed, and though the kingdom, having lost its theo
cratic importance, disappears henceforward from the
pages of Scripture, yet it continued for some time longer
to possess the form of a separate state with its own sove
reign. After Esarhaddon, however, its name occurs but
once, and that on a tablet belonging to the twentieth
year of Assurbanipal the son of Esarhaddon, where an
Assyrian dignitary is called governor of Samaria, proving
that at that time the kingdom was abolished, and Samaria
incorporated in the empire and placed under a military
governor.1 Now these facts yield important illustration to two
somewhat obscure passages in the Old Testament. The
one is Isa. vii. 8, where it is predicted that ' within
threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken that
it be not a people.' Reckoning from the days of Ahaz
when this oracle was given, the period mentioned, sixty-
five years, brings us to about the close of the reign of
Esarhaddon. The other passage is Ezra iv. 10, compared,
with ver. 2, where we read of certain tribes from the East,
' whom the great and noble Asnapper brought over, and
set in the cities of Samaria,' ' in the days of Esarhaddon,
1 See Smith, Ass. Canon, pp. 96, 169.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 289
king of Assur.' This name, Asnapper, is one which does
not elsewhere occur, and nothing is with certainty known
of the person referred to.1 It is highly probable, how
ever, that this colonisation of Samaria which took place
under his leadership was connected in some way which
we have no means of defining, with that abrogation of
the sovereignty in Samaria which seems to have taken
place ' in the days of Esarhaddon.'
Another fact connected with the overthrow of Samaria
by Sargon yet remains to be noticed. In the sequel of
the Scriptural account of the capture it is said:2 'The
king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from
Cuthah, and from Avah, and from Hamath, and from
Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria
instead of the children of Israel.' This statement pre
sents another instance of that system of transplanting
peoples from country to country which, as we have
already seen, became about this time part of the ordi
nary pohcy of the Assyrian kings. The fact of this
transplantation in the case of Samaria is explicitly men
tioned in the extract given above from the annals of the
conqueror. Elsewhere we hear of certain Arabian tribes
as transferred to the land of Israel. ' The Tamudu,
Ibadidi, Marsimani, and Hayapa, remote tribes of
Arabians ... I destroyed them, and the rest of them I
removed, and in the city of Samaria I placed them,' 3 —
a statement with which we may connect the fact that
among the conspicuous opponents of Nehemiah are
1 Some, as Schrader, Keilinschriften u. d. alt. Test., p. 246, believe that
Asnapper was a general of Esarhaddon's ; others, as.M. v. Niebuhr, Ass.
u. Bab., p. 38, and Bosanquet, in Smith's Assurbanipal, p. 363, regard
the name as a corruption or contraction of Assurbanipal.
2 2 Kings xvii. 24.
3 Smith, Ass. Canon, p. 128. T '

290 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
named the Arabians, and especiaRy Geshem the Arabian.1
In another later portion of Sargon's annals, after giving
an account of the rebellion of the king of Ashdod, — a
rebellion in which ' the people of Philistia, Judah,2 Edom,
and Moab ' were aR involved, — and after relating his
expedition against and utter defeat of the insurgents, in
agreement with the allusion in Isa. xx., he proceeds :
' People, the conquests of my hands, from the midst of the
countries of the rising sun, within them I seated; and
with the people of Assyria I placed them, and they per
formed my pleasure,'3 — an express attestation of the
Scripture statement, that from the remote East were
people brought' to occupy the waste cities and deserted
fields of the kingdom of Samaria.
IV. Sennacherib. — This monarch, whose name is so
prominent in connection with Jewish history, is now also
weR known to the student of Assyrian antiquity, both
from the extant records of his reign and from the exca
vations conducted in his palace at Nineveh proper, or
Kouyunjik, by Layard and others, the extent and sculp
tures of which give so perfect an idea of his magnifi
cence. It is ascertained that he was Sargon's son and
successor, and that he ascended the throne in 705 B.C.,
reigning tiR 684 B.C.4 The most interesting portion of
his annals as yet known, indeed the most important
extant record of Assyrian antiquity, is the narrative of
his third expedition (about 702 B.C.). This recounts an
invasion, under his conduct, of Syria and Palestine ; and
1 Neh. ii. 19, iv. 7.
2 In another inscription of Sargon occurs the phrase, ' He has subdued
the distant country of Judah.' — Oppert, Sargonides, p. 34.
3 Smith, Ass. Canon, p. 131.
4 His name, transcribed from the original, is Sin^ahi-irib or Sin-ahi-irba.
Herodotus renders it Sxsxxipifas, the LXX. ?am%tifip, or 2inxXnfiifc,
and Josephus 2sv»«^;i)/j//3ss.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 291
the facts related coincide so closely with the Scriptural
narrative of his invasion of Judah under Hezekiah, that
we cannot doubt that the two accounts relate to the same
series of events.
In order to understand the position of affairs, accord
ing to the Scriptural representation, we must cast our
eye over the opening events of Hezekiah's reign. Ahaz,
as we have seen, was a humble and down-trodden aRy of
the Assyrian king. In his son and successor, however,
we find a man of a different stamp. Immediately on
his accession he set himself to cleanse the land of those
idolatrous abominations which his father had introduced -,1
and as in Israel hatred of idolatry and patriotic spirit
were identical, we are told also that ' he rebelled against
the king of Assyria, and served him not,' 2 — a statement
which confirms the fact of Judah's previous humiliation.
Not merely did he cast off the yoke, — he proceeded to
measures of aggression. ' He smote the Phihstines, even
unto Gaza, and the borders thereof, from the tower of
the watchmen to the fenced city ; ' 3 — words which denote
the openness of his revolt, and the greatness of his suc
cess. Since the conquests of Sargon in this quarter, the
Philistine strongholds had no doubt been held in the
interest of Assyria, and the victories of Hezekiah were a
direct encroachment upon the integrity of the Assyrian
empire. Such, according to the Scripture narrative,
were the circumstances which preceded the formidable
attack upon Judah by Sargon's son in Hezekiah's four-
1 2 Kings xviii. 3-6 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 3-36.
2 2 Kings xviii. 7. Cf. Isa. xiv. 25. From the notice of Judah in
Sargon's inscriptions (see above, p. 290), it appears that Hezekiah had
joined the king of Ashdod and other neighbouring sovereigns in a revolt
against that monarch, but had at that time been compelled to renew his
submission. 3 2 Kings xviii. 8 ; cf. Isa. xiv. 29.

292 Invasions of the L and of Israel.
teenth year, of which I proceed to quote the Assyrian
account as now read from his annals. Before doing so,
however, it is necessary to determine whether the pas
sages in the Bible relating to the assaults of Sennacherib
on Hezekiah are to be understood of one expedition or of
two. These passages are — 2 Kings xviii. 13— xix. 36 ;
Isa. xxxvi. 1-xxxvii. 37 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 1-21. In
these narratives it is certainly not easy to recognise any
clear mark of separation.1 On the face of them, they
appear to relate to one and the same continuous series
of transactions. That this is the right view seems to be
placed beyond aR question by the mention of Lachish at
the commencement, and twice afterwards in the later
portions of the narrative (2 Kings xviii. 14, 17, xix. 8).
It is hard to beheve in the existence of two expeditions
in separate years, in both which this town occupied so
prominent a place.2 I suppose, therefore, that the pas
sages in question relate to one expedition only,3 and shall
consider as they arise the difficulties which this supposi
tion may involve.
I now turn to the Assyrian record, of which I quote
the whole, dividing it into two portions : 4
1 Canon Rawlinson, who supposes two expeditions, breaks off the
account of the first at 2 Kings xviii. 16. See Smith's Did. of Bible, s.v.
Sennacherib. 2 Especially if we suppose, as Canon Rawlinson explicitly does (Herod.,
i., p. 479, n. 1), thatitwas captured and pillaged on the first occasion, and
resisted successfully all the power of Assyria on the second, ' within one
or at most two years ' thereafter.
8 With Ewald, Hist, of Israel, iv., p. 181 (Eng. Tr.), "Vance Smith,
Prophecies, p. 45, Oppert, and the majority against Rawlinson, Herod., i.,
p. 479; Hincks, Museum, July 1861, p. 217; Bunsen, Bibelwerk, i., p.
ccxviii. * This inscription has often been translated and commented on. I
quote the rendering of Smith, in Ass. Canon, pp. 131 f., taking account
also of those by Talbot, Records of the Past, i., p. 335 ; Oppert, Les

Invasions of the L and of Israel. 293
' In my third expedition to the land of the Hatti
(Hittites or Syria) I went. Luli (or Elukeus) king of
Siduni (Zidon), fear of the might of my dominion over
whelmed hhn, and to a distance in the midst of the sea
he fled, and his country I took. Great Zidon, Lesser
Zidon, Bit-zitti, Sarepta, Mahalliba, Usu (Hosah), Akzibi
(Achzib), Akku (Accho), his strong cities, fortresses,
waUed and enclosed, his castles, the might of the soldiers
of Assur my lord overwhelmed them, and they submitted
to iny feet. Tubahal (perhaps Ethbaal) in the throne of
the kingdom over them I seated, and taxes and tribute
to my dominion yearly, unceasing, I fixed upon him.
Of Minhimmu (Menahem), of Ussimiruna (probably
Samaria), Tubahal of Zidon, Abdilihiti of Arvad, Urume-
lek of Gebal, Metinti of Ashdod, Buduil of Beth-Ammon,
Kamusunatbi of Moab, Airammu of Edom, kings of the
Hittites, all of them of the coast, — the whole, their great
presents and furniture to my presence they carried, and
kissed my feet. And Zidqa, (Zadok or Zedekiah), king
of Iskaluna (Askelon), who did not submit to my yoke,
the gods of the house of his father, himself, his wife, his
sons, his daughters, and his brothers, the seed of the
house of his father, I removed, and to Assyria I sent
him. Sarludari, son of Rukibti their former king over
the people of Askelon I appointed, and the gift of taxes
due to my dominion I fixed on him, and he performed
my pleasure. In the course of my expedition, Bit-
dakanna (Beth-dagon), Yappa (Joppa), Banai-barka
(Bene-berak), and Aznr, cities of Zidqa, which to my
feet homage did not render, I besieged, I captured. I
carried off their spoR The priests, princes, and people
Inscriptions des Sargonides, pp. 43 f. ; Menant, Annales des rois
d'Assyrie, pp. 217 f. ; and Schrader, Keilinschriften u. d. alt. Test., pp.
171 f.

2 94 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
of Amgarruna (Migron or Ekron), who Padi,1 their king
faithful and stedfast to Assyria,2 in bonds of iron placed,
and to Hazakiyahu (Hezekiah) king of Yahudu (Judah)
gave him as an enemy ; 3 for the evil they did their
hearts feared. The kings of Musuri (Mizraim or Egypt),
and the archers, chariots, and horses of the king of
Milukhi (Meroe),4 a force without number, gathered and
came to their help. In the vicinity of Altaku (Eltekeh)
before me their hnes were placed, and they urged on their
soldiers. In the service of Assur my lord with them
I fought, and I accomplished their overthrow. The
charioteers and sons of the kings of Egypt, and the
charioteers of the king of Meroe, ahve in the midst of
the battle my hands captured. Eltekeh and Tamna
(Timnah) I besieged, I captured, I carried off their
spoR' Thus far the record is in striking harmony with the
statements of Scripture, and throws no httle fight upon
them. We here learn that not only Judah, but also the
chief cities of Phoenicia and Philistia, had revolted against
the Assyrian power ; and we may reasonably enough pre
sume the existence of a mutual understanding or compact
between these states. Among those who unresistingly
tendered their homage to Sennacherib, besides Ammon
and Edom, it is interesting to find the name of Samaria,
and her king bearing the Biblical name of Menahem.
] Cf. the Biblical name, Pedaiah, 2 Kings xxiii. 36.
2 Menant adds, ' the protege of Adar.'
3 Talbot adds, ' and had acted towards the deity with hostility.'
* This, which is the common way of interpreting the name Milukhi, is
called in question by Lenormant, who says that he has ' found proof in
the cylinder of Asshur-banipal that Milukhi was north of Memphis, and
that it was the name given to the western portion of the Delta (Merekh
on the Hieroglyphic texts), where at this time a small independent kingdom
existed. '—Manual of Ane. Hist., i., p. 394.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 295
This shows, what has been already remarked on, that
after the capture and spoliation of Samaria, a subject
king, apparently of Israehtish descent, had been appointed
by the conquerors, and we have seen that there is proof
of the continuance of this arrangement under Sennacherib's
successor. After subduing the Phoenician revolt, and
receiving the accustomed acknowledgments of subjection
from his vassal states, Sennacherib proceeded to restore
to its aRegiance to Assyria the important city of Askelon.
Here there had been a domestic revolution ; the former
king, the nominee of Assyria, had been deposed, and
another placed upon the throne. The name of the latter,
Zidqa,1 i.e. Zedekiah or Zedek, seems to point him out as
a Jew ; and perhaps he had been appointed by Hezekiah.
That the influence at least occasioning this revolution in
Askelon had come from Jerusalem is sufficiently shown
by the fuller details given in regard to the town called
Amgarrun. The places mentioned as dependent upon
Askelon and faRing along with it are known Bible names
belonging to the country of the Philistines.2 At Am
garrun — probably Ekron rather than Migron3 — had taken
1 A seal, said to have been found in Ireland, exists in the British
Museum, bearing in Phoenician writing the legend, ' Belonging to Ab-
dallah the son of Shebat, the slave of Mitintu, the son of Zadek. ' Sir H.
Rawlinson finds some reason for believing that this is the very Zadok
mentioned by Sennacherib (Jour. Asiatic Soc, i. (new series), p. 237). At
least it is curious that two of the names in the Assyrian record, Mitinti
and Zidqa, are here also found together.
2 Joppa is well known. For Beth-Dagon and Beneberak, see Josh. xv.
41, xix. 45. Azur, doubtless, answers to the Biblical Hazor, a name of
frequent occurrence. In Van de Velde's map of Palestine there is a
Yazur S.E. of Joppa, and two Yazurs N.E. of Askelon.
3 Both identifications have been advocated. The evident importance
belonging to the place speaks strongly in favour of Ekron, of which
the transcription in the LXX., 'Axxipav, comes very near the Assyrian
form.

296 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
place a revolution similar to that at Askelon, and in this
case the influence of Hezekiah is clearly marked. The
governor who ruled in the interest of Assyria, and against
whom all classes of the Ekronites had rebelled, had been
delivered up by them to Hezekiah, and was held a cap
tive in Jerusalem. This is a new and unexpected testi
mony to the power exercised at that period by the Jewish
king against Assyria over the Philistine cities, and is in
remarkable accordance with Scripture statement.1 Ac
cording to Mr. Talbot's rendering, it would further appear
that a religious reformation had accompanied the pohtical
overthrow, and that in Ekron the idolatry of Assyria had
been purged away, and the worship of Jehovah estabhshed
in its room. For this- confirmation is needed; but the
predominant political influence of Hezekiah in regard to
Philistia is abundantly shown. While Ekron was threat
ened by the Assyrian power, the Egyptian army advanced
to its help. The expression, ' the kings of Egypt,' is im
portant and instructive.2 These kings held a place of
subordinate rule in Lower Egypt. The Lord Paramount
of the country at this time, as indicated equaRy in the
inscription and in Scripture,3 was the king of Meroe, or
Ethiopia. The circumstance that Tirhakah, the king re
ferred to, is thus designated in the two documents before
us, is another noticeable proof of the historical exactness of
both. It is well known that this monarch ultimately be
came king of Egypt; but it can now be shown, from Egyptian
records,4 that he had not yet, at the period then in question,
assumed that title. The district of Altaku, in which the

1 See 2 Kings xviii. 7, 8.
2 Probably the passage Isa. xix. 2-4 is here illustrated.
3 2 Kings xix. 9 ; Isa. xxxvii. 9.
4 See Hincks, Jour. Sac. Lit., Oct. 1858, p. 130 ; Oppert, Rapports de
I'Egypte et de VAssyrie, p. 29.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 297
battle took place, both from probable situation and from
the form of the word, seems plainly identifiable with the
Biblical Eltekeh in Dan.1 The encounter which here
occurred between the Assyrians and the Egyptians, and
which issued in the defeat of the latter, is certainly not
to be confounded2 with the later conflict represented as
impending in 2 Kings xix. 9, when the king of Ethiopia
himself advanced with a fresh army to repel the enemy,
and is no doubt that which gave point to the words of
Rabshakeh before Jerusalem : ' Now, behold, thou trustest
upon the staff of this bruised reed, even upon Egypt, on
which if a man lean, it wiR go into his hand, and pierce
it : so is Pharaoh king of Egypt unto aR that trust on
him.' 3 This victory of Sennacherib over the Egyptians
was immediately followed by the conquest of the towns
Eltekeh and Tinman.4
I now quote the remaining portion of the Assyrian
record : — ' To Ekron I approached ; the priests and
princes who the rebellion had made with the sword I
slew, and in heaps over the whole of the city I threw
down their bodies.5 The sons of the city committing sin

1 Josh. xix. 44.
2 As is done by Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 143 a.
3 2 Kings xviii. 21. Cf. Hincks, Museum, No. 1, p. 89, n. Jour. Sac.
Lit., Oct. 1858, p. 138. At the same time, this seems to have been a
standing reproach against Egypt in the mouths of the Assyrians. Thus
Sargon, in one of his inscriptions, speaking of the revolt which led him to
attack Ashdod (Isa. xx.), says : 'The people of Philistia, Judah, Edom,
and Moab . . . were speaking treason. The people and their evil chiefs
to fight against me unto Pharaoh king of Egypt, a monarch who could not
save them, their presents carried, and besought his alliance.' — Smith, Ass.
Canon, p. 130.
4 Cf. Josh. xix. 43, 44, where Thimnathah and Eltekeh are likewise
mentioned together.
5 'On stakes all round the city I hung their bodies.' — Talbot. So
Oppert, Menant, and Schrader.

298 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
and the revilers into slavery I gave ; the rest of them
not making rebelhon and defiance who of their section
were not,1 their innocence I proclaimed. Padi their king
from the midst of Jerusalem I brought out, and on the
throne of dominion over them I seated, and tribute to my
dominion I fixed upon him. And Hezekiah of Judah who
did not submit to my yoke, forty-six2 of his strong cities,
fortresses, and smaR cities which were round them, which
were without number, with the marching of a host, and
surrounding of a multitude, attack of ranks, force of
battering-rams, mining and missiles, I besieged, I cap
tured ; 200,150 people, small and great, male and female,
horses, mules, asses, camels, oxen, and sheep, which were
without number, from the midst of them I brought out,
and as spoil I counted. Him like a caged bird within
Jerusalem his royal city I had made, towers round him I
raised, and the exit of the great gate of his city I shut,
and he was conquered.3 His cities, which I spoiled, from
the midst of his country I detached, to Metinti king of
Ashdod, Padi king of Ekron, and ZiRibel king of Gaza,
I gave, and I reduced his country. Beside their former
taxes, their annual gift, the tribute due to my dominion, I
added and fixed upon them. He, Hezekiah, fear of the
might of my dominion overwhelmed him, and the Urbi
and his good soldiers, whom to be preserved within
Jerusalem he had caused to enter, and they inclined to
submission,4 with 30 talents of gold, 800 talents of silver,
1 ' The rest of them who had not been guilty of faults and crimes, and
who sinful things against the deity had not done.' — Talbot.
2 Oppert reads forty-four.
3 ' The exit of the great gate of his city to divide it he had given com
mand.' Talbot, who notes, — ' It means, I think, that Hezekiah had
commanded the drawbridge to be raised.' Menant renders, — 'J'aiarrete
tous ceux qui voulaient franchir la Grande-Porte de l'enceinte. ' — So Oppert.
4 'The workmen, soldiers, and builders, whom for the fortification of

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 299
precious carbuncles . . . stones, couches of ivory, elevated
¦thrones of ivory, skins of buffaloes, horns of buffaloes . . .
weapons, everything, a great treasure, and his daughters,
the eunuchs of his palace, male musicians, and female
musicians, to the midst of Nineveh the city of my
dominion after me he sent, and to give tribute and make
submission he sent his messenger.'1
Such is the narrative almost completely recovered and
interpreted of Sennacherib's famous invasion of Judah,
drawn up under the eye of the Assyrian king himself.
It is at once apparent that it bears upon its face certain
remarkable coincidences with the Scriptural account.
According to both, the fortified cities of Judah were
taken, the whole country outside the capital was ravaged
and to a great extent depopulated, treasure to a large
amount, stated almost ahke in the two narratives, was
carried away, while Jerusalem, though invested, was not
captured, and Hezekiah, though greatly alarmed, and though
tendering a certain degree of submission and suffering
great losses, yet ultimately escaped with his life and his
throne. Even if we were unable fully to reconcile the
differences of statement which, in accounts so entirely in
dependent of each other, and written from points of view
so opposite, could furnish no occasion for surprise, such
agreements as these would remain as a striking testimony
to the truth of Scripture. In attempting to bring the
Jerusalem, bis royal city, he had collected within it now carried tribute.'
— Talbot. 'Les hommes du guet et les troupes gardiennes qu'il avait
assemblees pour la defense de Jerusalem, la ville de sa puissance, il leur
donne' conge. II les envoya vers moi a Ninive. ' — Oppert.
1 In two other inscriptions, in which Sennacherib gives condensed state
ments of his conquests, these notices occur : — ' I subdued the extent of
the kingdom of Judah, powerful and rugged. Hezekiah its king, I sub
jected" to -my yoke.' 'I subdued the extent of the district of Judah.
Hezekiah its king set up my pleasure.' — Smith, Ass. Canon, p. 136.

\-

300 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
Assyrian narrative into harmony with the Jewish, the
chief difficulty we have to contend with is that arising
from the desire of the king to conceal his failures, and to
exaggerate his successes. I do not find it necessary to
suppose that he has misstated facts, or even seriously de
ranged the order of events. We ought to bear in mind that
from the Assyrian point of view the expedition was upon
the whole a successful one, or at least capable of being
plausibly represented as successful.1 Up to a certain point,
it is plain the course of conquest was uninterrupted. It
was necessary to do httle more than break off the narrative
at the fitting place, and leave unrecorded all that followed,
in order to produce the desired impression. That the
success was imperfect, indeed, is sufficiently indicated by
the silence preserved in regard to certain of the more im
portant objects aimed at, as the capture of Jerusalem and
of its king, and by the anxiety shown to magnify certain
inferior gains, as the conquest of the provincial towns, and
the receiving of homage and of tribute from Hezekiah.
To those who knew Sennacherib's real designs, as set forth
by Rabshakeh,2 the shortcomings of his enterprise, even
in his own account of it, must have been obvious.
The second portion of the Assyrian record just quoted
begins with the subjection of Ekron, which followed the
overthrow of the Egyptian army, and the punishment of
those of the inhabitants who had been involved in the
revolt against the Assyrian cause. From this point the
1 Canon Rawlinson (Herod., i., p. 479) objects to the supposition that
we have in these narratives only one invasion of Syria recorded, ' the im
probability of national vanity going to the length of seeking to conceal an
enormous disaster under cover of the proudest boasts.' But the boasts of
Sennacherib are based on the facts which actually took place. We have
only to understand, as Oppert expresses it, ' des reticences calculees dans
le recit Assyrien. '
2 2 Kings xviii. 31, 32.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 301
events of the campaign may be conveniently distributed
into three acts. — The first act contains the invasion of
Judah by Sennacherib, and the capture of the most of the
fenced cities, till he sits down before Lachish. Somewhat
before its commencement should be placed those prepara
tions for the defence of his capital by Hezekiah, narrated
in 2 Chron. xxxii. 2-8.1 There is in the Assyrian account
(at least if Talbot is right) an aRusion to these prepara
tions ;2 and Sennacherib expressly states, before recounting
his capture of the provincial towns, that Hezekiah king
of Judah had not submitted to his yoke. The invading
host seems to have swarmed up from the Phihstine plain
by the passes on the west and north-west of Jerusalem,
and apparently it is this approach to the capital which
is described propheticaUy by Isaiah, chap. x. 28-32.3
It is evident from the prophet's language, ver. 32, — 'He
shall shake his hand against the mount of the daughter
of Zion, the hiR of Jerusalem,' — that Jerusalem was not,
in the meanwhile, subjected to siege ; and the words of
the inscription which describe the confinement of Heze
kiah and his army within the city, and the construction
of towers with garrisons of observation, convey additional,
not discordant, information.4 Reserving the siege of the
1 Cf. Ecclesiasticus xlviii. 17.
2 An interesting parallel is found in Sargon's account of his expedition
against Ashdod, in reference to the measures of defence taken by the
Ashdodites : ' Round it a ditch they excavated, twenty cubits in its depth
they made it, and they brought the waters of the springs in front of the
city.' — Smith, Ass. Canon, p. 130.
3 It is possible that only a portion of the Assyrian force had been em
ployed in the operations against the Philistine cities, and that the main
body had been till now encamped at the headquarters. Thus the passage
referred to in Isaiah will describe the general movement of the army south
ward. Cf. the parallel passage, Micah i. 9-16.
4 There is nothing in these words that contradicts, as Canon Rawlinson
seems to suppose (Bampton Led., p. 413), the promise of the prophet

302 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
capital to the last, Sennacherib proceeded southwards to
the conquest of the rest of the country. In this part of
the undertaking he was completely successful. Forty-six
fortified places were taken, with many other less important
towns 'of which they took no account,' 200,150 captives
and an immense booty were secured, the whole country
was ravaged, and by flight, slaughter, or captivity, almost
emptied of inhabitants. We have in the Bible several
statements relating to this fearful invasion, and conveying
a similarly strong impression of the amount of destruction
and misery which it inflicted.1 The conquering army
pursued its ravages, spreading over the country doubtless
in different divisions, and graduaRy advancing towards
the south of Judah, tiR siege was laid to Lachish, one of
the strongest of the Jewish cities, distinguished for its
idolatry, where for a time its progress was arrested.2
Meanwhile the conquests already made in Judah were dis
tributed by Sennacherib among the Philistine kings who
had been most faithful to his cause. — The second act of
this contest includes the submission of Hezekiah to his
adversary, and the humiliations to which it led. Of this
in 2 Kings xix. 32 : 'He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow
there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it.' It is
plain that Sennacherib left Jerusalem unassailed, taking only such measures
as were necessary to watch and curb the movements of Hezekiah. With
the surrounding country at the mercy of the Assyrians, Hezekiah was
'like a caged bird.' Talbot remarks: 'I think it may be concluded
that the siege of Jerusalem was not attempted by Sennacherib. ' — Jour.
As. Soc, xix., p. 148.
1 The extent of the depopulation is clearly indicated in 2 Kings xix.
29-31 ; Isa. xxxvii. 30-32. Cf. the predictions, Isa. vii. 20-25, x. 21-23,
xxxiii. 7-9 ; Micah i. 16. It is worthy to be noted that the Jewish
writer Demetrius made Sennacherib the author of one of the great cap
tivities. Clem. Alex., Miscellanies, vol. i., p. 442 (Eng. Tr.).
2 Cf. 2 Kings xiv. 19 ; 2 Chron. xi. 9 ; Jer. xxxiv. 7 ; Micah i. 13. This
invasion of Sennacherib's, with the conquest of the strong places through
out Judah, is strikingly parallel to that of Shishak.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 303
submission we find explicit and agreeing testimony in
both records. The motive assigned for it by Sennacherib,
' fear of the might of my dominion,' sufficiently accounts
for it, and, in the circumstances, with the whole country
down-trodden by the Assyrian host, the capital almost
alone remaining unconquered, and 'it too awaiting a
determined assault, and moreover with a large party in
Jerusalem of merely worldly men and unbeheving poli
ticians ready to influence the king towards faithless
projects, such a feeling is perfectly inteRigible. Hezekiah
doubtless expected, displaying in this not only a want of
faith in his God but a misappreciatibn of Assyrian policy,
that by his voluntary proffer of subjection he would save
his capital and his hfe, and secure the position of a
subject-ally. The advantage which the fear of Hezekiah
thus gave to Sennacherib is naturally made the most of
in the account of the latter ; and the two narratives
combined enable us to form a very complete conception
of the relative transactions. In the first place, Hezekiah
sends to Lachish, professing regret for his rebelhon against
Assyria, and offering, on condition of being left in peace,
to become the tributary of Sennacherib.1 In the second
place, there are imposed on him as terms of peace the
payment of. thirty talents of gold and three hundred'
talents of silver, the release of Padi the captive king of
Ekron,2 and the giving of hostages for his continued sub
jection. In the third place, Hezekiah sends an accredited
representative to tender formal obeisance, and to introduce
the tribute-bearers to Sennacherib, and along with him
some of his leading officers and warriors, and his daughters
1 Cf. Isa. xxxiii. 7.
8 On this point Oppert (Rapports de I'Egypte et d'Assyrie, p. 30) says :
' Sennacherib . . . fait sortir de Jerusalem, par ses menaces, le roi Padi, '
-which I do not find it easy to understand.

