Page images


Battle between Judah

Jehoash the king of Israel sent to Amaziah king of Judah, saying, The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar 1 that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife: and there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down the thistle. (10) Thou hast indeed smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted thee up: glory of this, and tarry at home: for why shouldest thou meddle to thy hurt, that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and Judah with thee? (11) But Amaziah would not hear. Therefore Jehoash king of Israel went up; and he and Amaziah king of Judah looked one another in the face at Beth-shemesh, which belongeth to Judah. (12) And Judah was put to the worse

Heb., at thy house.

B.C. cir. 825.

and Israel.

before Israel; and they fled every man
(13) And Jehoash king of
to their tents.
Israel took Amaziah king of Judah, the
son of Jehoash the son of Ahaziah, at
Beth-shemesh, and came to Jerusalem,
and brake down the wall of Jerusalem
from the gate of Ephraim unto the
corner gate, four hundred cubits. (14) And
he took all the gold and silver, and all
the vessels that were found in the house
of the LORD, and in the treasures of the
king's house, and hostages, and returned
to Samaria.

2 Heb., was smit-

Give thy daughter to my son to wife.Perhaps hinting at Amaziah's demand for the surrender of Israel (the "daughter" of Jehoash) to Judah (the "son" of Amaziah).

And there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon.-Rather, and the wild beasts that were in Lebanon passed over it. So LXX. and Vulg. It is obvious to compare with this brief but most pithy parable that of Jotham (Judges ix. 8-15). The contrast between the northern and southern kingdoms in point of military strength and resources, and the disdainful tolerance with which the former regarded the latter, could hardly have found more forcible expression.

(10) Thou hast indeed smitten-i.e., thou hast thoroughly worsted; gained a brilliant victory over Edom. (The "indeed" qualifies "smitten.")

Hath lifted.-Rather, lifteth.

Glory of this, and tarry at home.-Literally, be honoured, and abide in thine own house, i.e., be content with the glory thou hast achieved. Rest on thy laurels, and do not risk them by further enterprises which may not turn out so favourably. So the Vulg. Thenius explains: "Show thy might at home," referring to the LXX. (Comp. 2 Sam. vi. 20).

For why shouldest thou meddle to thine hurt ?-Rather, and why shouldst thou challenge or provoke (literally, attack, Deut. ii. 5) disaster?

(11) Looked one another in the face-i.e., encountered one another; joined battle.

dent, which is further indicated in the original by the
order of the words: "And Amaziah king of Judah
did Jehoash king of Israel take.

Came. So the Hebrew margin. The Hebrew text has, brought him (way’bî'ô; a rare form). So Chronicles and the Vulg., but not the other versions. Jehoash brought Amaziah a prisoner to his own capital.

Brake down the wall.-Or, made a breach in the
wall. No resistance appears to have been offered.
of death to order the gates to be thrown open to the
Josephus relates that Amaziah was induced by menaces
enemy; a needless assumption, considering that the
army had been routed and the king was a captive.
He adds, that Jehoash rode in his chariot through the
breach in the walls, leading Amaziah as a prisoner.

From the gate.-So Chronicles and the Syriac,
Vulg., and Arabic here. The Hebrew text has, at the
gate, which is due to the common confusion of the
letters b and m (be, "in;" min, "from"). The follow-
"unto" shows that "from" is right.

Of Ephraim.-This gate lay on the north side of
Gate of Benjamin."
the city, and was also called the
It answers to the modern Damascus gate.


The corner gate.-This gate was at the north-west corner of the wall at the point where it trended southwards.

Beth-shemesh.-The modern Ain-shems, north of which is a great plain now called Wady-es-Surâr, in which the encounter probably happened. Jehoash proposed to attack Jerusalem from the west, as Hazael also had intended (chap. xii. 17).

(15) Now the rest of the acts of Jehoash which he did, and his might, and how he fought with Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?

(12) To their tents.-Hebrew text, to his tent; so the LXX. and Syriac. Hebrew margin, to his tents; so Vulg., and Targum, and Chronicles. The meaning is that the enemy disbanded, as usually after a great defeat. (Comp. chap. viii. 21.)

(13) Amaziah king of Judah, the son of Jehoash the son of Ahaziah.-Comp. verse 8. Thenius thinks the formal specification of Amaziah's descent indicates that this narrative was derived from "the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel." At all events, it emphasises the importance of the inci

Four hundred cubits.-That is, about 222 yards.
It was also a
The insolence of a victorious enemy is sufficient to ac-
count for this conduct of Jehoash.
forcible way of convincing Amaziah that even his
strongest city was not proof against the prowess of
Ephraim. Thenins thinks that Jehoash wanted to
make room for the triumphal entry of his troops.

(14) That were found.-This expression seems to
hint that there was not much treasure to carry off.
(Comp. chap. xiii. 18.)

Hostages.-Literally, the sons of sureties. Having humbled the pride of Amaziah, Jehoash left him in possession of his throne, taking hostages for his future good behaviour. Similar acts of clemency are recorded of themselves by the Assyrian kings of the dynasty of Sargon.

(15, 16) Now the rest. . .-Comp. chap. xiii. 12, 13, where the reign of Jehoash is already summed up, though not altogether in the same phraseology. The compiler probably found verses 15, 16, in their present


[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]


Murder of Amaziah.

(16) And Jehoash slept with his fathers, a 2 Chron. 25. 27,
and was buried in Samaria with the
kings of Israel; and Jeroboam his son
reigned in his stead.

(17) And Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah lived after the death of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel fifteen years. (18) And the rest of the acts of Amaziah, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the Chron. 1h one years. (24) And he did that which

(23) In the fifteenth year of Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel began to reign in Samaria, and reigned forty and

is called

kings of Judah? (19) Now "they made a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem: and he fled to Lachish; but they sent after him to Lachish, and slew him there. (20