304 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
and women of his palace as hostages, the former bearing
as presents to the king an additional amount of five
hundred talents of silver, and other valuable articles.
Thus may the two documents before us be combined so
as to give and receive mutual illustration. The restoration
of the captive Ekronite, though mentioned in an earher
part of the inscription in connection with the affairs of
his city, can only be assigned to the time of Hezekiah's
submission. The agreement in regard to the amount of
money rendered to Sennacherib has been pronounced1
' perhaps one of the most remarkable coincidences of
historic testimony on record,' while the additional five
hundred talents of silver mentioned in the inscription,
may not only be easily understood to have been given
among the presents, but seem indeed to be expressly
referred to in the Scripture narrative.2 — The third act
is marked by the revival of the faith and courage of
Hezekiah, and by the final triumphant escape, through
divine interposition, of himself and his capital from the
power of Sennacherib. With this the remainder of the
sacred narrative is occupied. Though the occasion of the
revival of confidence on the part of the Jewish king is
not expressly stated, yet a careful consideration of the
.narrative makes it sufficiently intelligible.3 The submis
sion and tribute rendered by Hezekiah to Sennacherib

1 Layard, Nineveh and Babylon, p. 144.
2 See 2 Kings xviii. 15, 16. The mention of gold in ver. 16, in the
Authorised Version, is without warrant in the original. These verses,
coming in after the appointment of the tribute has been noticed, seem
naturally to refer to what was given additional. Cf. Layard, Nineveh and
Babylon, p. 145 ; Rawlinson, Bampton Led., p. 142.
3 Bunsen (Bibelwerk, i., p. ccxviii), advocating the separation into two of
the Biblical narrative, says of vers. 17-21 (2 Kings xviii.), 'We are here
in quite new relations. ' This is strange, when it is expressly said (ver.
14) that Hezekiah sent his submission to Sennacherib to Lachis/i, and

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 305
had been rendered in the expectation of being delivered
from further attack, — ' return from me.' 1 Hitherto
Jerusalem had been left inviolate. It was, however, not
in harmony with the policy of the Assyrian monarch to
leave this strong city, with its obstinate king and people,
in a condition to head another revolt on some convenient
opportunity among his subject states, and to play into
the hands of his Egyptian adversary. From the speech
of his officer, Rabshakeh, before the walls of Jerusalem, it
is plain that his design did not stop 'short of the destruc
tion of Hezekiah, the deportation of the people, and the
utter abohtion of the independent Jewish State.2 I con
ceive that the mission of his general, Tartan, and the
officers, Rabsaris and Rabshakeh, from Lachish to Jeru
salem, with ' a great army,' as narrated 2 Kings xviii. 1 7,3
was with the view of carrying out this design. The main
portion of the army, with the siege apparatus, was still de
tained in the south ; and Sennacherib evidently expected,
now that he had received Hezekiah's submission, that
his purpose was gained, and that he would without diffi-
then (ver. 17) that Sennacherib sent his officers with an army from Lachish.
The only new element is the change in Hezekiah from despondency and
mistrust to confidence and determination to resist.
1 Cf. Josephus, Ant. Jud., x., 1, 1.
2 See 2 Kings xviii. 31-35 ; cf. xix. 10-13.
3 Cf. Isa. xxxvi. 2 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 9. The latter passage shows that
the main army was stiU left at Lachish. Probably we have a tradi
tionary testimony to the encampment of this host before Jerusalem in the
name, the ' Assyrian camp,' applied in later times to a place on the north
ofthecity. See Josephus, Bell. Jud., v., 7, 3 ; 12, 2. Rawlinson (Herod.,
i., p. 479, n. 1) sees an improbability in such a hostile attack on Jerusalem
immediately after the payment of a large tribute. The improbability in
the circumstances seems very small. It is not to be supposed that a king
so great in his own eyes as Sennacherib would observe any strict measures
with one so insignificant as Hezekiah. Josephus (Ant. Jud., x., 1, 1) says
that Sennacherib made a stipulation on oath to depart without further
hostilities. It is quite likely that there was such a formal engagement, — cf.
U

o

06 Invasions of the Land of Israel.

culty secure an entrance into Jerusalem. But this
despatch of an army to the capital, with the demand for
complete and unconditional surrender, was the violation
of his agreement and the revelation of his ulterior
designs. Hezekiah now understood that he had been
deceived, that he and his country were not to be left
in peace, and that the fate of Samaria and its in
habitants was impending over him and his people.
Indignation and alarm, a feeling as of betrayed con
fidence and of self'- reproach for voluntarily incurring
bootless humiliation and loss, with resolute determina
tion to resist to the utmost, now took possession of
their hearts ; and though famine was pressing hard upon
the overcrowded city,1 the pohcy of the king was at once
changed, and the gate was closed against the Assyrian
officers. 2

Isa. xxxiii. 8 ; but even the violation of such an engagement need not surprise
us. Doubtless the understanding on the Jewish side was that the Assyrian
king had undertaken to leave the country, as is evident from the passage
in Isaiah just referred to. In regard to the names Tartan, Rabsaris, and
Rabshakeh, it is now fully ascertained that they are official titles, not
personal names, — a fact indicated indeed by the LXX., in whose version
the article is prefixed to them. Tartan and Rabshakeh are of frequent
occurrence in the inscriptions under the forms tartannu and rabsak as
high military officers. The other, so far as I know, has not yet been
found ; rab lub, or chief of the harem, which is often met with, is perhaps
its equivalent.
1 See 2 Kings xviii. 27, 31 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 11 ; cf. Isa. xxxiii. 16.
2 It is instructive to compare the emotion occasioned, at an earlier
period, in Jerusalem, by the much less sweeping proposals of Rezin and
Pekah ; Isa. vii. 6, ' Let us go up against Judah, and vex it, and let
us make a breach therein for us, and set a king in the midst of it, even
the son of Tabeal.' Ver. 2, ' His heart was moved, and the heart of his
people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind.' In the
language of Rabshakeh, we may, I think, clearly enough perceive the dis
appointment and surprise, mingled with suspicion of underhand dealings
with Egypt, which Hezekiah's new attitude had excited in the mind of the
Assyrians.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 307
While Rabshakeh was vainly endeavouring to over
come the spirit of resistance now predominant in Jeru
salem and to gain possession of the city, Lachish fell after
having sustained a lengthened siege ; and of its fall we have
an interesting memorial on the slabs found in the ruins of
Sennacherib's palace at Kouyunjik.1 The sculptures on
these slabs bear ample testimony both to the obstinacy
of the defence and the terrible vengeance taken by the
conqueror, and impressively show forth the unsparing
ruin with which Jerusalem, 'the virgin, the daughter of
Zion,' was at this time threatened. That it is the Jewish
city in question which is here represented is certified
by the inscription over the head of the Assyrian king,
which, as translated by Schrader, runs thus : ' Sennache-
1 2 Kings xix. 8 ; Isa. xxxvii. 8. Canon Rawlinson (Herod., i., p. 480,
n. 6) thinks that the language, ' he had heard that he was departed from
Lachish, ' implies that on this occasion the siege was unsuccessful. Surely
this is an unnatural straining of the words. It is not said, indeed, whether
he was successful or not, but the whole circumstances as detailed, and
specially, as Drechsler remarks (Der Prophet lesaias, ii., 168), the language
in Isa. xxxvi. 1, lead us to infer that he was. For the Kouyunjik bas-reliefs,
depicting the siege and capture of Lachish, see Layard's Ruins of Nineveh, ii. ,
plates 20-24. Cf. his Nineveh and Babylon, pp. 149 f. : ' These bas-reliefs, '
says their discoverer, ' represented the siege and capture by the Assyrians of
a city evidently of great extent and importance. It appears to have been
defended by double walls, with battlements and towers, and by fortified
outworks. The country around it was hilly and wooded, producing the
fig [or perhaps the olive] and the vine. The whole power of the great
king seems to have been called forth to take this stronghold. In no other
sculptures were so many armed warriors seen drawn up in array before a
besieged city. . . . Against the fortifications had been thrown up as many
as ten banks or mounts, compactly built of stones, bricks, earth, and
branches of trees, and seven battering-rams had already been rolled up to
the walls. The besieged defended themselves with great determination,
Spearmen, archers, and slingers thronged the battlements and towers,
showering arrows, javelins, stones, and blazing torches upon the assailants.
On the battering-rams were bowmen discharging their arrows, and men
with large ladles pouring water upon the flaming brands, which, hurled
from above, threatened to destroy the engines. Ladders, probably used

308 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
rib, the king of nations, king of the country of Assyria,
sits upon a lofty throne and receives spoil over against
the city of Lachish.' The countenances of the inhabit
ants certainly bear in a striking degree the Jewish cast,
and the hills around the city are marked by the charac
teristic trees of Judah. Such representations exhibited
to our eyes in almost all their original freshness, as they
left the hand of the Assyrian artist, annihilate time, and
bring out into vivid and thriUing clearness the briefly-
told facts of the sacred volume. Lachish having faRen,
Libnah was next attacked, and thither Rabshakeh re
paired to report to his master his ill success at Jerusalem.1
It is evidently implied that the general or Tartan con
fer escalade, were faUing from the walls upon the soldiers, who mounted
the inclosed ways to the assault. Part of the city had, however, been
taken. Beneath its walls were seen Assyrian warriors impaling their
prisoners, and from the gateway of an advanced tower, or fort, issued a
procession of captives, reaching to the presence of the king, who, gor
geously arrayed, received them seated on his throne. Amongst the spoil
were furniture, arms, shields, chariots, vases of metal of various forms,
camels, carts drawn by oxen and laden with women and children, and
many objects the nature of which cannot be determined. The vanquished
people were distinguished from the conquerors by their dress ; those who
defended the battlements wore a pointed helmet, differing from that of
the Assyrian warriors in having a fringed lappet falling over the ears.
Some of the captives had ,a kind of turban with one end hanging down to
the shoulder, not unlike that worn by the modern Arabs of the Hedjaz.
Others had no head-dress, and short hair and beards. Their garments
consisted either of a robe reaching to the ancles, or of a tunic scarcely fall
ing lower than the thigh, and confined at the waist by a girdle. The
latf;er appeared to be the dress of the fighting men. The women wore long
skirts, with an outer cloak thrown, like the veil of modern Eastern ladies,
over the back of the head and falling to the feet. Several prisoners were
already in the hands of the torturers. Two were stretched naked on the
ground to be flayed alive, others were being slain with the sword before
the throne of the king. The haughty monarch was receiving the chiefs of
the conquered nation, who crouched and knelt humbly before him.' Cf.
Oppert, Exped., i., p. 296.
1 2 Kings xix. 8.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 309
tinued to invest the capital with the army under his
command. The prospect of having soon to encounter a
fresh and more powerful force from Egypt, with the con
queror Tirhakah at its head, rendered Sennacherib more
than ever desirous to effect the capture of the capital,
and he wrote a letter of expostulation and warning to
Hezekiah, in regard to which we have recorded the prayer
of Hezekiah and the memorable answer conveyed by
Isaiah.1 ' And,' we read, ' it came to pass that night, that
the angel of the Lord went out, and smote in the camp of
the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand :
and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they
were all dead corpses.' 2 To me it is evident that this
refers exclusively to the army investing Jerusalem. This
is implied in the terms of the narrative, and especially in
the expression 'that night.'3 It was, moreover, at Jeru
salem that the contest in its highest aspect — the contest
between the God of Israel and the might of Asshur — was
being carried on, and it was manifestly appropriate that
it should be there decided.4 Jerusalem was the place in
defence of which Jehovah fought. The tidings of the
sudden destruction of this army at the metropolis, in-
1 2 Kings xix. 9-34. 2 2 Kings xix. 35.
3 These words occur only in that version of the narrative given in
2 Kings ; and Mr. Vance Smith is disposed to think that they have been
'wrongly retained' there, — a supposition utterly groundless. See his
Prophecies, p. 213. Canon Rawlinson, with many others, believes that
the sudden destruction took place in the army opposed to the Egyptians,
founding chiefly on Herodotus, ii., 141. See his H erod., i., p. 480. This
is very insecure ground. The tradition which Herodotus relates seems to
me rather to favour the belief that that army was not destroyed, but
simply fled away in a manner which to their opponents seemed utterly
unaccountable. 4 That the overthrow took place at Jerusalem is the representation of
Josephus (Ant. Jud., x., 1, 5 ; Bell. Jud., v., 9, 4). So also M. v. Niebuhr,
Assur, p. 174. Cf. Isa. xiv. 25, xxxi. 8, 9, xxxiii. 3, 4.

3 1 o Invasions of the Land of Israel.
flicted by a resistless, invisible hand, determined the
immediate withdrawal of Sennacherib and his entire force
from the country.1 The Egyptian tradition preserved in
Herodotus2 seems to intimate that this took place as he
lay in presence of the Egyptian army which had come to
oppose his progress. There is no reason to conceive of
this withdrawal as a rout ; and hence we are not surprised
to find him asserting in his inscription that his captives
and hostages, and the immense treasure he had secured,
were brought after him to Nineveh.3
I have thus endeavoured to present a combined view
of the two narratives before us, and the admirable har
mony subsisting between them has been sufficiently
evinced. The very omissions of the Assyrian record are
confirmations of that of Scripture. The fact, acknow
ledged but unaccounted for in the one, is accounted for
in the other, that the capital of Judah, with its king, was
1 To the rumour of the terrible calamity which had overtaken one of his
armies, I refer the words (2 Kings xviii. 7), ' Behold, I will send a. blast
upon him, and he shall hear a rumour, and shall return to his own land.'
To suppose that it was the report of Tirhakah's approach (ver. 9) that
frightened him out of the country is manifest injustice to Sennacherib,
and is inconsistent with the fact that he did not then at once withdraw.
2 Herod., ii., 141.
3 Rawlinson speaks of ' the impossibility of a triumphant return with
200,000 captives to Nineveh after the loss sustained and the hasty flight
which followed.' Herod., i., p. 479, n. 1. In the mode in which the facts
have been dealt with above, 1 conceive that no such impossibility appears.
One large portion, probably the larger portion, of his entire force remained
to him. The expression, ' a hasty flight, ' seems to me quite unsuitable.
There was a sudden arrestment of his military operations and an immediate
return to Assyria, conducted, so far as appears, with perfect deliberation ;
and he would be the more careful to secure his captives and other trophies
in order to give the requisite colour of triumph to the expedition. The
expression in the inscription, ' he (Hezekiah) sent after me to Nineveh ' his
offerings and hostages, appears to me simply a natural exaggeration on the
part of the Assyrian king. Doubtless these trophies were exhibited at
Nineveh as proofs of triumph over Judah and its king.

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 3 1 1
able to defy aR the might of Assyria, and to escape that
unsparing pillage and depopulation which, it is obvious
from both sources, Sennacherib proposed to inflict ; and
this, too, notwithstanding Hezekiah's declared submission,
and the recovery from his hands of the king of Ekron
and of large presents. We may be satisfied that Jeru
salem would have occupied the place of Lachish on the
slabs of Nineveh had the enterprise of Sennacherib fully
succeeded, and that it did not issue in this wished-for
consummation cannot easily be explained by any ordinary
law of human affairs.
We may remark, in conclusion, how the length of time
occupied by the Assyrian invasion, as indicated in Scrip
ture, adapts itself to the probabilities of the case. The
Assyrian armies set out on their warlike expeditions in
early spring. In the instance before us, we cannot
suppose that the territory of Judah was entered till after
midsummer; and it is evident that the capture of the
fenced cities, the siege of Lachish, and other operations,
must have protracted the stay of the Assyrians in the
country tiR somewhat late in the year. Turning to the
Scripture, we find one indication of time in the narrative
of the measures adopted for the defence of the city in
2 Chron. xxxii. 2-4. Only in the dry season, from May
to October, would an army besieging Jerusalem have
difficulty in finding sufficiency of water. To intercept
and confine within the walls the water of the fountains
in and near the city, during the heat of summer, was an
eminently prudential course. Another and clearer indi
cation is given in the prophet's words, 2 Kings xix. 29,
or Isa. xxxvii. 30 : 'This shaR be a sign unto thee, Ye
shaR eat this year such as groweth of itseR; and the
second year that which springeth of the same ; and in the
third year sow ye, and reap, and plant vineyards, and eat

3 1 2 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
the fruit thereof.'1 The harvest of the year of the inva
sion being appropriated or trodden down by the Assyrian
hosts, only the spontaneous production of the wasted fields
was available for the inhabitants of the country. No
better was their dependence for the year ensuing. The
seed-time of that year, falling at the close of the year of
the invasion, from October to December, passed by while
the fields remained uncultivated, it may be in conse
quence of the continuance of the enemy in the land, or it
may be more probably in consequence of the general
disorder that prevailed and the great depopulation pro
duced by the slaughter, flight, and captivity of the people.
Only in the following year did labour begin to return to
its wonted channels, and thus prepare subsistence for the
remnant left in the land.
We hear no more of Sennacherib's advancing into
Palestine,2 — a circumstance which, when we remember
that one leading object of Assyrian policy at this time
was to gain possession of Egypt, is sufficiently remark
able, and may be reasonably understood as indicating the
greatness of the check he had sustained, and perhaps the
superstitious dread henceforth entertained by him in
reference to the God of the Jews.3
1 Mr. Bosanquet, with others, supposes that the words imply the con->
currence of a Sabbatic and jubilee year on successive years. See his Sacred
and Profane Chronology, p. 87. This is to destroy the significance of the
passage. See Keil, Biicher d. Konige, and Drechsler, Der Proph. Jes. , ad
loc. ; M. v. Niebuhr, Assur, p. 100, 4 ; Tyrwhitt, Jour. Asiatic Soc, xviii.
113. We may compare the parallel case of privation resulting in the
experience of the Athenians from the Persian invasions ; Herodotus, viii.
142. Cf. Grote, Hist, of Greece, v., p. 202.
2 This, as M. v. Niebuhr (Assur, p. 174, 3) remarks, is probably the
force of the expression in 2 Kings xix. 36, ' He dwelt at Nineveh,' which,
moreover, implies what the inscriptions and other sources confirm, that he
reigned for a considerable period after his expedition against Judah.
3 Sir. H. Rawlinson (Outlines, p. xxxvii) thinks that the record of his

Invasions of the Land of Israel. 3 r 3
One reflection springs up in the mind on this survey
of what the inscriptions record of the expeditions of these
Assyrian kings into the land of Israel. If, within a
period of time so short as to be measured by the age of
men yet alive and vigorous, some one had hazarded the
prediction that ere the generation had passed away, the
native official records of the expeditions which the Bible
reports, conducted by Tiglathpileser, by Sargon, and by
Sennacherib against the kingdoms of Israel, would be
discovered, deciphered, and currently read in Christian
countries, it would have been regarded as merely idle
talk. Yet the thing incredible and unconceived thirty
years ago is to-day a reality. We handle the cylinders
and slabs on which these old kings recorded their con
quests ; we look upon their pictured forms and the
representations of their cruel triumphs ; we read in their
own language the accounts which they caused to be
drawn up of their proceedings in relation to Samaria and
Jerusalem. These witnesses from the Assyrian mounds
must dispel whatever of the hazy, the uncertain, or the
mythical may still to some minds appear to hnger round
the corresponding accounts in the Jewish Scriptures.
Here, at least, is so much solid ground ' won from the
void and formless' chaos, as it is deemed, of Jewish
tradition. Samaria was depopulated, Jerusalem invested,
Lachish stormed and pillaged. These things, as reported
in the book, aR really happened ' under the sun.' So
much, at least, of the strictly historical in the Old Testa
ment is now secure as the rock upon the sea-shore against
fourth year, by its meagreness, implies that he had suffered a severe check
in the previous campaign. And Oppert (Rapport, p. 170) finds a similar
indication in the opening words of that record : ' In my fourth year I
commended myself to the grace of Asshur, my lord ;' or, as Talbot
renders : ' Asshur, my lord, giving me confidence. ' — Jour. Asiatic Soc. ,
xix. p. 149. Cf. Strauss, Nineveh u. das Wort Gottes, p. 33.

314 Invasions of the Land of Israel.
the surgings of unbelief. And of course this is not all ;
there are many others of the facts and narratives of Scrip
ture similarly corroborated. Much, it is true, of the
historical in this book remains yet unsubstantiated by
such independent and authoritative testimony. But who
can tell how much more, ere another generation shah
have passed away, shall have emerged to light ? Who
knows what testimonies of a like kind are yet hidden in
those mysterious mounds, — kept in reserve against the
fit time for their production, when the spiritual conflict
between faith and infidelity shall have waxed yet more
fierce ? After the experience of the past, no one now will
be so daring as to set a limit to the disclosures that are
possible. The unexpected once, now that it has hap
pened, has become the expected. Again and yet again, we
may be confident, ' the stone shaR cry out of the waR
and the beam out of the timber shaR answer it,' pro
claiming in the ears of aR, and with a voice so clear as to
compel the attention even of those who refuse the divine
authority and are dead to the spiritual excellency of the
Bible, — this book may, or may not, be a book inspired
by the Spirit of God and given to be the light of the
world, but whatever else it is or is not, it is at least
historically veracious.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 3 1 5

VIII.
THE DEATH OF JUDAS ISCARIOT.
Of the circumstances connected with the death of the
betrayer of our Lord we have two accounts, — the one in
Matthew, chap, xxvii. 3—10, the other in Acts, chap. i.
18-20. These accounts, on the face of them, are dis
crepant, and the difficulty of harmonising them is so
serious that some expositors have roundly declared them
irreconcilable, while others have pronounced it impossible
for us, in the absence of fuller details, to perceive their
reconcilableness. Both views appear to me to go beyond
what the facts warrant. In a case of this kind, indeed,
we may weR, with the late Dean Alford and others,
retain our confidence in the perfect truthfulness of the
varying accounts, while we confess ourselves unable to
devise any hypothesis at once admissible in the circum
stances and adequate to evince their reconcilability. At
the same time, it is more satisfactory to have our minds
made up as to some such admissible and adequate
hypothesis ; and not unfrequently it happens that a
hypothesis is conceivable which, though incapable of
direct proof, yet fits id so well with the data, and sheds
so much light upon the whole case, that the probabihty
of its truth rises almost to demonstration. I am not
disposed to say that the suppositions which have been
aReady proposed in order to harmonise the accounts
before us, and which it is unnecessary to occupy space in
detailing, are unsuitable or insufficient. It may, at the

316 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
same time, be granted that they do not, in all points,
commend themselves as marked by the high degree of
probabihty referred to, and they certainly leave room for
another attempt. What I have- to suggest is new only
in part, but taken altogether it seems to shed a new light
of probability on the mode of reconciliation here adopted.
A prehminary remark is required in reference to the
different character of the two accounts. The one occurs
in Matthew's narrative of the apprehension, condemnation,
and death of Jesus ; the other occurs in Peter's address
on occasion of his proposing to his fellow-disciples to elect ,
a new occupant of the place in the apostleship vacated
by the treachery of Judas. The one is marked by the
calmness suited to historical narration ; in the other,
the aroused feeling and rhetorical style of the speaker
are unmistakeable.1 Again, in the one, the interest of
the evangelist is centred in Jesus, — in vindicating His
innocence, and in presenting Him to the Jews as bearing
the prophetic marks of their expected Messiah, while
the acts and end of the traitor are to him important only
in so far as subservient to these purposes ; in the other,
the interest of the apostle is centred in Judas, the fallen
apostle, whose faR had rendered Peter's proposal neces
sary, and whose terrible crime with its terrible retribution
was naturally present in the minds alike of speaker and of
audience. Two accounts so various in character should
be expected to offer considerable divergences of statement.
The questions with which we are now occupied re
lating to the harmonising of these narratives, are three-
1 Cf. Ebrard, Kritik d. evan. Geschichte, p. 543 (2te Auf.): 'eine
Rede, wo wir rednerische, uneigentliche Ausdriicke wohl erwarten diirfen. '
There is no sufficient reason for regarding vers. 18, 19 of Acts i. as an
insertion by the author of the book, and including this passage in a paren
thesis. See Meyer, ad loc.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 317
fold, — connected, 1st, with the disposal of the thirty
pieces of silver, and the purchase of the field ; 2nd, with
the circumstances of the traitor's death ; and 3rd, with
the application of the name Aceldama. There is another
question, scarcely less difficult than any of these, arising
in connection with one of the accounts, that of Matthew,
from the quotation there alleged from 'Jeremy the prophet,'
which I exclude from the present discussion.
The method of conciliation here advocated depends on
two main suppositions, viz. that the purchase of the field
took place before the death of Judas, and that both events
took place on the very day of our Lord's crucifixion. If
these suppositions can be made out as admissible and
probable, then the difficulties which beset the accounts
naturally disappear, and a luminous impressiveness is left
in their stead.
1. Let us look at the circumstances relating to the
disposal of the money and the purchase of the field.
Matthew informs us that the repentance of Judas took
place immediately on the condemnation of Jesus by the
Sanhedrim. His words, according to Alford, are, ver. 3,
Tore l$a>v 'lovSa? 0 TrapaBi^oiii avrov, otl KareKpldv,
fieTafiek-rjOels earpeyfrev ra Tpid/covra dpyvpia rot? dp^uep-
evai Kai Trpeafivrepots, — language plainly implying that
this proffer of restoration was made while the priests and
elders were still met in council, and ere they had pro
ceeded to accuse Jesus before Pilate.1 Evidently, also,
the next step was taken immediately. Finding his
proffer scornfully rejected by his employers, ' he cast
1 See Mark xv. 1 ; Luke xxiii. 1. The time is defined by Matthew's vpuixs
yisopUm, and Mark's Wi <rh *pm. Cf. Ellicott, Life of our Lord, p. 338,
note 3 (4th ed.). Lightfoot says it was 'probably as Christ stood by.'
— Harmony, p. 157 (Works, by Pitman, vol. iii.). More probably He had
been removed.

o

1 8 The Death of Judas Iscariot.

down the pieces of silver in the temple.' The temple,
b vao?, doubtless means here the Holy Place, where the
priests would now be occupied j1 and by casting down the
money in this sacred place, the traitor must be understood
as offering it to the acceptance of Jehovah, for the service
of His house. What Judas then did it was of importance
for the evangelist to record ; for it was a twofold pro
testation on the part of the betrayer on behalf of the
innocence of the betrayed, — on the one hand, before the
highest tribunal of the nation ; on the other hand, before
God. Having mentioned his casting the money down in the
temple, Matthew immediately adds, ' and he departed,
and went and hanged himself Was this step also
taken in immediate sequence to the preceding ? So from
the coRocation of the words we are tempted to suppose.
Yet, looking more closely, there seems cause for hesitation.
The coRocation decides nothing, and it was natural for
Matthew to finish what he had to say of the traitor
before proceeding to show how prophecy was fulfiRed in
the disposal of the money. Moreover, his language is
marked by a peculiar redundancy, — dve^wp^ae Kai
aTreXOcov cwnfy^aTo, — where the aTrekOcov seems to leave
room for the lapse of some time before the consummation.
Then, though we cannot lay much stress on considerations
of a psychological kind, it seems natural to suppose that
Judas would not feel himself driven to this deed of self-
murder, till the case of Jesus had been decided at Pilate's
tribunal, and tiR he had learned the ultimate result of
his treachery. The reference to the Roman governor, as
it seemed to offer a possibility of dehverance for Jesus
from His enemies, so also must have opened up a last
1 Cf. Alford, ad loc. ; Ellicott, op. cit., p. 339, note 2 ; Meyer, in Matt.
xxvii. 5.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 319
hope to the wretched man that the worst for him might
yet be averted ; and I conceive it most probable that
only when this hope was extinguished did he rush in
despair ' out of the world.' Turning now to the account
given in Peter's address, we find additional reason for
believing that an interval elapsed, — an interval long
enough at least for the disposing of the money which
Judas had cast down before Jehovah, in the manner
described by Matthew. The statement of Peter, as given
in the Authorised Version, is, ' This man purchased a
field with the reward of iniquity,' — a version true as to
the general sense, but, as we shaR see immediately, not
exact. Now it must be granted that if Judas was already
dead when the field was purchased, it wiR be difficult or
impossible to reconcile this statement with what we read
in Matthew, who exphcitly narrates that it was the chief
priests who took counsel in regard to the disposal of the
silver pieces, and ' bought with them the potter's field, to
bury strangers in.' Certainly, the method of reconciliation
commonly resorted to, whereby the apostle's statement is
considered equivalent to, 'he gave occasion to the purchase
of a field,' is far from satisfactory.1 Suppose Judas,
however, to have been still ahve when the purchase was
made, and the difficulty disappears. The purchase was
negotiated by the priests, but it was made with Judas's

r2_
man nor God woidd take off his hand, — and doubtless

money, — which clung to its owner, and which neither

1 See references, with a defence of this view, in Hackett, Commentary on
the Acts, p. 44 (2ded.).
2 So Hofmann, Weissagung und Erfvllung, ii., p. 123 : 'Das Feldstiick,
fiir des Verrather's Geld gekauft, hiitte er als sein Eigenthum ansprechen
mogen. ' This acute exegete also believes that Judas was still in life when
the purchase was made ; see op. cit., p. 134. So Robinson assigns Matt.
xxvii. 3-10, and Acts i. 18, 19, to the day of the crucifixion. — Harmony,
p. 161.

320 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
also it was made in Judas's name, and with a clear
understanding on the part of aR concerned, and of the
general pubhc in Jerusalem, as to the source whence the
means for the acquisition of the burial-place for the
strangers were derived. Thus primarily the field became
the legal property of Judas, though secondarily it was
destined, by those to whom Judas had left the disposal
of his silver pieces, for a public purpose. The circum
stances, thus viewed, seem to me quite sufficient to warrant
the language employed by the apostle, especially when
the rhetorical style of his address is taken into account.
For what does Peter say ? ' Simply that Judas ' acquired
(eKTrjcraTo) a field,' — which is surely not the same thing
as that which Matthew predicates of the priests, — they
'bought' (fi<yopaaav) the field. The words, nicely dis
criminate - what belonged to the different parties in the
transaction.1 The one negotiated the purchase, but the
ground became as much the property of the other as ff
he had himself purchased it with the view of devoting
it for a public burial-place. I can see no vahd objection
to the representation now given. I am not aware that
any law or custom would prevent the chief priests who
had not scrupled to take part in the trial of Jesus en
gaging in such a pecuniary transaction on the day of the
preparation for the passover.2 They would certainly
hasten to rid themselves as speedily as possible of ' the
1 Alford, on Acts i. 18, says the words Ix piulm t«s xSixixs 'plainly bind on
the purchase to Judas as his personal act. ' How they do so I cannot per
ceive. Peter says not a word of Judas 'purchasing.' Meyer translates,
' Dieser nun erwarb sich einen Acker fur den Lohn seiner Ruchlosigkeit, '
and adds — 'rednerische Andeutung der den Zuhorern genau bekannte
Thatsache : Fiir das geld welches Judas fiir seinen Verrath erhalten hatte
ward ein Acker erkauft. '
2 Cf. the remarks in'Smith's Bib. Diet., vol. ii., p. 722 ; and see Mark
xv. 46, Luke xxiii. 56.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 321
price of blood,' whose very touch they regarded as pol
luting to the temple, and of course also to its ministers.
Moreover, it seems very questionable whether this purchase,
if not made at once, would have been made at aR —
whether a spot profaned as this was by the blood of a
suicide would have been apphed as a place of burial for
the pilgrims to the feasts who chanced to die at Jerusalem,
at least while the event was yet fresh, and without special
rites of purification. There is, indeed, a difficulty, which
will be considered more closely by and by, arising from
the ease with which the purchase seems to have been
made ; but this difficulty bears against the smallness of
the price, a fact which must be accepted, even more than
against the rapidity of the negotiation. And whatever
view be adopted in regard to the hour of our Lord's
crucifixion, there must at least have been an interval of
hours between the time when Judas threw down the
money and the time before which, as I conceive, his
suicide had not taken place ; and this may reasonably be
accepted as sufficient.
2. We have now to look at the data in the accounts
before us bearing upon the mode of the traitor's death.
In regard to this point, Matthew says simply, ' he hanged
himself ' (dirr)<y%aTo) ; while Peter says, ' falling head
long, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels
gushed out ' (Trprjvrjs <yevofievo<; ikaKncrev p.eaos, koX
i^e^vdrj iravra to, aw\dy%va avrov). There is no philo
logical ground for taking the dirrj^aro of the former in
any other than its ordinary meaning which our version
gives, and aR the attempts made to show that it is
capable of another rendering are unsuccessful. I am
indeed at a loss to understand how interpreters should
feel themselves bound, in the interest of harmony, to
make such attempts. Wherein does the statement of
x

322 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
Peter contradict that of Matthew ? I can see in the one
what supplements the other, but nothing that contradicts
it.1 Alford himself, though not professing to be able to
reconcile the discrepancy, says, — ' It is obvious that,
while the general term used by Matthew points mainly
at self-murder, the account given here (in Acts) does not
preclude the catastrophe related having happened, in some
way, as a divine judgment, during the suicidal attempt'.
The last clause of the sentence, with the emphasis which
the writer has put upon it, indicates that, in Alford's
opinion, the words of the apostle imply that the ' falling
headlong ' took place during the process of suspension,
or while Judas was yet living. But the language is
equally consistent with the supposition that the fall took
place after the self-murder had been accomplished ; and
supposing the sequel of the suicide to have been as here
described, it was quite natural for Peter, regarding the
catastrophe as marking the divine displeasure against the
traitor, to ascribe to the person what happened to the
inanimate body. Further, not only is the one statement
not inconsistent with the other ; it seems to me plain that
the one, viz. that of Peter, imphes the knowledge of the
fact given in the other. Evidently Peter does not describe
the mode of the traitor's death at all ; his statement re
lates to the mode in which he took possession of the
property he had acquired. Had he meant to give a
relation of his death, how could he have begun with the
abrupt and unexplained statement, irpr)vij<i yevofievos ?
Evidently the words suppose that his hearers were
acquainted with those circumstances connected with
1 Cf. Casaubon, Exercit. ad Baronium, p. 527: ' Matthaeus expressit
facti initium, Lucas finem, suppleens divinitus quod deerat narrationi
Matthaei. '
2 On Acts i. 18.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 323
Judas's end which rendered inteRigible to them this
' falling headlong.'1 Take now into account the allu
sions in Peter's address to the recognised fulfilment in
the traitor's death of Old Testament prophecy ; let us
recaR the application to Judas by Christ Himself of
language primarily referring to the false friend of David,
the traitor Ahithophel, — ' I speak not of you all ; I
know whom I have chosen : but, that the Scripture may
be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted
up his heel against me ;'2 let us compare the apostle's
language, Acts i. 16, 'Men and brethren, this (or the)3
Scripture must needs have been fulfilled which the Holy
Ghost, by the mouth of David, spake before concerning
Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus ;' let us
remember how Ahithophel, the typical Judas, came to
his end ; and I do not see that we have any cause for
doubting that the fact that Judas, like his Old Testament
representative, ' went and hanged himself ' was present
on the occasion before us to the minds both of Peter and
of his hearers.4
What the occasion was of the dismal catastrophe
described by Peter is mentioned in neither of our
accounts. The purpose of Matthew was gained when
he had mentioned the mode in which Judas destroyed
himself, and Peter could not feel called upon to be
explicit in regard to an incident ' known unto aR the
dwellers at Jerusalem.' No one can reasonably say that
the hypothetical explanation usually given, the breaking
of the rope, or the giving way of some portion of the
1 Cf. Hofmann, op. cit., p. 133; Meyer, ad loc. : 'Die nahern Um-
stiinde werden als bekannt vorausgesetzt. '
2 John xiii. 18.
3 Tkbtjiv is absent in several of the most important mss. See Alford.
1 Cf. the fuller discussion of this point in Hofmann, op. cit., pp. 132-136.

324 The Death of Judas I scariot.
fastening, is either inadmissible or insufficient.1 At the
same time, I conceive that there is another more likely
supposition, not far to seek — suggested, indeed, by inci
dents recorded in connection with the occasion. I have
shown cause for thinking that Judas survived the pur
chase of the potter's field and the condemnation of Jesus
by Pilate. There is, however, no reason for thinking that
he delayed the execution of his desperate purpose, or
deferred it to another day. The day of the crucifixion of
his victim was doubtless the day of, the self-murder of the
traitor. Now we read, John xix. 31, in reference to those
who had that day been crucified on Calvary, 'The Jews
therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies
should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath-day (for
that Sabbath was an high day), besought Pilate that their
legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.'
The necessity thus felt by the Jewish rulers to have the
bodies taken down before the Sabbath commenced was
based upon the principle of the Mosaic law 'stated in
Deut. xxi. 23, that ' he that is hanged is accursed of
God,' and brings the divine curse upon the land, if aRowed
to remain exposed all night. But the same necessity
must have held, and that in increased strength, in the
1 Cf. the parallel quoted from Apuleius by Kuinol on Matt, xxvii. 6.
Casaubon, op. cit., says : 'Frangitur laqueus, cadit in faciem Judas, id enim
est, ffmns yivo/nyos ; cadit autem vel in saxum fortasse asperum, vel in
ligni trancum acutum aut alias, Dei judicio, venter illi finditur, intestina
effunduntur. ' Limborch's supposition is peculiar : ' Suppono Judam laqueo
sibi vitam finivisse ; quamprimum in tali statu repertus fuit id statim'
primoribus Judasorum fuisse siguificatum ; illos noluisse hunc Judse exitum
populi innotescere, ne forte populus eum tanquam sceleris Judse ei propria
sua conscientia convicti indicium interpretaretur : itaque curasse ut clam
cadaver ejus auferatur, et in profundam quaudam voraginem prascipitetur,
ut sie omnes de ejus morte sermones praeciderent. . . . Simile quid ergo
hie locum habuerit, cum eo quod de militibus sepulchri Christi custodibus
Matthaeus refert.' — Commentarius in Act. Apost.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 325
case of Judas. His. corpse was suspended in the sight
of heaven, and that in the immediate vicinity of the city
and the temple.1 Moreover, his death was that of one who
had hanged himself, and we know that suicide, though it
became at a later period, during the time of their final
struggle "with the Roman power, fearfully common among
the Jews, was peculiarly abhorrent to the spirit of the
Israehtish nation.2 Then, of course, the fact mentioned
in the passage quoted from John, that the high Sabbath
day of the Paschal feast was at hand,3 rendered it all the
more imperative that the body of the suicide should be,
on the very day of his death, put out of sight. To effect
this, the Jewish rulers needed no authority or aid from
the Roman governor. It was a matter coming under
their own jurisdiction, and they had their own officers for
the maintenance of the religious order and purity of the
community. And these, doubtless, would use but scant
ceremony in the execution of their duty upon the poRut-
1 Cf. Josephus, Jewish War, iv. 5, 2 (Traill) : ' The Jews are so attentive
to the rites of sepulture, as to take down even those who have undergone
the sentence of crucifixion and inter them before sunset.'
2 See Josephus, op. cit., iii. 8, 5 : 'The souls of those whose hands have
acted madly against themselves, a region of darker Hades receives, and God
their Father visits on the offspring the impiety of their parents. . . . Thus
it is ordained among us, that those who destroy themselves shall be
exposed unburied until sunset, although we think it right to inter even
our enemies. '
3 The fact of John's mentioning this as the one consideration leading
the Jews to seek the removal of the three dead bodies on Calvary is con
nected with the fact that the crucifixion had taken place under Roman
authority. They needed to obtain permission to take down the bodies,
and the coming on of the passover Sabbath detenu ined them to petition
for it. Cf. the case of the descendants of Saul put to death by the Gibeon-
ites and hanged up before the Lord (2 Sam. xxi. 1-14). Here also, as the
execution took place at the instance of foreigners, the bodies were allowed
to remain suspended. At the same time, since they remained suspended
on Israelitish soil, the land was defiled.

326 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
ing corpse of the despised traitor and suicide : — -Cut him
down, and let him drop, and cover him up where he falls !
When the body was thus rudely disposed of, what more
natural than the revolting issue which Peter describes,1
and which had been so generally and impressively recog
nised in Jerusalem as a suitable termination of the false
disciple's earthly history ? Such a result is the more
conceivable, when we take into account the precipitous
character of the ground in the environs of the city, and
still more if we accept as rehable the tradition which,
since Jerome's time, has existed in regard to the locality,
and which fixes it to one of the cliffs facing the temple-
hill towards the south.2
3. The third discrepancy presented by the two accounts
before us relates to the apphcation of the name Acel-
1 Cf. the Rabbinical quotation in Bloomfield, Greek Testament, on Acts
i. 18 : 'Aramasus quidam vidit hominem qui de tecto in plateam decidit, et
ruptus est ejus venter, et viscera ejus effluxerunt. '
2 See Robinson's Researches, i., p. 354 (2d ed.). According to Barclay,
City of the Great King, p. 208, the tradition in regard to the precise
locality has varied. ' During the Frank kingdom it was located in Gehenna,
at the foot of the cliff opposite the traditional Aceldama — a much more
likely site, certainly, for here the cliff is thirty or forty feet in height ; and
should he have fallen into the rocky gorge below, from an overhanging
limb at this place, such a doom of the traitor would have been as natural
as well merited. ' Hackett's note is worth quoting : ' As I stood in this
valley on the south of Jerusalem and looked up to the rocky terraces
which hung over it, I felt that the explanation proposed above (the falling
from a precipice) is entirely natural. I was more than ever satisfied with
it. I measured the precipitous, almost perpendicular, walls in different
places, and found the height to be variously forty, thirty-six, thirty-three,
thirty, and twenty-five feet. Trees still flourish on the margin of these
precipices, and in ancient times must have been still more numerous in
the same place. A rocky pavement exists also at the bottom of the
ledges ; and hence on that account too, a person falling from above would
be liable to be crushed and mangled, as well as kiUed. The traitor may
have struck in his fall upon some pointed rock, which entered the body
and caused his bowels to gush out '¦(op. cit., p. 45).

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 327
dama, the field of blood. While Matthew intimates that
the locahty was thus named in consequence of its being
purchased with ' the price of blood,' Peter declares that
the appellation arose from the shedding forth of the
traitor's blood upon the field. The matter may seem
of comparatively trifling importance, yet the considera
tion of it wiR be found to lead to conclusions of the
highest interest. The reconciliation of the discrepancy
is to be effected by showing that this bestowing of the
same appellation on various occasions and on different
grounds is in entire harmony with what is constantly
exemplified in the case of persons and places theocra-
tically significant. The rationale of naming in Israel is
too wide a theme to be discussed at present. It is
requisite, however, to remark that the name is in many
cases to be regarded as not merely founded on a certain
attribute or character of the object to which it is apphed,
but also as possessing a prophetic importance. The
name given to an individual or locahty is often significant
of the relation sustained by the individual or the locahty
to the kingdom of God and the evolution of His re
demptive work. Both places and persons were used in
Israel as symbols and types, and hence their names also
came to possess a prophetical significance. And just as
prophecy in general has a fulfilment which is ' spring
ing and germinant,' which rises by stages to an ever-
increasing degree of fulness and adequacy, — so these
prophetic names gather new meanings and references as
the types to which they belong develop their theocratic
import. It is unnecessary to go over aR the instances recorded
in Scripture of a twofold or threefold apphcation of the
same name. The foRowing may suffice for our present
purpose. The promised son of Abraham was named

328 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
Isaac, laughter, and this name was peculiarly appropriate
in the circumstances connected with his birth ; ' And
Sarah said, God hath made me to laugh, so that aR that
hear will laugh with me.' But previous to his birth
there is a twofold occasion recorded for the apphcation
to the child of the same name.1 Jacob's third son re
ceived the name of Judah, praise, for his mother said at
his birth, ' Now wRl I praise the Lord.' 2 But the name
was prophetic, and a higher meaning is pointed out in
the words of the dying Jacob, ' Judah, thou art he whom
thy brethren shall praise.' Beersheba, the well of the
oath, was the scene of the covenant sworn between
Abraham and the Philistine king Abimelech, whereby
each, in the name of their respective peoples, became
pledged to respect the territory of the other. And addi
tional significance was given to the name when this
covenant was renewed, at the same place, between the
Philistine king and Abraham's son.3 Thus the place
with its name remained a memorial of the ancient and
solemn covenant, and a standing protest against Philis
tine invasion. The first apphcation of the name Bethel,
house of God, to the locahty which bore it is recorded on
occasion of the vision there beheld by Jacob, and the
promise there made to him by Jehovah. It was again
thus named after Jacob's return from Haran, and it is of
special interest to note that the name was then re-appRed
in express remembrance of the previous occasion. Forth
with a fresh significance was given to the place and the
name by the re-appearing of God to the patriarch, and
the renewal, on the same spot, of the divine promise :
' And Jacob called the name of the place where God
1 Cf. Gen. xxi. 6 with xvii. 17, xviii. 12.
2 Cf. Gen. xxix. 35 with xlix. 8.
3 Gen. xxi. 22-32 and xxvi. 26-33.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 329
spake with him Bethel.' x I need not dweR on the fact
that the locality retained its prophetic importance
throughout the subsequent history of Israel, and, with
its name, is treated by the prophets as an enduring rebuke
of the idolatry of their countrymen.2
Like these and many others, the name Aceldama, the
field of blood, is to be regarded as possessed of prophetic
significance, and hence as properly renewable on every
occasion on which, in the course of divine providence,
this significance was brought to light. A name of cor
responding import had been of old given to the same
locahty, and place and name stood an abiding memorial
and warning for Jerusalem and for Israel. In order to
evince this, it is requisite to ascertain and identify the
locality as exactly as possible.
(1.) First, it is to be maintained that the suicide of
Judas and the Outshedding of his blood took place in
the field which had been purchased with his money.
This, looking at the words of Peter, appears to me so
indisputable, that I cannot weR understand how any
attentive reader of the account in Acts can fail to
recognise it.3 ' This man,' says the apostle, ' acquired a
field with the reward of iniquity, and falling headlong,'
etc. — of course, on the field which he had acquired,
— ' insomuch,' he continues, ' as that field (to yaplov
eKelvo, the very place aReady spoken of) is called in
their proper tongue Aceldama.' The position is con-
1 Gen. xxviii. 19, xxxv. 7, and xxxv. 15.
8 See the detail given in Stanley's Sinai and Palestine (4th ed.), pp.
221 -223.
3 See Hofmann, op. cit., p. 133. To the investigations of this writer,
in regard to the locality of the potter's field, I have to acknowledge large
obligations. Alford also remarks that the narrative implies that the
catastrophe happened in the field. — Com. on Acts i. 18. So Baumgarten
and Lange. Meyer refuses assent.

330 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
firmed when the general scope of Peter's address is
taken into account. Evidently his purpose is to point
out the miserable exchange which by his treason Judas
had made. ' He was numbered with us, and had ob
tained part of this ministry' (an inadequate rendering of
tov KrJr)pov t7j<s SiaKovta? tuvtij?). The service of Jesus
Christ in the apostleship was Judas's original allotment.
But he ' became guide to them who took Jesus,' and
thereby secured another allotment. As the reward of his
iniquity, ' he acquired a field,' and this his new posses
sion he entered upon, when ' falling headlong,' etc. ' For
it is written in the book of Psalms, " Let his habitation
be desolate," ' etc.1
(2.) The locality purchased with Judas's money and
in which he hanged himseff drew its popular designation,
the potter's field, from the period before the Babylonian
captivity. That the place was currently designated the
potter's field we learn from Matthew. It is incredible,
however, that it was, at the time when it was purchased
by the priests, the seat of a pottery,2 or, indeed, that it
was apphed to any other profitable purpose. The small-

1 Cf. Lange, Bibelwerk, Matt, xxvii. 1-10, p. 413. Probably also there
is a reference to the suicide taking place on the property acquired by
Judas in the words of ver. 25, #t>piv6wxi us ™ to«v t»» 'i%ov, — though
this reference is not to be held as exhausting the meaning of the language.
It seems to me consistent with psychological truth, that Judas, like
Ahithophel, should betake himself, when resolved on self-destruction, to
' his own place. ' When a person feels that his last hour is come, he
naturally turns with longing to the spot of earth most interesting to
his spirit, where of all places he has a right to be, and which is most
identified with his life. Cf. Virgil, of Dido, ' Interiora domus irrumpit
limina,' etc.
2 Alford on Matt, xxvii. 7 notes : ' The field of some well-known potter
— purchased at so small a, price, probably from having been rendered
useless for tillage by excavations for clay.' This explanation, I think,
most persons will regard as unsuitable.

The Death of J iidas Iscariot. 331
ness of the sum which sufficed to buy it, and the readi
ness with which the purchase was effected, seem to
indicate that it was an utterly waste and useless piece
of ground, of which the owner gladly rid himself on
any terms, and to which perhaps some evil repute clave.
The passage quoted by Matthew from Zechariah1 enables
us to trace the name to the post-exilian period, when this
prophet lived. At the same time, the terms in which
the locahty is there referred to indicate that, at that
period, it was a place devoted to the reception of refuse
and rubbish. ' The Lord said unto me, Cast it unto
the potter : a goodly price that I was prized at of them.
And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them
to the potter in the house of the Lord.' We know
from Rabbinical tradition that a place thus given up
to refuse actually existed in the valley of the son of
Hinnom,2 on the south side of the city, where, as wiR
be seen immediately, the potter's field is to be sought.
Thus, during the post-exilian period, it was not a pottery
but a place for rubbish ; and we must go yet further
back to find the origin of the name. This we discover
at last in the period immediately preceding the capture
of the city by Nebuchadnezzar, and in the writings of
the prophet Jeremiah. From one or two passages in
this prophet we learn that there was a pottery in
active operation in the immediate neighbourhood of
Jerusalem.3 There is no ground for doubting that
this was the locahty which came, from this circum
stance, to be popularly known as the potter's field, a
name which it continued to bear till the final over-
1 Chap. xi. 12, 13.
2 See Lightfoot, Chor. Century, chap. 39 ; Eisenmenger, Entdecktes
Judenthum, ii., p. 323.
3 Jer. xviii. 1 , xix. 1 .

332 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
throw of the city.1 It is very conceivable that, in
consequence of the ruin inflicted by the Babylonian
arms, a flourishing pottery should be converted into a
place for shooting rubbish on, whRe it continued to
bear its old designation.
(3.) Another step remains : — This locahty, known as
the potter's field, is identical with, the place , called
Tophet, in the vaRey of Hinnom. The proof of this
position is furnished in Jeremiah, chap. xix. At the
commencement of this chapter we find the prophet
commanded to take an earthen bottle, and go forth in
company with some of the elders of the people, ' unto the
vaRey of the son of Hinnom, which is by the entry of the
east gate' In the original the last clause stands nna ib>k
niD"inn "W ; and it seems now universally agreed among
Hebraists that the word inD"iri is connected, not with
D}n, the sun, but with fenn, a potsherd? Thus "W
mD"inn means, the gate of the pottery, or the gate of
the potsherds, according to Hitzig; and as the clause
evidently points out the particular spot of the well-known
vaRey of Hinnom to which the prophet was to go forth,
it wiR read thus : where is the entry of the gate of the
pottery} The potter's house, spoken of in chap. xvhi. 2,
1 Hofmann, op. cit., p. 124, says : "0 xypos tou xtpxfiXus ist nicht "der
Acker jenes bewussten Topfers, " sondern der aus der Schrift, aus der Weis
sagung Jeremia's bekannte Topferacker. '
2 See Gesenius and Fiirst, s.v. ; also Hitzig and Graf on Jeremiah,
ad loc. rVDin occurs in the later Hebrew in the sense of mud or clay.
See Buxtorf, ad vocem.
3 The gate of the pottery has been generally supposed to be one of the
gates in the city wall. But no such name occurs in the enumeration'of
the city gates in Nehemiah or elsewhere, and it is merely conjecture to
identify it with the dung-gate or any other of the known gates. More
over, it seems unlikely that a gate in the wall should be employed to point
out a particular spot in the valley of Hinnom. It is more natural to
suppose that it simply means the door of the potter's house or premises.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 333
to which the prophet is directed to ' go down,' is here
defined to have been situated in the valley of Hinnom.
Now at Jer. xix. 6 we read, ' Behold, the days come, saith
the Lord, that this place shall no more be called Tophet,
nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The vaRey of
slaughter ; ' and in ver. 14 it is said, ' Then came Jere
miah from Tophet, whither the Lord had sent him to
prophesy' The place where the potter's house stood is
thus identified with Tophet and the valley of the son of
Hinnom ; — Tophet denoting the particular locahty which
was situated in that vaRey, as is exphcitly stated in
Jer. vii. 31, and 2 Kings xxiii. 10. The etymology of
the name Tophet is obscure, and we have no means of
determining with certainty the original character of the
spot thus designated.1 The locality, whatever its original
character, became infamous during the reigns of the
idolatrous kings of Judah for the hideous rites there
practised in honour of Moloch, — especially for the sacrifice
of children on the altar of their idol. By king Josiah
this, along with other idolatrous practices, was abolished,
and Tophet was profaned and defiled, so as to be rendered
thenceforward unfit to be used as the scene' of sacred
rites.2 It was, I conceive, after this defilement that
Tophet became the site of the pottery mentioned in
Jeremiah, and the bed of clay which, it is said, still
exists in the valley on the south of the temple-hiR was
turned to a useful account.3
1 See Smith's Did. of Bible, s.v. ; Graf, Jeremias, p. 127 ; Neubauer,
Geographic du Talmud, p. 150; and the Lexicons. Some think the word
Assyrian or Persian ; see Thrupp, Antient Jerusalem, p. 243.
2 See 2 Kings xxiii. 10 ; cf. 2 Chron. xxxiv. 3-7.
3 About this bed of clay there is a strange discrepancy of statement among
those who ought to know. Hackett expressly states that ' argillaceous clay
is still found in the neighbourhood. A workman in a pottery which I
visited at Jerusalem said that all their clay was obtained from the hill

334 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
We are now prepared to understand, in some measure,
the prophetic significance of the name Aceldama, and the
mysterious connection of the potter's field with the his
tory of Israel and the fate of Jerusalem. It had been
specially the theatre of Israel's apostasy, — it was fitting
that it should be made the type of Israel's rejection and
overthrow. Though, in Jeremiah's time, the worship of
Moloch Was no longer practised,1 yet the sin of which the
people with their rulers had thus been guilty remained
unrepented of, unexpiated, and unforgiven, and the cry
of innocent blood went up to Jehovah, imprecating His
curse upon the guilty nation. The coming of that curse
Jeremiah was commissioned' to announce, and Tophet,
where the potter was then peacefuRy pursuing his useful
employment, was set up prophetically as a symbol and a
warning. This spot had been rendered a Field of Blood
by Israel's sin, — it should acquire by the approaching
retribution a new title to the designation. Twice did
the prophet declare that the names Tophet and The
Valley of the son of Hinnom should be replaced by
another name, The Valley of Slaughter,2 and the second
time with circumstances of pecuhar solemnity and im-
pressiveness, — in the presence of certain of the elders of
over the valley of Hinnom. ' — Illustrations of Scripture, p. 267. Grove,
on the other hand, declares (Smith's Dictionary, vol. ii., p. 908) : ' There
is not now any pottery in Jerusalem, nor within several miles of the
city ; ' while Barclay (I.e. p. 207) speaks of a bed of whitish earth near the
traditional Aceldama, 'evidently calcareous in its nature.' See also
Schultz in Williams' Holy City, i, Sup., p. 62 ; ii., p. 495.
1 See on this point, Graf, Der Prophet Jeremias, p. 126.
2 Jer. vii. 32, xix. 6. It is an interesting suggestion, made by a
writer in Smith's Diet, of the Bible, iii., p. 1564, that the njinn N'J
of Jeremiah may be represented in the Eroge of Josephus (Ant. ix.
10, 4). The locality seems to answer, and if this conjecture be sustained,
it will show that the Gt haharigah of the prophet, like Aceldama at a later
time, had passed into a current appellation.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 335
the people, called to mark the sign, and with the breaking
of a potter's vessel formed of clay taken from Tophet. The
symbol was explained in the words : ' Even so will I break
this people and this city, as one breaketh a potter's vessel,
that cannot be made whole again : and they shaR bury
them in Tophet, till there be no room to bury. Thus
will I do unto this place, saith the Lord, and to the
inhabitants thereof, and even make this city as Tophet.'1
The prophecy received its first and imperfect fulfilment
on occasion of the capture of the city by the Chaldeans,
when the valley of Hinnom was polluted with corpses
and became a place of defilement and of burial. After
this overthrow, a time of respite was granted to Israel.
The iniquity of the people was not yet fuR tiR they had
refused the message, not of the prophets only, but of the
Lord of the prophets, and had rejected their Messiah.
And again, when the final overthrow is drawing nigh, a
warning voice, as in Jeremiah's days, is heard issuing
from the potter's field, and the people are plainly
summoned to mark the sign. The thirty pieces of silver,
the price of the betrayed, persecuted, murdered Son of
God, is ' cast to the potter.' But though abhorred and
rejected by God, the price of blood is appropriated and
used by Israel.2 By, the Sanhedrim, the employers, on
the one hand, and by Judas, the agent, on the other, in
that deed of consummate ungodliness, Israel was fuRy
represented ; and in their purchase with the price of blood
of that Rl-omened field, it was formally declared symboli
cally that Israel had sacrificed not merely their children
to the Moloch of their idolatry, but their King and their
Messiah, and with Him their hopes as a nation and as
individuals. By that public purchase was the potter's
1 Jer. xix. 11, 12.
2 Cf. Neumann, Jeremias, ii., p. 29.

336 The Death of Judas Iscariot.
field again publicly involved in Israel's apostasy from
Jehovah their God. It was the first-fruits of the coming
retribution, a prelusive warning of the doom now hastening
on, when, on the very day on which the inexpiable offence
of Israel was consummated and Jesus was led to the
cross, Judas, His betrayer, the prominently and confessedly
guilty party in the deed of crime, went to ' his own place '
and took possession, ' not without blood,' of his acquired
inheritance, — giving to Tophet a fresh title to the name,
The Field of Blood. The advancing doom did not tarry.
The people with their rulers refused to repent of their
iniquity and to acknowledge the crucified One as their
Lord, when the call to repent and believe came to them
through the men appointed to be the witnesses of His
resurrection. By their political turbulence and insub
ordination, they provoked the utmost fury of the Roman,
as they had before provoked the utmost fury of the
Chaldean, power ; the curse deserved and imprecated fell
upon them ; the light of Israel's national glory was
quenched, and Jerusalem became one wide Tophet, a
Field of Blood, a Valley of Slaughter.
The twofold apphcation of the name Aceldama pre
sents now no difficulty, and we have no need, with
some, to have recourse to the unnatural and utterly
groundless supposition of two Aceldamas.1 The locality
was The Field of Blood, on the one hand, as defiled with
blood through Israel's sin ; and it was The Field of Blood,
on the other hand, as specially marked by the blood of
Israel's punishment. The former view is presented in
Matthew, where we are told that it was purchased with
the price of blood ; the latter view is presented in Peter's
address, where he speaks of the purchased possession being
entered upon with the blood of the traitor.
1 See Andrews, Life of our Lord, p. 441.

The Death of Judas Iscariot. 337
Surely an ever-memorable day was that, some of the
incidents of which have thus passed before us. Then was
' the judgment of this world ; ' then was ' the prince of this
world cast out.' Then, in a preliminary but public and
unmistakeable manner, was account taken of human sin ;
and that its wages are death was impressively declared.
On Golgotha was Jesus, the Holy One, lifted up, bearing
the- sins of others ; on Tophet was Judas, the betrayer and
murderer, Rfted up, bearing his own sin in the first-fruits
of its harvest of woe. It was a spectacle for the universe,
and those to whom it is exhibited must be without excuse
if they fail to lay to heart its solemn lessons.

338 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.

IX.
THE TENSES OF THE HEBREW VERB.
The question as to the significance of the verbal forms
caRed Tenses in Hebrew has long been recognised as, in
relation to that language, the crux grammaticorum. After
all that has been done for the elucidation of this question
not only by the older school of grammarians, but also by
Ewald and his successors, the subject remains in an un
satisfactory condition; and even the perusal of the last
and most complete work on the subject, that of Mr.
Driver, leaves on the mind a strong impression that the
right theory has not yet been reached. Though by
means of this and other works important advances have
been made, yet something appears to be still awanting,
and the current doctrine on the subject lacks those
characters of clearness and simplicity which are the usual
stamp of truth. In these circumstanoes, any attempt, how
ever humble, at a reconsideration of the subject should be
welcome. Not only is the question curious as a matter of
philological interest, it is also important as bearing upon
the interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures. It is a
question indeed beset with difficulties, and no student
who has addressed himself with an unprejudiced mind to
the task of surmounting these will be disposed to think
lightly of the work of those who have preceded him ;
and if, in any respect, the conclusions at which he arrives
differ from those generaUy accepted, he wiR be thereby
rendered the more diffident regarding his own processes

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 339
and results. It is with a feehng akin to dismay that
I have found myself on this question led to entertain
views different somewhat from those held by the acknow
ledged chiefs in this department of learning. At the
same time, as I shaR by and by more fully explain, the
ultimate practical difference is very small. If I am able
to effect anything, it hes almost entirely in a simplifi
cation of the theory of these so-called tenses, and a
clearing away to some extent of the uncertainty and
comphcation by which it is at present encumbered. It
should be remembered that the discussion cannot be
carried out into fuR detail in a short paper, and that
much must be here left unsaid which in other circum
stances it might be expedient for the reader's satisfaction
to set forth in detail.
In Hebrew, the verbal forms ordinarily called tenses
are two, represented by such words as ?t?i? and ?t3i?* ; and
these I shaR caR the first and second forms, except when,
for the sake of varying the expression, it may be desirable
to use some of the more common designations, such as per
fect and imperfect.1 In regard to their use, I am acquainted
with the following diversities of view among grammarians.
1. These forms refer to time proper, or to the date of
the action relatively to the speaker, i.e., they are tenses in
the meaning in which that term is commonly employed.
Among those who hold this general doctrine, various
subordinate modifications prevail. They are divided into
two sections by this distinction, that some hold the tense-
theory more loosely, others more strictly.
(1.) The former are worthy of being noticed only for
the sake of completeness of enumeration, as it is evident
that their views possess no scientific value. Some of
1 Donaldson (Maslcil le-Sopher, p. 24) has already proposed to call
them the primary and secondary tenses.

340 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
the older grammarians, as Buxtorf, Danz, and Glass, while
holding that the forms in question are tenses, at the same
time held that the Hebrew writers habituaRy used the
enallage temporum, interchanging them much as they
pleased. Others, as Michaelis, Jahn, etc., incline to, the
view that these forms are originaRy and natively mere
aorists, — tenses with the time undefined, the one of
which only through custom became more applicable to
the past, the other to the future. Hence the names first
and second aorists were applied to them by the gram
marians referred to.1
(2.) Among those who hold this doctrine in a stricter
and more scientific way, another twofold distinction is to be
made. While some regard the standpoint of the speaker
as fixed, others regard it as moveable. The former be
lieve that by these forms the speaker indicated the true
or absolute date of the act, regarded from his own present ;
the latter, that he may use them to indicate not only the
real date as viewed from his real present, but another date
relative to some fictitious present which he may choose,
or which he is led by the current of his thoughts to
assume. Thus we have these forms regarded as, —
a. Tenses absolute, or with fixed standpoint, — a view
always combined with the doctrine of the waw doubly
conversive, without the aid of which it could not be
maintained for a moment. This may be caRed the ordi
nary or the traditional view2 set forth by the Jewish
grammarians, and by their successors among Christians
from Reuchhn to Gesenius.
b. Tenses relative, or with moveable standpoint, — under
which are found several varieties of view. Some, as
1 See for these obsolete forms of the Tense theory, Gesenius, Lehrgebaude,
p. 761.
2 Bbttcher, LB., sec. 944.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 341
Lee,1 hold that the first denotes the past, and the second
the present ; others, as Weir,2 hold the first a present, and
the second a future ; others, as Nordheimer, Murphy, and
the most,3 hold the first a past, and the second a future.
2. These forms denote not the time proper or date,
but the kind or character, of the act. On this doctrine
they have no such distinctive relation to the time of the
act as belongs to the tense-forms of the Indo-European
languages, and they cease to be entitled to be caRed
tenses. It is true that the advocates of this view seem
in general reluctant to abandon the temporal reference
and the use of the ordinary terms, and endeavour to show
that time is marked in a certain way by these forms,
though they do not primarily denote when the action
happened. Thus Mr. Driver, in expounding his own
and Ewald's doctrine in contrast with that of former
grammarians, says : ' I allude to the distinction between
order of time and kind of time. In the first place, a
particular verbal form may exhibit a given action as
prior or subsequent to some date otherwise fixed by the
narrative : this is a difference in the order of time. But
secondly, an action may be contemplated, according to
the fancy of the speaker, or according to the particular
point which he desires to make prominent, either as
incipient, or as continuing, or as completed; the speaker
may wish to lay stress upon the moment at which it
begins, or upon the period over which it extends, or
upon the fact of its being finished and done : these are
differences in the kind of time. . . . Now in Hebrew
1 See Lee, Heb. Grammar, pp. 335 f. ; cf. id., in Jour. Sac. Lit., 1850,
pp. 193 ff. I find also a German writer, Herling, referred to as holding
that the second is a true present. Dietrich, Abhandlungen, p. 98.
2 See Weir, in Jour. Sac. Lit., 1849, pp. 308 f.
3 See Nordheimer, Heb. Grammar, ii., pp. 156 f. ; Murphy, in Jour.
Sac. Ut., 1850, pp. 194 f.

34 2 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
the tenses mark only differences in the kind of time, not
differences in the order of time ; i.e., they do not in
themselves determine the date at which an action takes
place, they only indicate its character or kind.' L Now
as of course everything done is done in time, the time-
element is present in aR verbal concepts ; and a verbal
form, is- by no means entitled to be called a tense merely
because it has in it some reference to this idea. That
which distinguishes the tense from- other forms is that it
indicates what in this extract is called the order of time,
or the date. It is true that in certain of the Greek tenses,
to which Mr. Driver refers in illustration of his view, the
character of the action is also- suggested ; but it is so
always in connection with the proper temporal reference.
'EhdXovv and ekadagcra denote the one a continued, the
other a momentary act, but at the same time both acts
are dated in the past.2 Mr. Driver himself expressly
maintains that in themselves the Hebrew forms have no
such reference to time as these and other similar forms
in the Greek and other languages. Thus he says, —
' The tenses in. Hebrew, at least as regards what they
do not express, are in their inmost nature radically dis
tinct from what is commonly known in other languages
by the same name ; indeed, they might almost more fitly
1 Driver, Hebrew Tenses, pp. 2 f.
2 The expression ' the kind of time ' is borrowed from the grammarians
of the Greek language, and seems to me an unhappy one. Thus, says
Curtius, Greek Grammar Explained, p. 204 (Eng. Tr.) : 'The difference
between y'malxt, yiyvtriai, and ytyomxi must obviously be denoted bv a
word which at once indicates that here we have to do with a difference
lying in the action itself, not merely with the relation to something
external to it. In this sense I chose the expression, "kind of time." '
Another way of expressing the same distinction is by the contrasted
phrases, subjective time, i.e. the time as related to the speaker, and
objective time, i.e. the time as related to the action. See Steinthal,
Charakteristik, p. 260.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 343
be called moods!1 Though then Mr. Driver speaks of these
forms as denoting the kind of time and uses the phrase,
Hebrew tenses, yet in reality according to his own doctrine
they are not tenses, but point to the character, not the
time, of the act.
The general view that these forms denote the kind, not
the time, of the act, is that which has been introduced
into Hebrew grammar by Ewald, and which owes its
currency to his authority. Hitherto it has been presented
under two or three different modifications.
(1.) In the hands of Ewald himself and his direct
foRowers,2 the two forms represent actions as on the one
hand complete, on the other hand incomplete. The first
denotes the accomplished and so the existing; the other
both the unaccomplished and so the non-existing, and
the coming into accomplishment and so the growing and
progressive. Hence, with these as their primary mean
ings, they have each their appropriate temporal sphere, in
which their use is respectively suitable, and from which
they derive secondary meanings. Thus Ewald apphes the
first, or the perfect, to actions in past and future-perfect
time, to states of existence in the present, and to events
about to happen in the future when these are regarded
as already resolved on or accomphshed in the speaker's
purpose. On the other hand, the second, or the imperfect,
he regards as peculiarly applicable (1) to present time,
inasmuch as actions happening in the present are regarded
as either becoming or rising into existence, or as con
tinuing and it may be suffering repetition ; and (2) to
1 He notes, ' This is the designation employed by Ewald formerly, and
by Hitzig still : the perfect being spoken of as theirs* mood, the imperfect
as the second mood. '
' Ewald, LB., sec. 134 ff. ; Olshausen, LB., p. 32 ; Davidson, Heb.
Grammar, p. 42.

344 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
future time, inasmuch as what is future is regarded as
unaccomplished and only coming into existence.
(2.) In the hands of Bottcher, with whom Driver
agrees,1 the contrast which the two verbal forms denote is
not that of the finished or the unfinished character of the
act, but that of its fulfilment and its beginning. In the use
of the first form, according to this view, the speaker looks
at the act as departing and done, and in the use of the
second as entering upon the stage and commencing. The
names which Bottcher adopts for the two forms as best
expressive of their true idea are respectively the perfect
and the fiens, i.e., the completed and the becoming. In
explaining the actual uses of the forms and. their appli
cation to different temporal spheres, he differs in no
essential point from his predecessor.
(3.) The same general distinction assumes in the
doctrine of Donaldson 2 a slightly different nuance. To
him ' both these forms are in effect indeterminate tenses,
which imply a relation to some point of time other than
the present. But their mutual relation is clear, and they
differ in sense, as the single act differs from the set of
acts ; in form, as the simple differs from the strengthened
root.' Thus for this writer, the first denotes a single act,
completed or transient, and understood to be in the past
unless the contrary is somehow indicated; the second is the
expression of continuous action from a point in past time.
Thus the two theories generally current regarding the
verbal forms in question are these : — on the one hand,
they denote the time or date of the action, and are tenses
1 Bottcher, LB., sec. 589 ; Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 2 ; cf. p. 75 : 'The
imperfect is pre-eminently the tense which expresses what in German is
called Eintritt, and which represents action as eintretend — two terms which
may be rendered in English by ingress and ingressive.'
2 See his Maskil, p. 23.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 345
properly so called ; on the other hand, they denote not
the time or date of the action, but its character as finished
or unfinished, accomplished or beginning, momentary or
continuous. These theories have now to be considered.
In regard to the former, it may be said that since the
publication of Ewald's Grammar it has been gradually
becoming obsolete, and is already for the most part aban
doned by scholars.1 On whatever side it is looked at, it
is found inadequate and inapplicable.
1. It is discountenanced by the want of consistency
among its supporters. While agreed that these forms are
and must be tense-forms, they are agreed in almost
nothing else. That which is a past to one is a present
to another, that which is a present to one is to another a
future. The only points on which all seem to be agreed
are these, — that the first cannot by itself denote the future,
and the second cannot by itself denote the past. A large
section own that unless the conjunction 1 with a certain
pointing be allowed to have a conversive power, i.e. to
reverse the signification of the tense-forms when it is pre
fixed to them, changing each into the other, it is impos
sible to apply the doctrine to the facts of the language ;
while others utterly repudiate the waiv conversive as a
mere figment and fetch of grammarians. The counter-
device of the moveable standpoint is just as far from
commanding universal acceptance, while on all hands
it is felt by the advocates of the tense-theory that some
device is indispensable if their doctrine is to be main
tained. The thought must occur to all, that when there
is so much difficulty and disagreement in attempting to
make out that' these forms are tenses, the probability is
very strong that this doctrine is altogether a mistaken one.
1 E.g. Kalisch (Heb. Grammar, i., p. 278), while retaining the names past
and future tenses, defines these in accordance with Ewald's doctrine.

346 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
2. It is discountenanced by its own vagueness and
pliability. This is especiaRy true of those forms of the
doctrine which include the hypothesis of a moveable stand
point. It is obvious that this is a hypothesis which no
difficulties in regard to the interchange of the forms can
resist. It is a skeleton-key which fits and opens every lock
however complicated. If the past tense is used in one clause
and the present or future in the next in reference to the
same act, we have only to say, — The standpoint is changed,
and all is explained. A doctrine so facile and elastic
really explains nothing. Somewhat less all-sufficient is
the waw-conversive theory, for even with this many
passages present insoluble enigmas. At the same time,
the doctrine that these forms suddenly interchange their
proper tense-significations as often as the conjunction
happens to precede, is too elastic a supposition to be of
any scientific worth.
3. It is discountenanced by its want of foothold in
Shemitic, and more particularly in Hebrew, philology.
When we look to the other languages of the same
family, and inquire in regard to cognate forms and their
use, the evidence, so far as it goes, is decidedly opposed
to the views which have hitherto been generally preva
lent. I have said that the grammarians who regard these
as proper tense-forms are, amid much diversity of opinion
on other points, agreed on this, that the first cannot
naturally denote the future, and that the second cannot
naturally denote the past. Now it is remarkable that in
some of the languages most nearly akin to the Hebrew,
there exist unmistakeable indications in regard to the
form corresponding to the second that it was regularly used
to denote past time. Thus the Phoenician, judging from
its extant monuments, is so like the Hebrew that it
should rather be called another dialect of the same

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 347
language than another language ; and of the Phoenician
Schroder writes,1 ' In relation to the syntactical use of the
tenses, it is to be remarked that the imperfect, the tense
of the future, frequently stands also for the present (ysthyal
obsecro, estumim obstupesco, ipsa conspicor, isthymmihy
laetantur . . . ), and at the same time for the past, e.g.
Dm'1 Mel. 1.4 Git.. 35..7 benedixit is,' etc. On a
bilingual inscription from Cyprus, the Phoenician vnp> is
represented by the Greek dved^Kev? Again, hi the lately-
recovered Assyrian, a language closely resembling the
Hebrew, the ordinary verbal form applied throughout
the inscriptions to the historical past is one constructed
by preformatives, and entirely corresponding to our second
or so-caUed imperfect. Says Oppert,3 — ' The future or
aorist, formed as in the other Shemitic languages, serves to
express the past ;' and he gives the foRowing as the con
jugation of this so-called aorist in all the voices :

Singular.

Plural.

1st pers.

-K

~:

2d pers. mas.

-n

(!)rn

2d pers. fern.

¦ • ($m

Q)*rn

3d pers. mas.

->

(t)r'

3d pers. fern.

-n

(|)»n

This fact naturally excited in the minds of the earlier
investigators, prepossessed by the views current regarding
the significance of the Hebrew tense-forms, no little sur
prise and even perplexity.4 It is established, however,
by evidence quite incontestable, drawn not only from the
obvious tenor of the Assyrian and Babylonian records,
1 Schroder, Die phonizische Sprache, p. 193.
2 Levy, Phonizische Studien, iv., p. 6.
3 Elements de la Grammaire Ass., pp. 43, 48 (2d ed.). Cf. Sayce, Assy
rian Grammar, p. 60 ; id., Elementary Grammar, p. 65.
* See e.g. Rawlinson, in Jour. Asiatic Soc, xi., p. 413 ; xiv., p. 4.

348 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
but also from the old-Persian renderings in the trilingual
inscriptions of the Achsemenian kings, in which past
tenses constructed with an augment according to the
ordinary analogy of the Indo-European tongues are con
tinually translated by words in our second form.1 So over
whelmingly preponderant in Assyrian is the use of, the
forms with preformatives,2 that some Assyriologers, as
Oppert and Menant, have doubted, and indeed continue to
doubt, if any well-attested examples of the simpler form
can be pointed out. This doubt, has been shown to be
groundless, and the existence of an Assyrian tense cor
responding to the Hebrew first, or perfect, has been
established and formulated.3 It is, at the same time, to
be remarked that this simpler form, equally with the
other, refers to past time. — There is another class of lin
guistic facts which point in the same direction. In all
the languages usuaRy studied in which past and future
tenses exist, these tense-forms are produced by the help
of subsidiary particles, often words of recognisable mean
ing, affixed to the root, while the present tense is marked
simply by the verbal stem and a personal affix, the other
1 Thus askun = akunavam, I made ; asbat = agarbayam, I took ; atur
= abavam, I was ; aqabbi = athaham, I said, etc.
2 Says Hincks (Jour. Sac. Lit., July 1855, p. 383): 'The aorist or
simple preterite approximates in form to the Hebrew tense which is
commonly called the future, but by some grammarians the present or the
aorist ; to the Syriac tense which is called by Jahn the second aorist, .
and to the Arabic tense which De Sacy calls the conditional aorist. In.
the inscriptions of the Assyrian and Babylonian kings, it is by far the
most common tense, occurring most probably as frequently as all the other
tenses taken together.'
3 By Hincks, in Jour. Asiatic Soc, ii., pp. 485 f. (new series), and Sayce,
Ass. Grammar, pp. 61 f. This tense these scholars call Permansive. Cf.
Menant, Grammaire Assyrienne, p. 140 ; Schrader, Die ass.-bab. Keilin
schriften, p. 266. Oppert continues, in the second edition of his grammar,
to deny the existence of the first form in Assyrian, regarding the verbs
assigned by Hincks and others to this form as participles or infinitives.

The Tenses of the Hebrew. Verb. 349
tenses contain in addition an auxiliary word, more or
less closely agglutinated to or combined with the stem.
Examples are furnished by the Hamitic, the Indo-
European, and the Turanian tongues. In the old
Egyptian, while the present tense is formed by annexing
the subject to the verbal root, the imperfect and perfect
are usuaRy made out by the use of the abstract auxiliary
verbs au and an, and the future for the most part by
placing the preposition er, to, after the auxiliary verb and
before the root (cf. I am to go = I shall go).1 Again, among
Indo-European philologers it seems agreed that the in
flexional past and future tense-forms in the languages
with which they have to do include in every case, not
only the personal ending, but also a special tense-element
derived usually from an auxiliary verb. Thus the syl
lables bam and bo of the Latin imperfect and future are
traceable to the substantive verb fui, fore, while the s of
the Sanscrit and Greek aorist is equally to be referred to
the other substantive verb whose root is as or es.2 So
also the d of the Enghsh past tense is traceable to the
auxiliary did, and the characteristic erai of the French
future to the er of the infinitive and the auxiliary ai, have
(aimerai = aimer ai, lit. have to love).3 In languages
of the Turanian family the same analogy stiR more
obviously prevails. There, in order to impress upon the
Toots the idea of tense, as weR as other modifications,
there are added to them auxiliary words and particles,
and it is to the composite terms thus produced that
the personal designations are affixed.4 Now, while alive
1 See Birch, in Bunsen's Egypt (Eng. Tr.), vol. v., pp. 656 ff. ; cf.
Brugsch, Grammaire hieroglyphique, pp. 36 ff.
2 See Bopp, Vergleichende Grammatik, vol. ii., pp. 369, 402, 423.
3 Cf. Muller, Science of Language, i., pp. 266 f. ; Whitney, On Lan
guage, pp. 117 ff. ; Sayce, Principles of Comparative Philology, p. 88.
4 See Miiller, op. cit., i., pp. 355 f.

350 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
to the peril attending analogical reasoning where languages
belong to different families and show fundamental diver
sities of structure, I cannot consider it too hazardous to
presume that, had the distinction between the first and
second verbal forms in Hebrew been a tense-distinc
tion, this would have been unambiguously stamped upon
the forms themselves. But in these there is nothing that
corresponds to the auxiliary tense-words or particles
which are found in the languages referred to, and such
modifications as the root undergoes point to some other
element than that of time. Some, indeed, have supposed
that the preformative of the third person of the second
form is a fragment of the verb njn, and hence that the
form is originally and properly a future tense1 (?t3^=
?bp njn = is to kill). But this is a view which has found
no acceptance and cannot be sustained. Others, again,
have found an indication of difference of time in the
different relative positions of the root-word and the per
sonal designation in the two forms. In the first, the
personal signs are appended after the root, indicating, it is
supposed, that the -action is past and accomplished ; in the
second, these personal signs come before the root, indicat
ing, on the contrary, that the action is stiR to take place,
and is only something wished, intended, wiRed, contem
plated, or thought of:2 But the ascribing of such im
portance to the collocation of the two parts .of the verb is,
so far as I know, quite without support in Hebrew or
1 Raumer, Sprachwissenschaftlkhe Abhandlungen, p. 470 ; cf. Merx,
Grammatica Syriaca, p. 199.
2 See Ewald, LB., sec. 137 ; Nordheimer, Heb. Grammar, i., p. 105;
Steinthal, Charakteristik, p. 260 ; Dillmann, JSthiop. Gram. p. 141 : 
'Im lezteren Fall wird die Handlung als etwas der Person noch bevor-
stehehdes, im ersteren als etwas von ihr schon zuriikgelegtes ausgesagt.'
Olshausen's explanation, at least of the second, is substantially the same.
LB., p. 454.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 351
Shemitic grammar, while assuredly it is altogether opposed
to ordinary hnguistic analogy. There may be a difference
of signification between I said and said I, between j'aimerai
and aimerai-je, but certainly it is not a difference of tense.1
A distinguished German philologer2 has drawn out a scheme
marking the different stages by which the verbs of the
Indo-European family have been developed from the
original undetermined root-words till they attained the
completeness of apparatus for the indication of temporal
and modal relations which is exhibited, e.g., in Greek or in
German. In this scheme -the Hebrew verb would occupy
the third stage, that is, the period in which ' forms with
the power of predication are constructed by the combina
tion of nominal roots with personal pronouns as marks
of the subject.' The period of temporal augments and
of auxiliary words marking time is subsequent to this.
These various :analogies assuredly support the doctrine
that the distinction between the two tense-forms of the
Hebrew verb is not one significant of a difference of time.
This conclusion, perilous if it rested merely on analogy,
becomes fuRy warranted when we turn to another order of
facts. In certain of the Shemitic tongues, and among
these in Hebrew itself, forms for the expression of time-
relations have actually been developed ; but these, in every
case, are superadded to the two forms which are presently
in question. In Assyrian, e.g., according to Sayce,3 ' the
imperfect split itself into two forms, one shorter (as iscun,
he made) and one longer (as isaccin, he makes), which
came to be used with a real distinction of meaning. . . .
The longer and more primitive forms of the present
(isaccinu) came further to be used with a future force ;
1 Cf. Koch, der semitische Infinitiv, p. 9.
2 Curtius, Zur Chronologie der indogermanischen Sprachforschung.
3 Sayce, Elementary Ass. Grammar, p. 65.

35 2 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
and the longer and more primitive form of the aorist
(iscunu), from its being adopted after words like " when "
or " who,'' came to have generally a perfect or pluperfect
sense.' A corresponding phenomenon is presented by the
Ethiopic, in which ' the old imperfect of the form jenger
has become obsolete as a form for simple narrative, i.e.,
as an imperfect, and is in this use replaced by a new for
mation with a inserted after the first letter of the root,
jenager.'1 In the Ethiopic also subsidiary tense-forma
tions have been produced by the aid of auxiliary words.2
The inflected participles of the Aramaean dialects, which
furnish true tense-forms, presenft another example per
tinent to our present purpose.3 In these dialects also as
weR as in Hebrew itseR we find the paraRel of what has
just been referred to as occurring in Ethiopic, the indication
of time by auxiliary words. In Aramaean, e.g., and in the
later Hebrew, a future tense is formed by substituting
? for the ordinary preformative in the second verbal
form. In the latter also the word Try?, ready, with
the infinitive is used to define the future, and irn with
the participle determines the past.4 Even in Old Testa
ment Hebrew similar circumlocutory forms for the ex
pression of time proper are found. Thus, we have an
unambiguous past in the phrase, Gen. xxiv. 62, 'Isaac
came,' Nta» sa ; and in Josh. h. 5, ' The gate was about
1 Schrader, Die ass.-bab. Keilinschriften, p. 267. See Dillmann,
JSthiop. Grammatik, p. 143 ; Hupfeld, Exercitationes JEthiop\cce, p. 22.
2 Dillmann, op. cit., p. 136.
8 See Cowper's Syriac Grammar, p. 40 ; Steinthal, Charakteristik, p.
268 ; Merx, Grammatica Syriaca, pp. 168 f., 246 f.
4 See e.g. "[Thiemann, Institutiones ling. Sam., pp. 178-180 ; Geiger, LB.
der Mischnah, p. 39 ; Dietrich, Abhandlungen, pp. 105-188 f. ; other
words besides ITIJ? are employed with the same meaning as pat, tPUp,
DIDVT'K ('Tu/tts). Something similar is found in Assyrian and Arabic.
' Lu is prefixed to verbs to denote past time (like kad in Arabic). ' — Sayce,
Ass. Grammar, p. 170.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 353
to be shut,' "ifaDp . . . \'T1, we have an equally unam
biguous future.1 The rise of these various derivative and
circumlocutory verbal forms for the expression of time-
relations, in Hebrew as well as in other Shemitic lan
guages, makes it sufficiently plain that in the simple
forms ?t?£ and ?bj£ no proper tense significance resides.
4. FinaRy, the theory in question is unsupported by the
usage of the language. The previous considerations pre
sent strong presumptions, aR adverse to the doctrine that
these verbal forms are tenses ; that now before us is the
conclusive argument. I have to show by the citation
of passages that, so far as the relations of time are con
cerned, the two forms are used interchangeably ; and that
the actual facts may be understood at a glance by the
mere English reader, I shaR distinguish the one from
the other by printing the second or so-called imperfect
in italics. (1.) I shaR bring together passages where in the same
expression, and without perceptible difference in point of
temporal relation, different forms are used. — Gen. xvi. 8,
Whence comest thou? xiii. 7, whence came ye? compared
with Josh. ix. 8, whence come ye ? (so also Judg.
xvii. 9, xix. 17; 2 Sam. i. 3, and elsewhere). Again,
Gen. xliii. 22, We know not (so Isa. xxix. 12; Job
xxxii. 22), compared with 1 Kings iii. 7, I know not (so
Eccl. xi. 2 ; Job viii. 9, etc.). Again, Isa. i. 1 2, who hath
required . . . ? compared with 1 Chron. xxi. 3, wherefore
doth my lord require ? and Job ii. 3, wherein I was born,
compared with Jer. xx. 14, wherein I was born. See also
2 Sam. xvi. 10 ; 1 Kings i. 6 ; Gen. xxiv. 14, compared
with Exod. v. 15. In aR these cases, whatever may be
the diversity of significance in the two forms, it can hardly
be supposed to relate to time.
1 See Ewald, LB., sec. 136, h.
Z

354 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
(2.) The passages are very numerous in which in the
same sentence and in relation to the same event or
action the forms are interchanged. A few of these
foRow : — Isa. xxvi. 6, Israel shall blossom and bud ; Ps.
lxv. 14, The pastures are clothed with flocks, the valleys
also are covered over with corn ; Isa. ix. 6, Unto us a
child is born, unto us a son is given ; Amos ix. 3, I will
search and take them out thence; Gen. hi. 22, Lest he
put forth his hand, and take; Num. xi. 22, Shall the
flocks and herds be slain for them and suffice; Deut.
vi. 12, If ye hearken . . . and keep, and do; viii. 1,
That ye may live and multiply . . . ; Exod. xxxvi. 3 7,
38, And he made . . . and he overlaid. See also Ps.
xi. 2, vii. 7, lxxvii. 20;- Prov. vi. 8, xi. 7, xiv. 1 8 ;
Isa. v. 12.1
(3.) Other passages show each of the forms applied
equally in all temporal relations. That the first is used
of past events needs not be shown. But it is also in
innumerable instances applied to present and existing
facts. Num. xi. 5, We remember; Ps. xxxviii. 15, I
hope ; Zech. <vi. 6, The white go forth . . . and the
grisled go forth ; Gen. ix. 11,1 estabhsh my covenant
(cf. ver. 9); Ps. cii. 16, The wind passeth over it; Ps.
i. 1, walketh . . . standeth . . . sitteth; Gen. xxxb. 10, I
am not worthy, . . . etc. So also is the same form applied
to what' appears to us as future time. Exod. iii. 20, I
wiR stretch; ver. 21, I wiR give; ver. 22, shaR borrow
. . . shaR put . . . shall spoil; 1 Sam. ii. 16, I will
take ; Isa. lxiv., wouldst rend . . . wouldst come down
. . . might flow down. It may in like manner be shown
that the second form is in the actual use of the language
unconfined to any definite temporal relation. In regard
1 Stuart, Heb. Grammar, p. 204 : ' The Prseter and Future forms can be
used in a great many cases to express the same idea.'

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 355
to present and future time this is universally recognised,
and the foRowing may suffice as examples.1 Present —
Gen. xxii. 14, It is said to this day; 1 Sam. xvii. 8,
Why are ye come out ; 2 Sam. ii. 8, Do show . . .
Future — Exod. ix. 5, To-morrow the Lord shall do;
Deut. xviii. 18, I will raise. But it is used not
less freely in regard to past time. When joined with
ivaw conversive, its use in this reference is patent on
every page of the Old Testament. And without this
particle, and in many various connections, it also occurs
in the same application. E.g., Gen. ii. 10, Thence
it was parted ; Exod. xv. 1, Then sang Moses ; Job
xxxvii., Then wast thou bom; Judg. ii. 1, I brought
you up. . . . So Job hi. 3 ; Ps. xviii. 7 ; 2 Kings iii. 2 5 ;
Ps. cvii. 6.
From this array of passages, which might be inde
finitely lengthened, it must be apparent that by these
verbal forms in the Hebrew the time of the action is not
indicated as by the past and future, or by any other two
of the tenses of the verb in the Indo-European lan
guages. A few texts are indeed appealed to in support
of the opposite doctrine.2 But the appeal is itself a
sufficient disproof. It would be absurd in the case of
Greek or of Enghsh to bring forward four or five
sentences out of a large book as clear and unquestion
able cases in which the past tense denotes past time,
and the future tense future time. It is evident that if
1 Cf. Dietrich, op. cit., p. 120 : 'Auf alien puncten seines Gebrauchs
durchwandert das sogenannte Futur je nach dem Zusammenhang alle
unsere speciellen Zeiten.' P. 115: ' In diesem ganzem Gebrauche ist die
Form nicht ein Prsesens, sondern ein Omni tempore. '
° Gen. xvi. 8 ; Ex. x. 14 ; Deut. xxxii. 21 ; 1 Kings ii. 38 ; Isa.
xlvi. 4, 11 ; Amos v. 11 ; Nah. i. 1-2 ; Ps. xxix. 10 ; Eccl. i. 9. See
Gesenius' Grammar by Roediger, p. 183 (Eng. Tr.) ; cf. Bbttcher's LB.,
sec. 945.

356 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
the thousands of other cases left the matter doubtful,
the half-dozen would not remove the doubt.1 The ques
tion as to the right interpretation of the texts adduced
will meet us by and by.
I have thus attempted to show that the two verbal
forms in question do not indicate the time of the act,
and are therefore in no proper sense tenses.2 The other
theory, that of Ewald and his foRowers, which is that
they denote, not the time, but the temporal character of
the action, must now also be weighed.
Now, some of the objections which have been already
urged against the tense-theory may, and that with even
greater force, be urged against this. EquaRy with the
former this is a doctrine which is without foothold in
Shemitic philology. It is an importation from the
1 Of course, it is impossible for observant men to ignore the common
facts of the Hebrew language, and the way in which the supporters of the
tense-theory often represent their own doctrine may be regarded as their
own sufficient refutation. Thus Schroder, Institutiones, p. 256, says of the
use of the tenses : . . . ' qui prsecipue pendet ex ipso sermonis contextu
atque dispositione. ' Stuart, as has just been shown, says that the two
forms are in many cases equivalent, and claims only for the Prater that it
is its predominant use to express past time, and for the Future its pre
dominant use to express future time (Heb. Grammar, p. 204). Gesenius
employs similar language (Lehrgebaude, p. 760). It must, indeed, occur
to every reader of Hebrew grammars of the older school that a large
portion of their authors' care and pains is taken up in explaining that the
tenses are used to denote other times than those properly belonging to
them, and in attempting to define the limits of this irregularity. One
of these authors himself remarks of the matter : . . . ' anomalia ipsa
ferme regula facta est, et passim fictae hae anomalise ut tot elegantiee aut
flosculi linguse Hebraae a quibu'sdam reputatae sint.' — Robertson, Gram-
mat. Heb., p. 239.
2 I am happy to strengthen this result by such statements of opinion
as the following. Dr. Wright says (Arabic Grammar, i., p. 54, 2d ed.) :
' A Semitic perfect or imperfect has, in and of itself, no reference to the
temporal relations of the speaker (thinker or writer) and of other actions
which are brought into juxtaposition with it. It is precisely these rela
tions which determine in what sphere of time (past, present, or future)

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 357
grammar of the Indo-European languages, and especially
from the Greek. ' The Greek tenses express differences,
in regard to the time at which the action begins, by the
addition of the element <r to mark the future, and by
prefixing e to mark past time ; and they express differ
ences in regard to the time occupied by the act, by re
duplicating or otherwise strengthening the root, and so
marking the continuous action or state.' J Thus, through
means of the elaborate mechanism of the Greek verb,
provision is made for the expression both of ' the
order of time ' and ' the kind of time ; ' and as it is
plain that no provision is made in the Hebrew for the
expression of the former idea, ij is assumed that the
two contrasted forms which run through aR the conju
gations of the verb must relate to the latter.2 But it
a Semitic perfect or imperfect lies, and by which of our tenses it is to be
expressed — whether by our past, perfect, pluperfect, or future-perfect,
by our present, imperfect, or future. The Arabian grammarians them
selves have not, however, succeeded in keeping this important point
distinctly in view, but have given an undue importance to the idea of
time.' See also Donaldson, Maskil, p. 19 : . . . 'nor has it (the Hebrew
language), strictly speaking, any differences of tense.' Uhlemann,
Institutiones Linguae Samaritance, p. 164: ' Utroque per se non tarn
certum tempus definitur, quam, modo ne prior ratio mutetur, utrumque
omnibus omnino Temporibus adaptari potest.' Sayce, Principles, p. 90 :
' The so-called future or imperfect of the Semitic languages is not a tense
in the Aryan acceptation of the word. It does not express time at
all, merely relation. '
1 Donaldson, Maskil, p. 23. Varro (de lingua latina, viii., p. 152,
ix., p. 172), as Gesenius remarks, 'fuhrt die Tempora der lateinischen.
sprache auf zwey Klassen zuriick, deren eine die noch nicht geschehene
oder angefangene Handlung bezeichnete (Futurum, Prcesens, Imper-
fectum), die andere die vollendete Handlung (Prceteritum, Prcesens
exadum, Futurum exadum). Nicht unpassend macht hiernach Jahn
(Gram. ling, hebr., s. 211, ed. iii.) die Bemerkung, dass die Hebriier
fiir jede der augefuhrten Klassen eine Formhatten,' etc. Lehrgebaude,
p. 760.
3 Ewald (LB. sec. 134), more suo, lays down his doctrine as a thing
evident in its own light, though referring to analogies in the Indo-

358 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
is evidently an illegitimate procedure thus to take the
principles underlying the phenomena of one family of
languages, and apply them off-hand to the explanation of
the phenomena of another family. It ought first to be
shown that these principles are native in the family,
and have their roots in its various sections. In the
case before us, in the phenomena themselves there is
presented a note of warning in regard to this off-hand
transference. In the Sanscrit and other Indo-European
tongues x the mark of the past tense lies in the temporal
augment. In form this resembles the preformative of the
second tense in Hebrew ; but in this language no gram
marian has ever ventured to bring the preformative into
analogy with the augment, simply because the second has
European and other non-Shemitic tongues. Bottcher (LB. sec. 589)
declares, in regard to his predecessor's distinction, in its application to
the two forms, of 'completed and uncompleted,' that it is 'iiberhaupt
unsemitisch ; ' while, at the same time, in support of his own modification
of the doctrine, his appeal is mainly to the analogies of the Indo-
European tongues. He believes, indeed, that his view is commended
(1) by the structure of the forms — the one, inasmuch as it has the
personal signs suffixed to the root, denoting that the act is completed and
past ; the other, inasmuch as it has them prefixed, denoting that the act
is viewed in its beginning — or as coming into being — evidently a very
precarious ground (on which see above, p. 350) ; and (2) by the text, 1
Kings vi. 1, as compared with 2 Chron. iii. 1, alleging that ps^ in the
former is strictly synonymous with ftSiJ? ?!! »1 in the other. (In our
version, the former of these phrases is rendered ' and he began to build ; '
and Gesenius in the Thesaurus remarks of it, ' semel ut videtur, de aedium
fundatione.') But, besides the objection that it is illegitimate to found
a wide theory on a single text, it is merely an assumption that the one
phrase here is identical in meaning with the other. There is quite as
much warrant for saying that in 1 Kings vi. 9 p»l is equivalent to
in^l, Donaldson (Maskil le-Sopher, p. 23) professedly applies the
principles of the Greek to the explanation of the Hebrew language in this
and in other points.
1 Cf. Bopp, Vergleichende Gram., ii., pp. 415 f.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 359
generally been regarded as more aRied to the future or
the present than to the past.
When the doctrine or question is thus destitute of
secure footing in Shemitic philology, it obviously requires
to be shown by a fuR and careful induction of passages
that it is conformed to and illustrative of the usage of
the language. And, no doubt, its advocates present an
array of texts meant to serve in this capacity ; but, at
the same time, the demonstrative value of the induction
is greatly diminished by the uncertainty and elasticity
of the doctrine itself. For (1), while discarding the
older and proper tense-theory, the later school of Hebrew
grammarians introduce a secondary temporal reference as
part of their own doctrine, and have recourse to this
reference wherever it seems applicable in the explana
tion of passages, while for those passages for which it
appears unsuitable they faR back upon their ground-
principle in one or other of its forms, — the distinction
between the finished and the unfinished, or the initial
and the accomplished, or the transient and the con
tinuous. Thus, on the one hand, such passages as
those aReged by Gesenius in token of the true tense-
power of the forms are explained also as indicating past
and future time by Ewald, simply with the appended
explanation that the past reference depends upon the
idea of the completed, and the future upon that of the
not yet completed. On the other hand, passages which
plainly exclude this temporal reference, as e.g. 0N3 £ND
(Gen. xvi. 8) compared with Nhri |?K» (Josh. ix. 8), are
explained by the contrast between action accomplished
and action initial.1 Then (2) the range of time-rela
tions aRotted to the two forms respectively by Ewald
and his foRowers is very wide, quite as much so as
1 See Ewald, LB., sec. 136, a.

360 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
those assigned to them by Gesenius or any of the earher
grammarians ; and to a large extent they cover and over
lap each other. Thus in Bottcher stands the following
enumeration : —
The perfect, i.e., the first form, denotes —
A. The accomphshed within a definite sphere of time,
including —
I. The accomplished in the present.
(a.) ' Perf. praesens.'
(&.) 'Peri, prasteritum.'
II. The accomplished in the past, or ' Perf. plusquam-
perfecti.' (c.) 'Plqmpf. Indicat.'
(d.) 'Plqmpf. Conjunct.'
III. The accomphshed in the future.
(e.) ' Perf. futuri exacti.'
(/) ' Perf. affirmativum,' or ' propheticum.'
(g.) 'Perf. precativum.'
B. The accomplished without a definite time-sphere,
expressed by us usuaRy as the present.
(1.) ' Perf. relativum.'
(2.) ' Perf. repentinum.'
(3.) ' Perf. empiricum.'
(4.) ' Perf. effectivum.'
C. A special class, including —
(1.) Perfect of condition (stative).
(2.) Perfect of spiritual action, in both of which we
use the present.
The fiens or imperfect, i.e. the second form, denotes
the beginning or initiation of an action or occurrence,
and that —
A. Within a definite time-sphere, as
I. The occurring in the present, ' Fiens prsesens ; ' dis
tinguished into

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 361
(a.) That which happens once.
(b.) That which happens often.
II. The occurring in the future, ' Fiens futurum.'
(c.) ' Futur. Indicat.'
(d.) ' Prsesens Conjunct.'
(e.) Fiens conditionale.
III. The occurring in the past.
(/.) Repeated acts.
(g.) Single acts.
(h.) Miscellaneous. (a.) With particle denoting time.
(yS.) Where a past occurrence is spoken of as
questionable, possible, necessary.
(7.) When a past occurrence is, represented as
the expected or reahsed consequence of
something already mentioned.
(S.) When something is viewed as stiR im
pending at a past time, whether in an
unconditional or a conditional manner.
B. Without definite time -sphere, where the present
is employed by us.
(a.) ' Fiens relativum.'
(b.) 'Fiens solitum.'
(c.) ' Fiens licitum, debitum.'
To this enumeration, which deserves great praise for
its elaborate and comprehensive character, the author
appends the remarks that under the uses ascribed to
the perfect, numbers a, c, d, and e do not admit the
fiens, implying that all the other uses may ; while of
those ascribed to the fiens, numbers a, b, d, e, and a
part of h do not admit the perfect, implying that in aR
the other uses noted the forms are interchangeable. It
is plain from this statement that the attempt on the
part of the newer school of grammarians to re-introduce

362 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
the tense-idea in another way into the explanation of
these forms and to mark off their uses into definite
time-spheres has again proved a failure ; while in thus
borrowing from their predecessors, and availing them
selves of an idea acknowledged to be not native to the
forms, they seem to proclaim the insufficiency of their
own theory.
Setting aside the borrowed elements in this doctrine, I
confine myself to the consideration of one point in which
the idea proper to the theory has been brought into
prominence and turned to account in the work of inter
pretation. — It is a familiar fact that introductory par
ticles, such as TN, DnD, tnoa, rs, mb, ma, DWO, etc., are
often found, when past time is referred to, associated
with a verb in the second form ; and the explanation
given by Ewald, Bottcher, and Mr. Driver, is that the
action thus introduced is looked at as incipient or grow
ing.1 Thus Exod. xv. 1, Then sang Moses ('proceeded,
began to sing,' Driver). Deut. iv. 41, Then Moses severed,
etc., etc. So also with D^t? or D'?.^3, Gen. ii. 5, Before it
grew; xix. 4, Before they lay down, etc., etc. So with ^,
1 Kings xxi. 6, When I spake ; Gen. xlvii. 17, . . . that
his father laid ; and DBto, Gen. ii. 1 0, Thence it was parted.
Looking at such passages, it must be confessed that, in
regard to some of them particularly, the idea which these
writers find in them seems somewhat unnatural and forced.2
Even with this feeling, however, we should be ready to
1 Ewald, LB., sec. 136 ; Bottcher, LB., sec. 942 ; Driver, Heb.
Tenses, sec. 21.
2 Mr. Driver owns the difficulty in regard to Gen. xlviii. 17 ; see op.
cit., p. 30. Cf. Dietrich, Abhandlungen, p. 100, who says of Ewald's
explanation of the Tt»>"i f&S of Exod. xv. 1 : ' Mir doch das Unvollendet-
* T T
sein ganzlich aufgehbrt hat, wie der Beisatz damals im Gegensatz zu
einer entfernteren Gegenwart ausdriicklich hervorhebt.'

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 363
admit that the explanation is at least strongly commended,
were the usage to which it is applied a uniform one. Un
fortunately, however, it is not so. These particles are all
of them occasionally, and some of them frequently, fol
lowed by the first form. Thus with tx, Gen. iv. 26, Then
began men . . .; Exod. iv. 26, Then she said; xv. 15,
Then the dukes of Edom shall be amazed ; 1 Kings xxii.
50, Then said Ahaziah . . . etc., etc. One is unable to
understand why, if incipiency be the idea contained in the
second form, and if such a particle as TK is naturally
suggestive of this idea, such passages as these should show
the first form. Especially, as it seems to me, should
the second have been used in Gen. iv. 26 and Exod.
xv. 15, R current explanations are correct. In regard to
B^B the facts are similar. Gen. xxiv. 15, Before he had
done . . . Contrast this with ver. 45, Before I had done.
In 1 Sam. iii. 7 this particle is joined to both forms ;
see also Ps. xc. 2 ; Prov. vii. 25. Again, ^ hkewise not
unseldom takes the first ; as Gen. vi. 1 ; Judg. ii. 18;
Ps. xxxii. 3 ; Job vi. 13 ; Ezek. iii. 19. Now, if these
introductory particles, which are said just in virtue of
their bringing the action upon the scene to impart to the
verb the idea of incipiency or incompleteness, do not
always exercise this power, have we sufficient reason to
think that they exercise it at aR ? If a theory fails to
meet aR the data, is it not thereby disproved ?
Having thus, as simply and briefly as possible, endea
voured to demonstrate the unsatisfactory character of the
theories hitherto held in regard to the so-called tenses of
the Hebrew language, I come to the much more arduous
task of suggesting and trying to estabhsh another
doctrine. The argument by no means requires me to
maintain that there is no element whatever of truth in
the views already disposed of. On the contrary, from

364 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
the advocates of the latter doctrine I accept one most
important tenet, viz., that that on which 'these verbal
forms depend is not an objective relation but a subjective
view.1 It is obvious that such ideas as incipiency and
completeness may be predicated of every act, and that it
must depend upon the writer or the speaker 'whether, in
setting forth an action, he represent it as beginning or as
finished, as transient or as going on ; and that the use of the
forms is determined simply by the feeling of the speaker,
and the hght in which he desires to place the action of
which he speaks, is a significant and pregnant finding.
Like aR important discoveries, it is, when once it has been
wrung out of the confusion and mist of erroneous tradi
tion, a very obvious one, written on the very front of
ordinary Hebrew style, evinced by the constant and rapid.
interchange of the two forms, and proved by the very
controversies which have arisen among grammarians in
regard to them, and the insuperable difficulty which has
been experienced in seeking for the objective fact or law ,
by which their use may be supposed to be determined.
The question now arises, — Is the subjective view im
posed upon these verbal forms by Ewald and others, viz.,
that they represent the completeness or the incipiency
and growth of the act as it appears to the speaker, the
true view, or is there any other possible and more
probable doctrine ? There are two sources whence infor
mation is to be sought, — the one the character and con
struction of the forms themselves as estimated by the
analogy of the Hebrew and of other Shemitic tongues ; the
other, the usage of the writers of the Hebrew Scriptures.
1 This is acknowledged, e.g., by Mr. Driver, though somewhat in
distinctly. See Heb. Tenses, pp. vii, 37, 107 f. Cf. Men, Gram.
Syriaca, p. 196 : ' TJsus utriusque temporis igitur de ratione qua res
cogitatuf pendet, nee de ratione qua re vera se habet.'

•The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 365
If the conclusion drawn from the former source is found
coincident with that derived from the latter, the evidence
is strong that it is based on truth.
I. Structure of the Forms. — I have already had
occasion to call attention to the fact that the verbs in
Hebrew stand at a lower stage in point of development
than those in the Indo-European tongues, and at a less
remove from the primitive undetermined roots out of
which the language has grown. I do not enter into the
dispute which divides philologers, whether the noun or
the verb was first formed; it is certain that, notwith
standing the prevalence of the idea that all words in
Hebrew came from verbal roots, the testimony borne by
this and the other Shemitic languages is 'clearly in
favour of the priority of the noun. It is indeed now
regarded as an ascertained truth by many grammarians,
that in its simpler uninflected form, the Shemitic verb
is reaRy nothing else than a nominal or adjectival term
of attribution.1 As indications of the priority of the
noun to the verb, the foRowing facts may be here men
tioned. (1.) A complete sentence may be formed without
1 See e.g. Lee, Heb. Grammar, pp. 83, 181 ; id. in Jour. Sac. Lit., July
1850, p. 195. Lee gives the following from Kimchi : ' The noun precedes
the verb, for the verb proceeds from the noun ; and they say that the noun
is like the body, the subject of accident, but that the verb is the accident
only. ' From the Arabian grammarian Ibn ul Fiham he quotes : ' The
noun itself will without any verb carry with it a complete idea ; and this
shows that the verb is a branch of the noun and is sustained by it. In
another respect, the verbs are, according to the most accurate of our
writers, derived from the masdars, which are nouns, and these as so
derived are branches of them,.' See also Koch, Der sero. Infinitiv, p. 5 ;
Philippi, Stat. Const., p. 169, who says : 'Es lasst sich nachweisen, dass
auch in Semitischen, wie wir das eben vom Turanischen behaupteten, das
Verbum vom Nomen ausgegangen ist, dass es also im Semitischen zunachst
eine Periode gegeben haben muss, wo nur Nomina existirten.' Olshausen,
LB., p. 22; Merx, Gram. Syriaca, p. 197 ; Sayce, Principles, p. 80 ;
Whitney, On Language, p. 303.

366 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
a verb. The copula of the Indo-European languages is
awanting, nor is it needed in order to a complete statement.
Thus the recognised verbal forms are not essential to
predication. See e.g. Gen. xxix. 7, xiii. 27.1 (2.) The
verbal forms in Hebrew are almost, without exception,
either absolutely identical with nominal forms, or differ
from them only in vocalisation.2 (3.) The verbal forms
share with nouns in theh ordinary inflections. Thus the
third person of the first form has a feminine ending in
a or at after the ordinary analogy.3 The same person in
both forms takes a plural, ending in un or u, the ordinary
plural ending of nouns in Arabic, traces of which exist
in Hebrew also.4 In like manner the he local of nouns
is paraReled in form and significance by the he paragogic
of verbs.6 (4.) These forms often interchange with the
infinitive, another fact which vouches for their nominal
character. See e.g. Ps. xxxii. 9 ; Isa. i. 28 ; Job xv. 35 ;
2 Sam. ii. 18 ; Jer. vi. 11, etc. Other considerations
pointing in the same direction might be adduced,6 but
these appear sufficient to demonstrate, in Dietrich's words,
' that the distinction between noun and verb in Hebrew
formed no great or impassable chasm.'
Assuming, therefore, that the verbal forms in question
are primarily nouns, and retain in a recognisable degree
their nominal character, I proceed to inquire if the
analogies of the language yield us any clue to their
' See Ewald, LB., sec. 297 ; Dietrich, Abhand., p. 106.
2 See Bottcher, LB., sec. 551.
3 The ending at is seen in DPTN, Deut. xxxii. 6, and that it is the
original form is proved by the analogy of the Arabic, iEthiopic, and
Aramaean, as well as by other considerations ; cf. Wright's Arab. Gram
mar, i., p. 60.
* See Bottcher, LB., sec. 672. 6 See below, p. 378.
6 I shall have occasion immediately to speak of the article as accom
panying one of these verbal forms.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 367
native significance. In regard to the first form, it is
evident that it is directly derived from a verbal or par
ticipial noun.1 Thus we have the forms ?BPT, 7t?Pt, ptof), of
which the last two form the active participles Kai of verbs
med. H. and med. 0., and are used at the same time
without change as the so-caRed perfect tense. The first,
though it does not occur as a participle,2 is common as a
verbal noun, and is employed, like the others, with proper1
verbal power, with no other change than the shortening
of the second vowel. Thus D3n means wise, and nb?B> D3n
means, Solomon is wise. In the Niphal conjugation also
the participle is reproduced with only a vowel-sharpening
in the first tense form. When the subject of the verb
is, a person speaking or spoken to, i.e. is a pronoun of the
first or second person, then it is appended to the par
ticipial noun in a form somewhat shortened as compared
with that worn when separate. The various suffixes by
which this tense of the verb is declined can all be satis
factorily accounted for by reference to the pronominal
roots found in Hebrew itself, and in the cognate dialects.
If it were needful to confirm the participial origin of the
first form, corroboration would be found in the way in
which the participle or other verbal noun is often used in
juxtaposition with a subject and with a proper verbal
1 Cf. Lee, Heb. Grammar, p. 190, n. ; Donaldson, Maskil, p. 19 ;
Olshausen, LB., p. 527 ; Ewald, LB., sec. 149 ; Philippi, Stat. Const.,
p. 168, n. : ' Wenn jetzt im hebraischen Verbum der zweite Vokal, wenn
er a, kurz geblieben ist, wahrend er im Nomen lang erscheint, so ist das
nur eine spatere Differenzirung der beiden urspriinglich identischen For-
men.' Sayce, Principles, p. 90 : 'The other so-called Semitic tense (i.e.
our first) is nothing else than the ' participle, the nomen agentis, from
which the third person singular masculine can still be only artificially
distinguished. '
2 In Hebrew the active part. Kai has lost the a sound, but it appears in
the cognate dialects. Thus in Aramaean we have pup. in Arabic katibun,
in Assyrian sacinu.

368 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
power. Thus Judg. xvii. 9, '•als ^n, I go ; iv. 4, ntta's?- nti,
she judged; Jer. xxi. 25, "vfa* nm, thou fearest.1 Now,
this fact that the root-word of the first form is the par
ticiple or verbal noun {nomen agentis) helps us to form
an idea of the essential significance of this form. It is
agreed that the so-called participles in the Shemitic
tongues have no relation to time, and their right to be
classed with verbs is seriously questioned. ' The fact is,'
says Lee, ' these are nothing more than attributives, into
the etymology of which nothing having the least possible
connection with tense has ever entered ; ' 2 and it may be
shown that in actual use they run through the whole
extent of the time - sphere, past, present, and future.3
They express the action or state which the word expresses
as the attribute of the person or thing spoken of. By
juxtaposition the one is linked on to the other, and shown
to belong to it as its property or characteristic. The
verbal is paraRel to the nominal or adjectival attribution.
Both are cases of construction by apposition, and the
circumstance that in the one a quahty, in the other an
activity, is apposed makes no difference in the nature of
the affirmation. The apposed activity is not represented
as an energy which the subject puts forth, but as a thing
which marks what he is, which forms an element in lis
1 In the Aramaean dialects verbs are regularly formed by the method
above indicated, the combining of participles with the personal pronouns.
See Merx, Grammat. Syr., pp. 168 f., 246 f. ; Winer, Chald. Grammar,
sec. 13. Cf. Ewald, LB., sec. 200. In these dialects we see the process
of verb-making, so to speak, actually going forward. Dillmann, JElhiop.
Grammar, p. 141, remarks:'. . . 'so konnte das Semitische die Person-
bildung zugleich als Mittel zur Zeitbildung verwenden.' In Jer. xxii. 23
are three verbs which seem to be formed after the Aramaean manner, by
suffixing the second person of the pronoun to participles. See Lee, Heb.
Grammar, p. 214. By others, however, the words are differently ex
plained. See Graf, ad loc.
2 Lee, Heb. Grammar, p. 206. 3 See Bottcher, LB., sec. 997.

The Tenses of the Hebreiv Verb. 369
name, and stands as a distinction of his nature. It is to
be observed that, as shown above, it is the verbs med. 0.
and med. E., i.e. verbs intransitive in their meaning, that
undergo least change in their vocalisation when the nomen
agentis is used predicatively ; while the other class, the
verbs med. A., or those of transitive meaning, sustain a
shortening or sharpening in their second vowel. It
seems not difficult to understand the ground of the
difference. A state such as the intransitive class
denotes may be more easily conceived of attributively
than an act ; such terms, therefore, are taken as they
are, and simply juxtaposited with the subject. In the
other case, a feehng of the transient, energetic nature of
the attribution has naturally led to the slight vowel-
change referred to.
Some writers have thought to gain an insight into the
significance of this verbal form as contrasted with the
other, by attaching certain ideas to the vowel-sounds
which most prevail in the two forms respectively. I
have no doubt that to the Hebrews themselves, and the
other peoples using languages of the same character, the
vocalisation of these and other words was symbolical and
suggestive. It seems questionable, however, ff we shaR
ever be able to project ourselves so thoroughly into
their modes of thought and of expression as to re
cover and define with certainty what these ideas were.
Hitherto, at least, the varying and unsatisfactory
character of the conclusions of those most profoundly
conversant with these tongues on this particular point
gives little hope of attaining to reliable results.
Probably the utmost that we can venture to say in
regard to the vocalisation of the first form is that
the broad a, e, and 0 which are found in it represent
the sense of the verb broadly and fully, in an inde-
2 a"

370 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
pendent, self-subsistent aspect, and as a really existent
thing.1 We seem to obtain somewhat more of insight into the
meaning of this form when we take note of the mode of
its composition with personal pronouns. These are suf
fixed, not prefixed. Now, according to the ordinary law
of collocation in Hebrew, exemplified, e.g., in the construc
tion by apposition and by annexion, and also in the
joining of substantives with adjectives and of verbs with
adverbs, the defined word precedes and the defining
follows.2 Hence in ,i??!?i?, n?Bj3, etc., the verbal root must
be regarded as holding the foremost place in the thought
of the speaker, as well as in the composition of the word.
It is the action as a fact which is prominent, and in it
the agent is regarded as involved. We perceive here the
difference between such verbal formations and those looser
statements in which an unattached pronoun and a verbal
noun are used. We feel that "§?• ^bK is not precisely
equivalent to ^pn, and the difference seems to me to
consist mainly in this, that in the former the emphasis
hes on the person who goes, in the latter on the fact of
his going. In the one, it is I who occupy the foreground ;
in the other, it is what I do.
I proceed to consider the structure of the second form,
of which the explanation is considerably less easy than
that of the other. One thing is obvious upon its face,
viz., its resemblance to the imperative and infinitive con-
1 See on the symbolic meaning of the vowels, Ewald, LB., sec. 149 ;
Bottcher, LB., sees. 528, 590 ; Whitney, On Language, p. 302 ; Philippi,
Stat. Const., p. 173 ; Dillmann, JEthiop. Qrammat., p. 116; Sayce, Ass.
Grammar, pp. 72, 127; id., Principles, p. 363: 'According to Bleek
(Comp. Grammar of South African Languages, ii., p. 138), the vowel
which terminates words in Ba-ntu may be either a (or e) or o. The latter
has " a passive meaning, i an active or causative, a a neutral force." '
2 See Philippi, Stat. Const., p. 3.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 371
struct. Now, these forms express the idea of the verb
in the most bald and abstract manner of which the
language is capable. Thus, e.g., in the command, Gen.
xi. 1, ' Get thee out,' and in the phrase, 1 Kings iii. 7,
' To go out and to come in,' we have the action of the
verbs set forth in an entirely indefinite and abstract way,
and as a thing of thought only, not of reality. This
doubtless should be borne in mind in attempting to
estimate the tense-form moulded upon these. The most
important question, however, relating to this form is that
regarding the meaning of the preformative. In reference
to this much uncertainty and controversy have prevailed,
and still prevail, among grammarians. The preformatives,
indeed, of the first and second persons are sufficiently
obvious, and all agree in finding in them, as in the
sufformatives of the first and second persons of the first
form, fragments of the respective personal pronouns. The
difficulty is connected with that of the third person, — the
" and n of tajr, ibtpp', itopri. I have adverted above (p. 350)
to one theory on the subject, that which finds the origin
of these letters in the verb of existence, njn, — a theory
which, so far as I am aware, has found, besides its author,
no support.1 The most obvious conception, which is also
that most generally entertained, is this, that as the first
and second persons derive their preformatives from the
corresponding personal pronouns, so also the third derives
its preformative from tan or son, the pronoun of the third
person. To this, however, there are formidable objections.2
In the first place, it is impossible to explain satisfactorily
how -the pronoun of the third person, Kin or ton, from
which we would expect n or 1, should yield the letter ^
1 Grill (Zeitsch. d. morg. Ges., xxvii., p. 433) calls this explanation
' eine hochst gezwungene Kunstelei. '
2 See Gesenius, Lehrgebaude, sec. 81.

372 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
which constitutes the preformative of the third person
masculine, and still more to explain the n of the third
person feminine. In the second place, if the explanation
were sufficient in Hebrew, it would naturally prove
sufficient also for the cognate languages. But in these
it is altogether inapplicable. Thus in Arabic and JEthiopic,
which, unlike Hebrew, not only tolerate, but have a pre-
. dilection for an initial waw, the preformative begins as
in Hebrew with jod.1 In Syriac it appears as 3, and in
Assyrian, while the separate pronouns are su and si, the
preformative is as in Hebrew.2 In the third place, the
analogy of the first form seems altogether opposed to this
supposition regarding the origin of these preformative
letters.3 The third person of the one corresponds, in its
relation to the other persons, to the third person of the
other; and if the pronoun Kin is not needed for the
definition of ?9PT, neither is it for that of ?0\>\. In the
third person the subject is expressed in its own proper
substantive form, and a pronoun therefore is not only not
required, — it seems not even admissible in the structure
of the verb. I agree, therefore, with those who hold that
1 Cf. Merx, Grammat. Syriaca, p. 199.
2 Mr. Sayce, who thinks the preformative to be of pronominal origin
(but cf. his Principles, p. 252), remarks that ' the third person of the
aorist seems to have employed a different pronoun from that in common
use among the Semitic nations. ... In the aorist the pronoun seems to be
that preserved in the JUthiopic wetu, yeti, which cannot be derived from
huwa, hiya, by dropping the first syllable, as this is the all-important one '
(Ass. Grammar, p. 61). Philippi supposes a, primitive pronominal root,
ja, as giving origin to the element in question (Zeitschrift d. morg. Ges.,
xxix., pp. 171 f.). Olshausen expresses the opinion : ' Der Ursprung der
Subjectsbezeichnung durch » und n ist zur Zeit noch dunkel und eine
Beriihrung mit den sonst bekannten pronominal Formen nicht nach-
weisbar. ' There is a corresponding difficulty in regard to the third person
of Aryan verbs. See Sayce, Principles, p. 294.
3 Cf. Dietrich, Abhandlungen, pp. .128 f.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 373
the preformative of the third form, whatever its origin, is
not derived from the pronoun of the third person,1 and
that ?®p.\ must be regarded as a new derivative root,
whose basis is the abstract form of the verb as it appears
in the imperative and infinitive.
We may now in two ways seek to determine the
peculiar modification of meaning which belongs to the
second form. The one is to collect the words of similar
formation, and endeavour to gather from them the signi
ficance of the common structure. I content myself here
with giving the opinions of some of those who have most
carefully collected and collated the substantives of these
formations. Ewald2 regards the noun with prefixed * as
an old formation, common to the Arabic with the Hebrew,
and especially frequent in Phoenician and in Himyaritic,
appropriated peculiarly to persons or things regarded as
agents. Dietrich3 believes that this formation ' was
originally representative of abstract terms, especially
sensible attributes, whereby at the same time the bearer
of such attributes is indicated, being employed less for
things without life than for things with hfe or conceived
of as living, and very frequent for the names of animals
and plants.' Such proper names as nw, 3pj£, pmp, btnfe^
nns*, yvt and many others, show how suitable this form
was felt to be for the designation of personal qualities.
In words with prefixed n, again, according to both the
writers named, a strong abstract significance prevails,
though occasionally also concrete appellatives are marked
by the same form. According to Bottcher,4 words of
1 Dietrich has the merit of having first clearly demonstrated this in his
Abhandlungen, pp. 121 f. He has been followed by Merx, Grammat.
Syriaca, pp. 199 f. ; Bottcher, LB., sec. 925; Koch, Der semitische
Infinitiv, p. 7.
2 Ewald, LB., sec. 162. 3 Dietrich, op. cit., p. 145.
4 Bottcher, LB., sec. 547.

3 74 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
the * formation declare, the conspicuously prominent
quality, words of the n formation the impression ex
perienced as the result of action. Among these varying
modes of representation a certain harmony may be traced,
which amounts to this, that in the formations in question
the abstract property of the root is represented as embodied
in some living or personal, existence, and so to speak,
energised and made alive.1
The other way is to endeavour to judge by analogy
what is the native force of these obscure preformatives.
It may be possible to discover their probable analogue
elsewhere than in the corresponding personal pronouns.
One suggestion on the subject ha3 been thrown out which
appears to me eminently worthy of consideration. This
is, that they are of similar origin and power to the mas
culine and feminine formative elements in gentile and
other specific names (the nomina relativa of Arabic gram
mar). ' It is, indeed,' says Donaldson,2 ' difficult to believe
that when , — 1?J? signifies " a Hebrew man," and TV — "UJ?
" a Hebrew unman" while 3ro — * means " he is writing,"
and 2^3 — 1? " she is writing," these parallel forms are not
due to the same principle of phonology' It seems to be
rather favourable than otherwise to the truth of this view
that these particles, in the case of the verbal forms in
question, are prefixed instead of being, as in the case of
nouns, suffixed. This is in agreement with the general
analogy of the form. The pronominal affixes, which in
the other tense appear at the end, appear in this at the
beginning, and we are thus led to suppose that this posi-
1 Of the i formation in Assyrian, Sayce remarks, ' As in Hebrew and
Arabic, intense active qualities are thus denoted ' (Ass. Grammar, p. 110).
2 Donaldson, Maskil le-Sopher, p. 26; cf. Nordheimer, Heb. Grammar, i.,
p. 210. The same view was long ago suggested by Schultens (Institutiones,
p. 275) and Storr (Observatkm.es, p. 143) in regard to the feminine pre
formative. So Grill, Zeitsch. d. morg. Ges., xxvii., p. 434.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 375
tion is proper to and characteristic of this form. We
seem to be carried back by these facts to a time in the
history of the Shemitic family of speech when, as in the
Chinese and other monosyllabic tongues, grammar de
pended upon position, or when at least position concurred
with vowel-changes and other circumstances in affecting
and defining the meaning of words. It is, moreover, a
corroboration of the doctrine that it enables us to explain
the anomaly of the Syriac preformative, nun. For this
letter is used as a sufformative with the vowels a; 0, and
u, in all the Shemitic languages, in various classes of
nouns, especially those with adjectival power,1 and we have
only to suppose that this particle, instead of the more
common i or ith, was adopted by the Aramaeans, and used
in the same sense in the formation of this verbal form.
If this be the right view of the preformative, we are
able to fix with considerable definiteness the meaning of
the second form. Suffixed to a nominal root, the particles
in question designate a person marked by the character
which the root denotes, as ^V, a Hebrew; ^i, a stranger ;
Mitsriyyun, an Egyptian ; HP31?' a despiser. In regard to
^Ethiopic, we are told that ' the ending i is for the most
part used to form nouns indicating the agent from simpler
personal nouns.'2 According to this analogy, the second
form indicates the personal or active performing of that
which the root denotes. It is the verbal noun which
expresses doing, and that not statically as a characteristic
of the subject, but dynamically as resulting from the sub
ject's life and energy. This conclusion is strengthened
by observing the obvious meaning of the form when used
1 See for Hebrew, Ewald, LB., sec. 163 ; Olshausen, LB., sec. 215 ; for
Aramaean, Winer, Chaldee Grammar, sec. 30 (Eng. Tr.); for Arabic, Wright's
Arab. Grammar, i., sec. 249; for Ethiopic, Dillmann, ^Ethiop. Gram-
matik, p. 205. 2 Dillmann, op. cit., p. 199.

376 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
as a personal name, as in Isaac, the laugher, Jacob, the
supplanter, Jareb, the contender, etc. ; or when used
adjectively in phrases, like *pip? 36W, a ravening wolf
(Gen. xlix. 27), rm tyfoK, mortal' man (Isa. h. 12).1
I conceive that we are warranted by these probable
views as to the nature of the preformative, or at least, if
these be disallowed, by the analogy of the nouns of
corresponding formation, in regarding the second form as
expressing distinctively the element of personal life and
activity We found reason to believe that in the first
it is the act that is made prominent, — we now find that
in the second it is the actor. It is the fact which is
set forth in the one ; it is the activity underlying the fact,
and giving birth to it, in the other. This view is
strengthened by the consideration that while in the one
the personal element comes second, in the other it comes
first. The position, as I have already remarked, determines
the relative importance and prominence of the two portions
of the word. Thus, while in the first form the verb is the
defined and leading element, to which the subject is subor
dinated, in the second the subject takes the leading place,2
1 1 have above reproduced the principal arguments by which Dietrich
has demonstrated that the preformative of the third pers. imperf. cannot be
derived from the pronouns of the third personal pronoun. It is still open to
inquire what is its origin. DiUmann (op. cit., p. 198) supposes it to bean
obsolete relative or, demonstrative pronoun, of the form ija or aja, support
ing this by the fact that the other relative or demonstrative word sa is also
used as a prefix to form adj ectives. But see Praetorius, Zeitsch. d. morg. Ges. ,
xxvii., p. 641. Probably we find the root of the preformative j in the
syllable are of the lengthened personal pronouns of the first and second per
sons, — anoki, ani, anakhnu, atta or antu, on which see Hincks, Personal
Pronouns, pp. 6 f. ; Donaldson, Maskil, p. 20. Others propose analogies
drawn from the Egyptian1; see Benfey, Verhdltniss d. cegypt. Sprache,
pp. 15, 211 f.| 296.
2 This is generally recognised. Thus Steinthal (Charakteristik, p. 260)
says : ' Im Perfectum werden die Personal-Zeichen hinten angefiigt ; das

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 377
and the verb with its action is presented as that by
which the subject is distinguished and in which its power
is manifested. The results reached from the consideration
of the several points marking the structure of these forms
seem to me coincident. Taken together, they amount to
this ; — in the so-called perfect the act or state expressed
by the verb is represented as an independent thing, a
' Ding an sich,' or existing fact ; in the so-called imper
fect, it is represented as in or of the subject, the produce
of the subject's energy, the manifestation of its power and
hfe. Instead of being, as in the former case, regarded
merely as a fact, it is by this form described as a process
taking place, or a stream evolving itself from its source.
The one answers the question, What has taken place ?
the other, How has it taken place, and by whom has it
been done?1 This fundamental distinction wiR, as I hope
to show, be found to be sustained by and to be illustrative
of the actual use of the forms in the Old Testament.
The foregoing result derived from the consideration of
the structure of the forms seems to be confirmed when
Verbum steht also voran, der Begriff der Handlung oder des Ereignisses
ist das Hauptsachliche nnd drangt sich vor. Im Imperfectun geht das
Perspnal-Zeichen voran, denn es wird dem Stamme vorn angefugt,' etc.
Wright (Arab. Grammar, i., p. 67) : ' In the Perf. the act is placed con
spicuously in the foreground, because completed; in the Imperf. ihe agent,
because still occupied in the act. If we look upon the root qtl as
primarily conveying the abstract idea of "killing,'' we may regard qataltu
as meaning " killing of me " (i.e., done by me), "my killing "= "I have
killed;" and aqtulu as meaning "I killing,"="I am killing."' See
also Nordheimer, Heb. Grammar, i., p. 105 ; Donaldson, Maskil, p. 24.
1 The relation is parallel to that between the two Infinitives to which in
form the tenses correspond. The Inf. Abs., according to Kalisch (Heb.
Grammar, pp. 293, 296), ' conveys the notion of the verb viewed as a noun,'
— ' emphatically expressing the action itself;' the Inf. Const, is used when
the verbal notion is grammatically connected with preceding or following
words, — and so represented as related and subordinate to the actor and the
circumstances.

378 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
we look at what is distinctive in their construction. We
find that the first undergoes absolutely no change through
collocation with the other elements of a sentence, save in
certain circumstances a shght accentual and vocal modifica
tion, — a circumstance which is in harmony with the finding
that it expresses fixed objective fact, or what is conceived
of as such. The second, on the other hand, is variously
modifiable in construction ; for this form, as we have seen,
expresses the action not on its objective but on its subjective
side, — not as self-subsisting, but as variously dependent
on the wiR of the agent and on outward circumstances.
I have already brought forward grounds for believing
that the verbs in Hebrew and other Shemitic languages
are derived from nouns, rather than vice versa. The like
ness between the two kinds of words is pecuharly marked
in the second form of the verb, in regard to which gram
marians have often remarked that the changes it undergoes
closely correspond to those of the noun.1 It seems, there
fore, a reasonable course to seek illustration of these verbal
modifications in those of the noun which correspond.
One of the most marked is the so-called n paragogic,
which has its unmistakeable parallel in the n local of
nouns. The latter seems a rehc of a case-ending once
in ordinary use along with 0, or u, and i, and found in
Assyrian, in Arabic, in yEthiopie, and in Phoenician.2 It
1 Thus Lee, Heb. Grammar, p. 200, n. : ' It is a curious fact that the
tense corresponding to this in the Arabic verbs is subject to a variation of
ending similar to that of the nouns, i. e. , its terminations will answer to those
of the nominative or of the objective cases.' Wright, Arab. Grammar,
i., p. 67 : ' The imperfect is closely akin to the noun, and its government
in the subjunctive falls under the same category with the government of
the noun in the accusative.' Cf. Merx, Gram. Syriaca, p. 197 ; Sayce,
Ass. Grammar, p. 127.
2 See Sayce, op. cit., p. 127; Wright, op. cit., i., p. 279; Bottcher,
LB., sees. 585, 605 ; Schroder, Diephcin. Sprache, p. 192.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 379
usuaRy indicates in nouns the object towards which
movement is directed. As appended to the second form
of the verb, it emphasises the movement itself in its
character and its origin, strongly marking the striving of
the agent towards the object, or in general the impulse in
the mind out of which the action flows. The lengthen
ing of the verbal form brings into special prominence the
spiritual emotion by which the act is impelled or by which
it is accompanied.1 'The cohortative,' says Mr. Driver,
' is hardly ever found except with the first person,' and
it ' has the effect of marking with peculiar emphasis the
concentration of the will upon a particular object — wi,
let us go, we would fain go ; the idea being expressed
with more decision and energy, with greater interest and
emotion, than by the mere imperfect ^]?3.' 2 Another
variation of the second is presented in the apocopated
imperfect or so-called jussive mood. 'It belongs almost
exclusively to the second and third persons (in the second
person principally after ?N, which is never used with the
imperative). It is obtained by shortening the imperfect
in such a manner as the form of each particular word
will allow.' 3 In regard to the use of this form, it is
employed very frequently in the expression of commands
and wishes, and also in the protasis of conditional
1 Sayce (op. cit., p. 127 ; cf. p. 55) remarks : ' The idea of motion was
suggested, it would seem, to the primitive Semite, by dwelling upon the
pure deep sound of a or ha by which the word was lengthened or ex
tended, as it were, beyond itself. . . . From the substantive these termina
tions (primarily strengthened by the mimmation) were transferred to the
verbs without losing their meaning. ' Bottcher calls the verbal form, ' ein
Intentional, zum Ausdruck persbnlichen Willensrichtung ' (LB., sec. 954).
See also Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 81. In Arabic, this modification is
employed in all the persons. Wright, op. cit., ii., p. 41.
2 Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 49. The imperative takes the same lengthened
form and with a similar modification of meaning.
3 Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 50.

380 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
sentences ;J and difficulty has been felt in attempting to
explain the relation between the shortened character of
the form and the meaning which it is found preferentially
to bear. The shortening is ' generally supposed to have
arisen from the quickened and hasty pronunciation of a
person issuing a command ; ' but Mr. Driver sets aside
this explanation, and prefers to regard its conditional
significance as that which is original and primary,2 though
certainly it seems not less easy to understand on this
supposition how the meaning arises out of the form.
Perhaps we may find the desired explanation by looking
at the analogue of the apocopated imperfect tense in
the noun.3 Now, in nouns we find also a shortened
form in constant use, the construct or annexed state, of
which the laws, though differing in several respects from •
those regulating the apocopation of verbs, yet agree in
this, that the noun takes the shortest form which its
nature allows. 'The ground of the shortening,' says
Philippi, ' is in aR cases the same. It is the close vocal
connecting of the defined and the defining. Haste is
made to append as quickly as possible to that which is to
be defined its defining element, and to bind them vocally
1 A similar form is ' found in Arabic, with corresponding powers. See
Wright's Arab. Grammar, ii. , pp. 35 f. So also in Assyrian ; Sayce (Ass.
Grammar, p. 54) says : ' The Apocopated Aorist, from its aptitude to denote
vigour, like the Jussive in Arabic and Hebrew, has become the common
form in Assyrian, as in Phoenician, Hebrew, Aramaic, and iEthiopic. '
2 See Driver, op. cit., p. 225.
8 I simply carry out in this particular case the principle expressed by
Philippi (Stat. Const., p. 171): 'Als sich nun das Verbum vom Nomen
allmahlich losloste, nahm es von dem Nomen wie seine Numerus, — so seine
Modusbezeichnung mit heriiber, naturlich in einem dem jetzigen Zustande
angemessenen etwas modificirten Sinn. Die Bezeichnung des Unab-
hangigkeifscasus ward zum Ausdruck des Selbstandigkeits — Modus, d. i.
des Indicativs, und der Abh'angigkeitsausdruck des Nomens ward zur
Bezeichnung der Abhangigkeitsmodus im Verbum d. i. Conjunctivs. '

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 381
into one whole.' x In like manner, I conceive that the
apocopated verb expresses what is determined by some
thing else, and is thus united with it by the shortening
of the form into one compound phrase. The action of
the verb is by this form sunk as far as possible in the
agent and the object, and is represented as simply the
line of influence, hke the electric wire, along which the
current passes. Being absorbed, so to speak, in the agent,
the verb vivifies it with its own activity. In the words,
e.g., *rtN_,TV5 "iiK TV, in both clauses the substantive, light,
is made active by combination with the verb, — the light
is commanded to be, and the hght rises into being. It
may now be easily understood how this form comes to be
so frequently employed for the expression of commands
or desires, and in conditional or hypothetical clauses. It
often happens that in these, the action expressed is im
portant only in relation to the object aimed at. Hence,
whether in stating a wish or a condition, when it is the
substantive elements which thus bulk in the speaker's
sight, the verb describing the intermediate volitional
element naturally assumes the curtest form of which it
is capable. It should occasion no difficulty that these
construct verbs are often found apart from their substan
tives, and connected with adverbial or ' relative clauses.
So is it also occasionally with construct nouns, and the
meaning appropriate to the form is not affected by the
accidents of collocation or the particular way in which
the object is expressed.
The only other modification of the second form to
which it is necessary to refer is that wrought by the so-
caRed waw conversivum. When in a continuous narra
tion a verb in the second form is joined on by the
copulative conjunction to what precedes, the conjunction
1 Philippi, Stat. Const., p. 25.

o

82 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.

very often appears in the form -V1 In regard to the
derivation and significance of this formation, many dis
crepant opinions have been expressed. The traditional
view, which without explanation assigns to it as its proper
function to give to the future tense the meaning of the
past, is still held. Many find its origin in nirii or nin,2
regarding this phrase as imparting to the future verb
that follows a past sense. Ewald and others suppose it
contracted from the conjunction and adverb tK 1, and
then.3 Another view, first propounded by Schultens,4
seems to me more simple and natural than any of these,
— this is, that it is compounded of the conjunction and
the article, — IV This at once explains the formation,
while at the same time it is in harmony with the
doctrine already estabhshed, that a nominal significance
continues to inhere in these verbal forms. It may indeed
be objected that, if the verb to which this conjunction "
with the implied article is prefixed be regarded as the
first member of a group mutually annexed, then the
ordinary rule is transgressed, whereby the defining article
is prefixed to the second member, whie its power extends
to the whole. But (1) even with nouns this rule is not
without exception ;° and (2) the different circumstances
are doubtless sufficient to account for the different con
struction. The annexion is of necessity more loose and
free in the one case than in the other; it is not a
definite thing, but an action proceeding from a certain
1 The waw conv. is found also in the Mesha Stele (see Noldeke,
Inschrift d. Konigs Mesa, p. 31), and traces of it are also to be found in
Assyrian. Sayce, Ass. Grammar, p. 69. It is unknown elsewhere.
2 The former was originaUy proposed by H. Scholze (see Bottcher, LB.,
sec. 971) ; the latter has been held by many grammarians, as Hezel, Gese
nius, Stuart, Nordheimer, Kalisch, etc. See Gesen., Lehrgebaude, pp. 292 f.
3 Ewald, LB., sec. 231. * Schultens, Institutiones, p. 624,
s See Ewald, LB., sec. 290, d ; Kalisch, Grammar, ii., p. 280.

The Tenses, of the Hebrew Verb. 383
agent in certain circumstances, which in this case the
article points to, and doubtless the only mode of unam
biguous definition, at least when the verb stands first, is
that of prefixing it to the verb itself.1 This fact that the
article is prefixed to the second form seems strongly to
confirm the view aReady given of its significance. Just
as when prefixed to nouns it points to a certain individual
or property, marking it out for special notice,2 so is it when
thus prefixed to the verb. It points to the action as that
which is passing before our eyes ; and the fact that it is
used exclusively with the second indicates both that the
two forms set the action before us in essentially different
points of view, and that a pecuharly descriptive power
resides in that with which alone it is associated.
Looking back upon the preceding inquiry, we find that we
have come by different lines to one consistent and definite
result. We have found, negatively, that these so-called
tenses do not in themselves refer to time, whether this be
regarded subjectively or objectively, whether relating to
the date at which the act takes place, or the period which
it occupies ; and positively, that they refer to the aspect
in which the act is viewed, indicating it on the one hand
as a fact, and on the other hand as a process evolving
itself from the impulse of the agent in the case. It is
difficult, or rather impossible, to find terms which are
in aR respects suitable to express the distinction thus
1 It may also be objected that the article exerts no effect upon the tone
or the termination of the word to which it is prefixed, while words with
waw conv. are often thus modified. It might be said that ' in Arabic the
addition of the art. does make a change in the termination ' (Driver,
Heb. Tenses, p. 86), but probably the modifications in question are due
to other causes than the prefixed waw.
2 I recall the fact that etymologically as well as practically the article
is a demonstrative word. Cf. Bottcher, LB., sec. 603. Driver, Heb.
Tenses, p. 161.

384 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
reached. It might be said that the first is the more
abstract, the second the more concrete, — the one the
more objective, the other the more subjective ; but against
such terms there he obvious objections. Perhaps the
most proper words which our language affords for the
expression of the distinction are these, — the Factual and
the Descriptive. The one makes statements, the other
draws pictures ; the one asserts, the other represents ; the
one lays down positions, the other describes events ; the
one appeals to reason, the other to imagination ; the one
is annalistic, the other fuRy and properly historical.
These verbal forms correspond to the two leading ques
tions of intelligence, — What ? and How ? The first
interest of the understanding is the knowledge of facts,
the second is that of causes; — the first inquiry — What
exists ? and the next, How has it come into existence ?
We first know things by themselves, in an isolated and
unconnected way, and then we know them in their
dependences and relations, as links in an evolving chain,
or as stages in an unceasing process. The one aspect of
human knowledge is represented by the Hebrew Perfect,
and the other by the Imperfect. Thus the distinction
which Res at the basis of this difference of form is one
not less natural and philosophical, while it is one cer
tainly more primitive and profound, than that of the time
of the action in any of its aspects.
It is to me satisfactory to find that many of the state
ments of the more recent school of grammarians, though
often discrepant among themselves, yet converge as to a
common centre to such a view regarding the true signi
ficance of these verbal forms as that just given. Thus, to
Donaldson, Steinthal, Driver,1 the first .form is an aorist,
1 Donaldson, Maskil, p. 24 ; Steinthal, Charakteristik, p. 260 ; Driver,
Heb. Tenses, p. 6.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 385
expressing a transient act or what has once happened,
while the second indicates continuous action. To Hincks
and Sayce, on the other hand, the second is the aorist, the
first the permansive tense. But if, as I have tried to
show, the first expresses simply the fact, it is easy to
understand how it appears to some as indicating a transient
thing or what is completed and past, and to others what
remains as a reahty or a state; and if the second is
really a descriptive form, then also we understand
how it happens that to some the conthruousness of
the act, and to others its want of time-determination
or its lying in the undefined past, should appear the
principal element. We have seen also that some find
the fundamental distinction in the opposed ideas of
completed and uncompleted, others in those of accom
plished and incipient. Both views I am able to explain,
and to a great extent to appropriate. What is set
forth as a fact is, of course, represented as completed and
accomphshed ; what is pictured as in process of taking
place may in one point of view be regarded as commenc
ing, in another as going forward or as continuous, in
another as unfinished. It is the same with those doctrines
which introduce more or less prominently the element of
time in explaining these forms. As we have seen, the
first has been applied predominantly to past time in its
various phases,— a circumstance quite natural on the
understanding that its real significance is simply that of
naked fact. That the second should be referred to future
and present time is also easily explicable if its true power
is the pictorial, for this is naturally employed of acts con
ceived of as present and going on to the future. Not a
few of the representations of one of the most recent and
best writers on this special subject, Mr. Driver, I can
appropriate almost without modification, regarding them
2 B

386 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
as lacking only in an adequate philological foundation.
Thus, he writes : ' Singularly enough, though it is im
possible to open a single page of a classical author
without observing it, the great and profound distinction
between being and becoming, between seyn and werden, elfil
and yiyvo^ai, between the forms descriptive of an achieved
result, and those which characterise the process by which
it is attained, has never been fuRy appropriated or
naturalised in English, Thus, " I am convinced " has
unfortunately to do duty for TreiOofiat, as well as for
irkiretcrp.ai, for " ich werde uberzeugt " as weR as for
" ich bin tiberzeugt." . . . Hence, the contrast being un
noticed, we are apt not to assign to it due prominence,
even in a language where it is being constantly applied,
and where, upon its being rightly observed, the force and
propriety of a sentence may entirely depend.' Or, again,
' hke the trained hand of the painter, which by a touch
can turn a tear into a smile, the verb in all these languages
is a pliable and elastic instrument, which by the smallest
movement effects a total change in the scene it is employed
to describe.'1 AR this I regard as excellently stated,
and it appears to me to be better founded on the theory
above explained than on that which its author has
embraced. Again, the doctrine of the late Dr. Hincks
regarding the Assyrian verb, partially adopted by Mr.
Sayce, appears, so far as I am able to apprehend it, in
almost entire accordance with the result above reached.
The two tenses answering in that language to the first

1 Driver, Heb. Tenses, pp. vii, vi. The same writer elsewhere, p. 82, in a
discussion regarding the native force of the cohortative or lengthened form,
says : ' The termination is not specially cohortative or intentional, it is
merely intensive ; ' — ' the intentional nuance is already there, it is only
rendered more prominent, made more perceptible, by the new termination. '
See also p. 107.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 387
and second in Hebrew,1 he designated in 1855 the con-
tinuative and the aorist, and afterwards in 1866 the
permansive and the mutative. Of the former he says
that it ' expresses continued or habitual action,' or
' continuance in the state which the verb signifies,' whie
the latter ' denotes change into that state.' From the
examples given, it appears that the one is used to indicate
abiding facts, as the ' permanent features of a country,'
etc., while the other is the ordinary form in historical
narrative, describing events as they pass before the mind.2
This is nearly if not quite equivalent to saying that the
one denotes things simply as existing, the other pictures
them as they evolve themselves and come into existence.
Another writer, Dietrich, whom I have frequently referred
to, and to whom in this discussion I have been greatly
indebted, suggests that, in contrast to the first or the Fac
titive as designating the factual (das Factisch), the second
form might be called the Cogitative,8 while allowing also
1 See Hincks, in Jour. Sac. Lit., July 1855, p. 382; ibid. Oct. 1855,
p. 161 ; id. in Jour. Asiatic Soc, ii, p. 485 (new series).
2 The term permansive seems better fitted to express the tempus stans or
durans of the Syrian grammarians, the name which they applied to the
inflected participles of the Aramaean dialects. This verbal form is especially
appropriated to the expressions of a continued action when represented
factually. See Merx, Gram. Syriaca, p. 246.
3 Dietrich, Abhandlungen, p. 119. When he speaks of 'das Gedachte,
bios Vorgestellte,' as the essential determination of the form, this agrees
with what I have remarked, that it distinctively appeals to the imagina
tion. I quote from Dietrich, p. 97, his account of the doctrine of an older
grammarian on the same point, Loscher : ' Er bestimmte das sogenannte
Futur als die subjective Form im Gegensatz zum Prateritum als objectiver
Form, indem er erkliirte : im hebr. Futur erscheine die Handlung nicht als
absolut ktinftige wie bei uns, sondern als innerhalb des subjects gedachte,
die kiinftige zugleich als die bedingte. ' ' Ebraorum Futurum non ut nostra
solent actum subjecti cum directione divina providentia et circumstantiis
ac annexis miscet, h. e. absolute quid futurum sit, notat, sed subjecto suo
contentum ; de ejus studio, intentione, conatu, non nudis, sed quatenus ad
futuritionem concurrunt, loquitur," ' etc.

388 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
that the term aorist, if only the idea of momentariness
be eRminated, and it be regarded etymologicaRy as the
tense omni tempore, would also be appropriate. The two
former approach very near to the terms which I have
above proposed.
II. Use of the Forms. — I go on to apply to the
results obtained the tests of actual use. — One preliminary
remark it is necessary to make. As the distinction
between the forms in question is not an objective but a
subjective one, depending upon the speaker's or writer's
point of view or special purpose, it may be expected that
they will be employed as it appears to us almost inter
changeably, when the circumstances are the same, and
when the difference of meaning is such as our language
is hardly competent to reproduce.1
It is expedient to begin with that form which is pro
bably in the Old Testament, as in the Assyrian inscriptions
though to a less extent, the more common. The Orientals
affect the descriptive rather than the statistical, and what
they report, they report usuaRy by presenting a picture of
the scene. Every event is perceived by them as the efflux
of the living forces inherent in nature and in men, and
every scene as represented in their imagination is full of
hfe. Hence the comparative rarity of compendious and
indirect statements, and the universal prevalence of the
detailed and the direct, — the introducing of individuals
upon the stage, and the recital of what they said and did.
Hence, too, if we regard the second as distinctively the
descriptive form, we shall not be surprised to find it
employed on aR occasions, in aR circumstances, and in all
1 It is suggested with much probability by Dr. Lee, that the frequent and
rapid changes of tense in the Greek of the New Testament is to be ascribed
to the Hebraising habits of thought and conception of the writers. See
Jour. Sac. Lit., July 1850, p. 197 ; cf. Donaldson, Maskil, p. 32.

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 389
relations of time, past, present, and future. We may say,
indeed, that in Hebrew all statements constantly tend to
run into the descriptive, and what requires in every case
to be specially accounted for is not the use of the second
but the use of the first form, or the interrupting the flow
of pictorial narrative or prophecy by the statement of bald
fact. It seems to me unnecessary to enter into great detail
in distingiishing the various relations in which this form
is employed, or in citing passages illustrative of these.
The manifold perplexities connected with its use are cleared
away when it is borne in mind on the one hand, that it
has no direct relation to time, and on the other hand, that
it simply sets forth the action in a descriptive and pictorial
way.1 In the narration of events, whether past or to come,
it is constantly employed ; and that both without and
with the waw conv. and other particles. (1.) Without, of
the past — Judg. xxi. 25, Every man did that which was
right in his own eyes. Ps. lxvi. 6, They went through the
flood on foot ; then did we rejoice in Him. 2 Sam. xii. 3,
It did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup,
and lay in his bosom. So of the future — 2 Kings v. 11,
He will surely come out. Gen. xlix. 1, And I will tell
you what shall befall you in the last days, etc., etc. This
form is used, as was to be expected, with peculiar
frequency in the elevated and poetical style of narration,
where the language is more particularly governed by the
imagination. I refer to such passages as Ex. xv. 5, 6, 7,
15 ; Num. xxiii. 7; Deut. xxxi. 10-18.2 (2.) With waw
1 My labour in seeking out passages has been greatly lightened by the
collections in several of the ordinary grammars, but especially by the
admirably full and careful selection in Mr. Driver's work.
2 See more in Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 29.

390 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
conv. this form also occurs, continually of the past and occa-
sionaRy of the future. Of the former no instance need be i
cited; of the latter also we have clear examples. Jer.
xxxvii. 9, And he is like to die, TlD'l ; Ps. xii., And settest me
before Thy face for ever ; Isa. xl. 24, Andthey shall wither;
Isa. xliv. 15, And he will take thereof and warm himself;
Ps. xhx. 15, And the upright shall have dominion over
them; Ps. 1. 6, And the heavens shall declare; lv. 18,
And he shall hear my voice; xcii. 11, And thou shalt
exalt my horn. — I have already indicated what appears
to me the native force of the introductory particle. It
includes along with the conjunction the demonstrative
article, and thus, while linking together a series of
events, it calls attention to each as it passes under view.
Probably our introductory phrase, and so, with the
historical present, forms the most exact translation of
which our language is capable of this Hebrew mode of
description. Occasionally at least, it might be repre
sented by the French et voila. History, as presented in
the Old Testament, becomes thus like the unroRing of a
panorama, and every scene is pointed at as it appears to us
and passes by. — Other introductory particles, as TK, ''S, D^D,
and the hke, are also preferentially, though as shown
above (p. 363) not exclusively, joined with the same tense.
This also is as it should be, if our idea of the meaning of
the form be right. For aR these particles, though less
decidedly demonstrative than -\, have a certain measure
of demonstrative power. In virtue of introducing a
narrative they caR attention to it, and when an event is
thus formaRy and expressly brought upon the stage, the
mind anticipates a description rather than a bald state
ment. The same remarks apply to the word Tn, and
it came to pass ; which is really equivalent to an intro
ductory particle, and which is usually, though also not

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 391
exclusively,1 followed by narration in the second form.
This phrase serves the purpose of clearing the ground
and preparing the stage for the display of the scenes
which foRow. — Regarding this form to have naturally
and essentially a descriptive force, it appears to me quite
natural that it should, even in narratives, present itself
in its modified (shortened or lengthened) moods. It is
true, these, as we shaR immediately see, are more usuaRy
appropriate elsewhere than in narration, in circumstances
where the intensified expression of emotion is more in
place ; but yet it is quite conceivable that in lively
description the feelings of the writer or speaker should
become so interested in the events as to clothe themselves
in these emotional forms. It is on this principle that the
use of the shortened (the so-called jussive) mood 2 is to
be accounted for in places like Zeph. ii. 13; Joel ii. 20;
Mic. ii. 4 ; Deut. xxxi. 18 ; Lev. xv. 24 ; Eccl. xii. 7, etc.
With pecuhar frequency does this shortened form occur
in the book of Job, — a fact in excellent harmony with the
impassioned character of the utterances there contained.
In like manner, even the lengthened or so-called cohorta
tive mood, though more usuaRy found in the mouth of an
impassioned speaker, occurs occasionaRy in the second and
third person of the verb in utterances marked by strong
emotion, as Deut. xxxii. 1 6 ; Job xi. 1 7, xxi. 2 1 ; Isa. v.
19. — With the use of this form in the narrative style,
we may associate its employment in the expression of
character and habit, and of repeated acts. Thus, Gen. xxix.
26, It is not so done in our country. 1 Sam. i. 7, And
thus he did year by year. Ps. i. 2, He meditates . . . ;
xci. 1 3, The righteous flourish like the palm-tree. Prov.
1 See Ex. xii. 41, 51 ; Gen. xl. 1, etc. Cf. Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 97.
2 Such cases as these are anomalies to Mr. Driver ; see Heb. Tenses, pp.
63 f., 216 f.

392 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
x. 9, He that walketh uprightly walketh surely. In such
expressions, the habitual action is represented on its sub
jective side, as the manifestation of the agent's character
and wil and imaging forth his hfe. Such constantly
recurring acts lend themselves with peculiar facility to the
descriptive or pictorial style of representation.
Again, for the expression of intention, and hence of
promise and threatening, the second is peculiarly appro
priate. An action intended is of course viewed as pro
ceeding from its source in the wiR of the agent, and as
an efflux of his personal character and power. Hence
naturally it clothes itself in that form in which the
subjective and pictorial element predominates. The
following few examples, which might be indefinitely
multiplied, may suffice as specimens of this use : — Gen.
xi. 7, Let us go down, and there confound . . .; Deut. xxxii.
20, 1 will hide . . ., I will see . . . ; Isa. lvii. 16, 1 will not
contend for ever; Deut. xviii. 18, I will raise them up a
prophet ; ver. 19, 2" will require it of him. So also in
indirect expression of purpose or wish :-¦ — Gen. xxvi. 4,
That my soul may bless thee; Ex. ix. 14, That thou
mayest know ; Josh. ix. 24, That ye might fear; Ps. civ. 5.
I conceive that from this use we should explain the
predilection of this form for future time. The intentional
and the promised he of course, as regards accomplish
ment, in the future. The temporal elementj however, if
expressed at all, is expressed only in an implicit and
secondary way ; what the form directly signifies is the
present movement or determination of the speaker's mind.
At an early stage of the development of our own and
other Indo-European tongues, they were equally destitute
of the means of directly indicating future time, and the
auxiliaries / will, thou shalt, are really words in the
present tense ; and beyond the corresponding stage in

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 393
Shemitic speech the Hebrew has not advanced. We
shaR find immediately that purposes, promises, and
threatenings are all equally expressed by the first form,
and from the contrasted point of view we shall derive
interesting Rlustration of our subject. Thus, when it is
said, 2 Kings iii. 2 7, He took his eldest son that shoidd
have reigned in his stead, the verb here, "$&, does not
express simple futurity, but the purpose in the father's
heart that this his son should succeed him.
Again, the form is constantly employed for the expres
sion of wish, command, entreaty, and the hke. Such
ideas, it is evident, equally belong to the form regarded
as significative of the outflow of personal energy and life.
The command or entreaty is addressed to the heart and
wiR of the person addressed, and hence the action is
usually pictured as proceeding from its spiritual source.
Thus, Gen. i. 16, thou mayest freely eat ; Exod. xxi. 12,
he shall be put to death ; Gen. xhi. 3 7, slay my two sons,
etc., etc.
Again, questions as relating to and dependent upon the
wiR of the questioner, or upon the will of another,
naturally take the same form. Num. xxiii. 8, How shall I
curse 1 2 Kings xx. 9, Shall it return ten degrees ? Ex.
ii. 1 3, Wherefore smitest thou ? Once again, suppositions
and conditions are also often expressed by the same form.
These are some instances : Isa. xxi. 1 2, If ye will inquire ;
Job vi. 1 1, What is my strength, that / shoidd hope ; xvi. 6,
If / speak ? Isa. xiv. 21, Lest ye say ; Ps. xxiii. 4, I will
fear ; Job v. 8, I woidd seek. All these and the innu
merable others of the same kind set forth the condition
as dependent upon a personal will, and not only state but
describe what is supposed.
I have thus presented a brief conspectus of some of
the leading applications of the second form, and have

394 ' The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
tried to show how in all these applications its special
nuance of meaning finds an appropriate place. Now
under the very same categories the uses of the first form
might also be ranged ; for the one is found accompanying
the other, and, so to speak, running parallel with it, in all
its diversities of application. What is now, therefore,
incumbent is to show that the view above given of the
distinctive significance of the first wiR account for its
employment in the room of the second under these various
categories. The first, I have said, indicates the action simply as an
existing fact, whatever be the time-sphere. It makes
prominent the event or the condition spoken of apart
from its source, its motives, its occasions, its circum
stances, or the associated feelings, — representing it stati
cally not dynamically, or objectively not subjectively.
Now, first, such bald statements of the fact are some
times justified and explained by the nature of the sub
ject. There are many subjects which excite no emotion,
which hardly admit of pictorial description, in regard to
which the fact is the only important thing. Such, e.g.,
are chronological and geographical particulars, annahstic
and genealogical details, matters of business, and the like.
The following are specimens of the kind of statements
referred to : — 1 Kings vi. 37, 38, In the fourth year was
the foundation of the Lord laid, in the month Zif ; and in
the eleventh year, in the month Bui, which is the eighth
month, was the house finished, etc. Cf. Ex. xi. 40,
Now the sojourning of the chidren of Israel who dwelt
in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years. Gen. xiv.
4, xxiv. 23; 2 Kings xii. 1, xvii. 31; Josh. xv. 3 f.,
xx. 9 ; 1 Chron. v. 1, 2, 9, 10 ; 2 Chron. ii. 13 ; Ruth
iv. 3, 4, Naomi . . . seReth a parcel of land . . . and I
thought to advertise thee ; ver. 7, A man plucked off his

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 395
shoe, and gave it to his neighbour; vers. 18-22. Ezra
vi. 6 ; 1 Kings xxii. 48, Jehoshaphat made ships of
Tarshish, etc.; x. 11 (contrast this with vers. 26-29,
where there is given a description of Solomon's" glory).
1 Chron. xvi. 7, Then on that day David delivered, etc.
Compare this with Gen. xxii. 4; Deut. ii. 10, 11;
1 Sam. iv. 19.1
Again, secondly, in certain forms of expression the living
source whence action proceeds is obscured or concealed,
and these too affect the first form. One conspicuous case
of this kind is found where passive or neuter forms are
interchanged with active, when very frequently while the
latter are in the second the former are in the first form.2
The following are examples : — Exod. xv. 6, 12 ; Ps. xc. 2,
Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou
hadst formed, etc.; xvii. 5, xviii. 37, Thou hast enlarged
my steps under me, and my feet did not slip ; xxxii. 4,
xxxvii. 36, I sought him, and he was not found; xxxix.
10, I was dumb, I opened not my mouth ; Job xxviii. 5,
As for the earth, out of it cometh bread ; and under it is
turned up, as it were, fire ; Prov. vii. 23, 25, compared
with 30 ; 1 Kings vi. 37, 38a, compared with 36, 38&;
Isa. v. 26, 27 ; Jer. vi. 10, The word of the Lord is unto
them a reproach ; they have no delight in it ; 2 Chron. iii.
2, 3. In other cases, whUe the verbs are aR active, the
1 Mr. Driver (Heb. Tenses, p. 152) thinks DDl here 'very irregular,' and
proposes to change the reading. To me it appears quite in place, express
ing simply the reported fact. In regard to the use of the Assyrian tense
corresponding in form to our first, Dr. Hincks remarks : 'In the description
of permanent features of a country the permansive tense is constantly
used.' — Jour. Asiatic Soc, ii., p. 488 (new series); cf. the list given in
Sayce, Ass. Grammar, p. 64.
2 This has been remarked also by Dietrich, Abhandlungen, p. 106. Of
the Assyrian permansive, Dr. Hincks, I.e., p. 489, says it 'is habitually
used in the passive conjugations. '

.396 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
main subject of the sentence is presented on the one
hand in a passive, and on the other hand in an active
aspect, when the same interchange of tenses takes place.
Thus Num. xiv. 36, And the men whom Moses sent to
•search the land who returned and made, etc. Ps. xvii.
5, The sorrows of death compassed me, and the floods of
ungodly men made me afraid ; Exod. xv. 12. Especially
frequent, as Ewald has remarked,1 is the use of the per
fect with j6, not, in clauses which contain negative attri
butives ; — as Ps. xv. 3, 4, He that backbiteth not with his
tongue, nor doeth evi to his neighbour, nor taketh up a
reproach „ . . in whose eyes a vile' person is contemned ;
but he honoureth them that fear the Lord, etc. ; xxiv. 4.
Again, thirdly, there are numerous cases in which
conditions and occurrences are emphasised by being
presented baldly and without description. Often it is
the purpose of the speaker to represent the simple fact
by itself as that which is of chief importance, and the
first form is there used as that by which the fact is made
prominent and emphatical.2 This general head embraces
a great variety of cases. It is probably on this ground
that we are to explain the frequent use of the first in
setting forth the attributes and acts of the Almighty.
See Ps. civ. 1 f. (the perf. and part, here interchange) ;
Ver. 24, xxix. 3 : The God of glory thundereth. Ex.
xv. 12, 13; Isa. xxxvii. 26; Ps. cxix. 4: Thou hast
commanded. In these and many similar passages the
Most High and His works are briefly and emphatically
set forth as the indescribable. So in other relations ; —
Ex. xv. 10 : Thou didst blow with Thy wind, the sea
1 Ewald, LB., sec. 135.
2 Cf. Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 17 : ' The pf. is also found . . . when, in
a description of the future, it is desired to give variety to the scene or to
confer particular emphasis upon individual isolated traits in it. '

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 397
covered them: they sank as lead. Jer. iv. 13, His
horses are swifter than eagles. Isa. vi. 5, Mine eyes have
seen; xxxvii. 10, I said . . . ; x. 13; Lam. iii. 54,
Waters flowed over mine head; I said, I am cut off.
Gen. xix. 28, The smoke went up. — Under the category
of emphatic statement, comes the frequent use of the
first form to denote general truths, habits of mind and,
character, and the like. I have above noticed the use
of the second in this relation when these habitual acts or
states are presented on their subjective side. But they
have also an objective side. They may be represented
emphatically as facts or subsisting entities. Thus Ps.
xiv. 1-5, The fool hath said, etc.; i. 1, compare ver. 2b;
lxxxiv. 4, cxix. 20 f . ; Prov. xxi. 13; Eccl. vii. 14;
Num. x. 1 7, xi. 8, The people went about, and gathered
it, etc. ; Ex. xvii. 26; 1 Sam. vii. 16, And he went
from year to year; ver. 17, there he judged Israel (con
trast next clause, describing a particular act, — and there
lie built an altar) ; Ex." xxxii. 1 0. The frequent use of
the first form in statements relating to condition, and in
words expressive of mental states, finds here its place.1
Bottcher has drawn out a hst of what he designates
verba stativa, such as those meaning to trust, to know, to
hate, to be full, to be great, etc., etc., which very often
appear in this form not expressing, as thus used, any
energy or process, but rendering emphatic the state itself
which the verb denotes. Ps. xvi. 1, In Thee do I trust;
xxi. 2, 5, xxxvii. 10 f., xl. 13; 1 Sam. xii. 2. Oc-
casionaRy such statements of existing condition stand
side by side with others representing a change in that
condition or describing a process issuing from it, and
1 See Bottcher, LB., sec. 948. Cf. Driver, Heb. Tenses, p. 12. It is
usual to compare these so-called verba stativa with such Greek words as
othx, yiyovx, TiQvxsc, Se^oi, tolKX, etc.

398 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
thus give rise to those contrasted modes of expression
which have seemed to Gesenius and others to establish
or at least to countenance their own tense-theory regard
ing the forms. (See p. 355.) Thus Gen. xvi. 8, Whence
earnest thou? and whither wilt thou go? .Ex. x. 14,
Before them there were no such locusts as they, neither
after them shall be such. Deut. xxxii. 21, They have
moved me . . . and / will move them. 1 Kings i. 3 8,
As my lord the king hath said, so will thy servant do.
Isa. xii. 4, 11, I have purposed, I will also do it.' Amos
v. 11 ; Nah. i. 12 ; Ps. xxix. 10, The Lord sitteth upon
the flood ; yea, the Lord sitteth King for ever. Eccl. i.
9, The thing which hath been, it is that which shall be.
In such passages, the reference, in so far as it exists, to
past and future time is, I conceive, secondary and con
structive. What is essentially and primarily contained
in the words is, on the one hand, an emphatic statement
of fact, and on the other hand, a description of what is
to be superadded to or come forth from this fact through
the purpose and energy of some living person. We find
an instructive parallel in Ex. xv. 9, The enemy said, T
will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil ; my
soul shall be' satisfied upon them; T will draw my sword,
my hand shall destroy them.
One of the most common uses of this emphatic form
of expression is to be found in what is called the
perfectum propheticum, and in emphatic resolves, pro
mises, anticipations, etc. The statement of what is yet
future on its factual side, not as the contemplated issue
of a process but as the object of such an intuition as
that by which we image the past, is evidently fitted to
give strength and assurance to the statement. See such
passages as Gen. hi. 18, ix. 13, xv. 18, xvi. 4, 20,
xxvi. 22, We shaR be fruitful; xxvii. 15, I am with

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 399
thee, and wiR keep thee. ... I will bring thee again.
Compare the succeeding clause, — for I will not leave thee
unti I have done . . ., where the second form describes
subjectively the divine affection and energy whose result
is objectively expressed in the preceding words. Ex.
vi. 6, 7, xxxiii. 2 ; Judg. iv. 14, xv. 3 ; Jer. iv. 13, We
are spoiled ; xxxi. 5, The planters shall plant ; xxviii. 2 ;
Isa. ix. 6, Unto us a chid is born, etc. ; vi. 7 ; Dan. xi.
36, The king shaR do according to his wiR Mic. v. 2 ;
Zech. i. 16. — It should not surprise us in such predictive
passages to find the first intermingled with or giving
place to the second, — as e.g. in Jer. v. 6, Wherefore the
lion out of the forest shaR slay them, the wolf of the
desert shall spoil them, the leopard is watching beside
their cities ; every one that goeth out thence shall be torn
in pieces. Isa. xi. 6, The wolf also shall dwell with the
lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, . . .
and the cow and the bear shall feed ; their young ones
shall lie down together : and the lion shall eat straw hke
the ox. This is simply the replacing of strong asseve
ration in regard to the coming fact by description of
what shaR be witnessed when the prediction is realised.
In other cases, a promise or threatening which com
mences with the form of subjective description runs into
that of emphatic asseveration. So in Lev. xx. 3, I will
set my face against that man, and wiR cut him off from
among his people. Naturally also in the strongest protes
tations, adjurations, expressions of surprise, and the hke,
the same form is used. Thus Gen. xiv. 22, I have lift
up mine hand unto the Lord. Judg. xv. 7, Yet will I
be avenged of you. 2 Kings v. 20, As the Lord liveth,
I wil run after him, and take somewhat of him. Jer.
Ii. 14, Surely I wiR fill thee with men, as with cater-
piRars, and they shaR lift up a shout against thee.

400 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
Ezek. xx. 34, 35 ; 1 Sam. xvii. 10, I defy the armies
of Israel; xxv. 34. Sometimes the use of the emphatic
perfect for the expression of a future contingency which
is greatly dreaded gives pecuhar force to the language.
Thus Gen. xx. 11, Surely the fear of God is not in this
place, and they wiR slay me ; xxxiv. 3 0, They shall
gather themselves together against me and slay me, and
I shall be destroyed, I and my house. 2 Sam. xiv. 7,
And they wiR quench. 1 Kings xviii. 14, And he
shaR slay me.
Again, in a similar emphatic way is the first used in
commands, counsels, entreaties, etc. The more natural
and more common form in this relation is the second,
whereby, as we have seen, the act commanded is pre
sented as the outflow of the will of the person addressed.
But the employment of the first imparts a special
intensity to the expression. Gen. xl. 14, Then show
kindness, I pray thee ; Ex. xii. 1 7, and ye shaR observe ;
xix. 10, 11, xxix. 3 ; 2 Sam. ix. 10, And thou shalt till,
etc.; xiv. 10 ; 1 Kings iii. 9, Give therefore thy servant,
etc.; viii. 28; Ps. xxv. 11, Pardon mine iniquity; Ruth
iii. 3, Wash thyself, etc. ; 9, Spread therefore, etc. ; Ezek.
xxii. 2 ; Zech. i. 3, Say unto them ; Mai. ii. 1 5, Therefore
take heed. So also in the expression of a strong wish.
Num. xiv. 2, Would that we had died; xx. 3, Josh.
vi. 7, Would we had been content; Isa. xlvii. 18.
Sometimes, as in the previous case, and in the same
sense, the one form interchanges with the other, as
1 Kings i. 6, Do therefore according to thy wisdom, and
let not his hoar head go down to the grave in peace. Gen.
xxiv. 38.
As to commands, so also to questions, the use of the
first gives new force, imparting to them the highest
degree of peremptoriness and decision. We have in-

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 401
stances in Gen. xxvi. 2 7, Wherefore come ye to me ? iv.
10 ; xviii. 12, 13 ; Ex. v. 5, x. 3, How long wilt thou re
fuse . . . ? xvi. 28 ; Num. xiv. 27, How long shall I hear?
Judg. ix. 9, Should I leave . . . ? 11, 13, iv. 14, Is not
Jehovah gone out? 1 Sam. xii. 3, 4, xxv. 11 ; 2 Kings
xx. 9, Shall the shadow go forward? Jer. xxii. 23 ; Hab.
i. 2, How long shall I cry ? Ps. lxxx. 5. In many
passages also we find the forms interchanged, as Judg.
xi. 7; Hab. i. 2 ; Prov. i. 22. The difference of effect
in the two forms of asking questions is very perceptible
in such places as Gen. xviii. 13 compared with 14, Where
fore laughed Sarah 1 ... Is anything too hard for the
Lord? Again, hypothetical statements are often expressed in
the same objective and emphatic way as detached from
aR dependence upon vohtion, and presented as if they
belonged to the category of facts. Thus Gen. ii. 5, Then
your eyes shaR be opened ; xviii. 26, xxiv. 8, xxxii. 8 ;
Ps. lxxiii, 15, If I say, ... I should offend ; Ixxxix. 33 ;
Judg. xiv. 18, If ye had not ploughed, etc.
FinaRy, there is another conspicuous class of instances
which are to be accounted for by this emphatic use of the
first form. Often the flow of narrative, or it may be the
issuing of promises or of commands, couched in the more
ordinary style with verbs in the second form, is inter
rupted by the verbs being changed alike in position and
in form. Sometimes the verb separated from the con
nective particle, usually the www conversive, is thereby
brought into an unusual position, and naturally appears
in the first form. Thus Gen. i. 5, And God called the
hght day, and the darkness He called night ; 1 Sam.
xvii. 1, 2, Now the Philistines gathered together, . . . and
Saul and the men of Israel were gathered together ;
Judg. iii. 29, And they slew of Moab . . . and there
2c

402 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
escaped not. a man. In these, and many similar passages
the second verb is thrown out of its place at the begmning
of the clause,1 and separated from the introductory par
ticle, the effect being that the fact which it expresses is
rendered prominent and is suitably clothed in the first
form. Sometimes, again, special points in a narrative are
emphasised by the verbs being put, while retaining their
nsual place at the beginning of the clause, in the first
form. Thus Gen. ii. 6, There went up a mist from the
earth, and watered, etc. ; iv. 2, vi. 4 ; Judg. xix. 3 0, And
it was so that all who saw it said . . . The emphatic power
of the first is very discernible when nvn instead of W is
used to introduce a descriptive passage, as Judg. xR. 5, etc.
In most of the cases thus referred to of the emphatic
use of the first form, it is liable to be affected by a
change of tone,2 accompanied occasionally with a modifi
cation of vowels, according to the rule that, when the
verb is preceded by \ and the form admits of the change,
the accent is thrown forward upon the final syllable.
This is the so-called waw conversivum prceteriti, of which
I conceive the simple explanation to be that the altera
tion of tone answers to the emphatic position and signifi
cance of the word. In relation to this point I quote an
instructive passage from Mr. Sayce : 3 ' Perhaps the chief
exhibition of the power of emphasis is to be found in
its regulation of accent and intonation. We naturally
accentuate the syllable or word to which we would give
prominence and definiteness ; and the less cultivated the
language, the more important is the employment of accent.
As has been weR - remarked,4 accent and tone vary
1 Cf. Steinthal, Charakteristik, p. 264.
2 Cf. Driver, Heb. Tenses, chap. viii. ; Ewald, LB., sec. 234.
3 Sayce, Principles, p. 30.
4 ' Eev. J. Earle on the " Revision of the English Bible." '

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 403
inversely as syntax ; and we may gauge the develop
ment of syntax in a language by its use or disuse of
accent.' Even in English, however, with all its syntac
tical resources, the meaning of a clause is often determined
by the emphasis, and it is to be expected that the same
device should be much more frequently employed in
Hebrew. That this accentual change takes place ex
clusively upon the first form, whieh, as we have seen, is
in its nature fitted for the emphatic statement of the
fact, and exclusively when this first form is set in the
emphatic place at the commencement of the clause, seems
a satisfying confirmation of the view given of its import.
In the fourth place, explanatory statements in a his
torical narrative are naturaRy put in the first form.1 The
ordinary narrative style, as we have seen, is couched in
verbs of the second form, usually preceded and linked
together by the waw conversive. It often happens, how
ever, that explanations require to be made in connection
with the narrative, — -relating sometimes to what has
gone before and setting forth the ground on which the
history proceeds, sometimes referring to outlying circum
stances a statement of which is inserted in the course of
the narrative, sometimes stating results which issue from
the series of events described. In all such explanations
the tense regularly employed is the first. Thus, e.g., in
preparing for a historical detai by reference to preceding
events or by a statement of the grounds of what is
described, we find this form. Gen. i. 1, In the be-
1 Cf. Driver, Heb. Tenses, pp. 200 f. ' The words expressing them (cir
cumstantial clauses) are simply thrown into ihe sentence, being either
entirely disconnected with what precedes or joined to it only by 1 — with
a change, however, of the usual order of the words, whereby the construc
tion with .1, expressive of the smooth and unbroken succession of events
one after another, is naturally abandoned.' — P. 201.

404 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
ginning God created . . . and the earth was . . . and' God
said, etc. ; iv. 1, x. 8-11, xiv. 4, Twelve years they served
Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled,
and in the fourteenth year came C, and they smote, etc. ;
xl. 1, 2. 2 Kings vR 3, And there were four leprous
men at the entering in of the gate, and, they said . . .
Job i. 1 ; 2 Chron. xvii. 11, It shall come to pass
when thy days be expired . . . that I wiR raise up thy
seed after thee, and I wiR establish his kingdom ; he
shall build me an house. Not unfrequently a summary
or more general statement is made in the first form,
succeeded by detaR in the second. Gen. xxi. 1, And
the Lord visited Sarah as He had said, and the Lord did
to Sarah as He had spoken. Exod. i. 7, And the clildren
of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly and
multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty, and the land
was filled with them. 1 Sam. xii. 1, I have hearkened
unto your voice in aR that ye have said to me, and have
made a king over you. 1 Kings xv. 2, 3, Three years
reigned he . . . and he walked . . .' We have also ex
planatory statements inserted in the progress of a narra
tive. Gen. xxiv. 62, xxix. 1-4, And Jacob went on his
journey and came . . . and he looked . . . and thither were
all the flocks gathered, and they rolled . . . and watered
. . . and put the stone again. And Jacob said to them . . .
Josh. x. 14, And there was no day hke that before it or
after it; Ruth iv. 7. In like manner we may have
explanatory remarks appended to a narrative and setting
forth some consequence. Gen. xxv. 30, Therefore was
his name caRed Edom; iv. 26, Then began men to caR
upon the name of the Lord ; xlvi. 2 6, Only the land of
the priests became not Pharaoh's.
I have thus distributed under four categories the uses
of that form which chiefly stands in need of explanation

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 405
in Hebrew and Oriental style, and I beheve that under
one or other of these the various instances of its occur
rence in the Old Testament may be ranged. It is, at the
same time, to be freely granted that there are many
instances in which, in our apprehension, there exists no
apparent reason why the one form rather than the other
should be employed, as e.g. why the question, Whence
comest thou ? should sometimes appear as Ni3fi j^O, anci
sometimes as nxa |^D. A wide border-land in which the
forms freely interchange must, on every conceivable
theory, be acknowledged ; and this, as I have said, is
only what is to be expected on the understanding which
all the more recent grammarians seem to have reached,
that the use of these forms is determined, not by the
fixed objective relations of the thing spoken of, but by
the subjective feeling and purpose of the person who
speaks. When the view given above of the significance of the
verbs in the various passages that have been quoted and
referred to is compared with that of these more recent
grammarians, it is evident that the doctrine which I
have proposed regarding the native significance of these
so-called tenses is important mainly as a matter of
theory, and affects only to a small extent the accepted
interpretation of the Hebrew Scriptures. In truth, the
influence ascribed to these forms in the above doctrine
is either identical with, or very simiar to, that ascribed
to them by such writers as Ewald, Bottcher, and Driver,
by whom the perfect is habitually spoken of as setting
forth accomplished facts, and as giving certainty and
emphasis to the statements in which it occurs ; while
the imperfect is not less habitually represented as de
scribing a process, as giving vividness and picturesque-
ness to historical narrative, and bringing to light the

406 The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb.
volitional and emotional elements in the act.1 What I
propose is that these contrasted ideas, which the best
grammarians agree in finding in the two forms respec
tively, but which they relegate to a secondary position,
should be brought to the front and have assigned to
them the principal place. And I have tried to show
that the structure of the forms themselves not only
warrants but even requires this procedure. I feel per
suaded that, when this is done, Hebrew grammar wiR be
disencumbered of a vast incubus of unprofitable refine
ments and distinctions serving at present to repel and
confuse the student, and often leading off in a false direc
tion in the work of interpretation.
It may perhaps occur to some, that if Hebrew be a
language destitute of proper tense-forms, it must be
greatly lacking in the means of precise expression, and
especiaRy of the definite conveyance of historical facts.
But for such an opinion there is not the least foundation.
There are many languages serving all the ends of intelli
gent speech to many milhons of our feRow-men, and
comprehending large and important hterary treasures,
in which not only tenses but even verbs also, in our
1 Thus Mr. Driver, instar omnium, in his Hebrew Tenses, says of the
perfect, when used of future events, that it gives ' a most forcible and
expressive touch of reality, and imparts in the most vivid manner a sense
of the certainty,' etc. (p. 15) ; again, 'The perfect of certainty is of such
frequent and well-established occurrence,' etc. (p. 17) ; again, 'It occurs
after oaths or other strong asseverations ' (p. 16) ; again, ' Sometimes the
perfect is used in order to give emphatic expression to a predicate, ' etc.
(p. 18). On the other hand, of the imperfect he says, ' If the subject of
the verb be also the speaker, i.e., if the verb be in the first person, that
which is about to come to pass will be commonly that which he himself
desires or wishes to come to pass. If, however, the verb be in the second
or third person, it naturallyexpresses the wishes of the speaker as regards
some one else,' etc. (p. 26). Again, 'The imperfect always expresses a
deal more than the mere pf. : how far more picturesque, e.g., is the scene,'
etc. (p. 33).

The Tenses of the Hebrew Verb. 407
sense of the word, are absolutely unknown.1 The
Hebrews were at least as Avell furnished with the means
of expressing time -relations as the Chinese are. If
their verbs did not in themselves clearly distinguish
between the past and the future, they knew how, by
their adverbs and adverbial phrases and by other means,
to discriminate between different time-spheres, and to
transfer the minds of those whom they addressed to
the desired point of view. It is to be confessed that in
the prophetical portions of the Old Testament the date of
the events spoken of is often left undefined. This, how
ever, it is obvious, arises from no inherent defect in the
language ; it belongs to the divine plan after which pro
phecy has been moulded, and has a special suitableness
to its character and design. The principles propounded
in these oracles are for all time, and in" every age they
reappear in some new historical embodiment, while the
particular embodiments speciaUy indicated in the line of
Israel's history were, for good and sufficient reasons, left
indeterminable as to date ante cventum. ' Perhaps we may
see in this another instance of those wise adaptations
which meet us everywhere in tracing the works of God,
that a language was found for the expression of these
prophetic disclosures which lends itself so readiy to the
withholding of definite dates, while at the same time it
is so excellently furnished for the full and impressive
exhibition of the event.
1 See Steinthal, Charakteristik, pp. 131, 164, 186 f., etc. Whitney,
On Language : ' The Chinese words . . . represent ideas in a crude and
undefiiod farmland are. equally convertible by use into noun, verb, or
adverb.' See also p. 312.

or third person, it natuTally -expresses the wishes of the speaker as regards
some one else,' etc. (p. 26). Again, 'The imperfect always expresses a
deal more than the mere pf. : how far more picturesque, e.g., is the scene,'
etc. (p. 33).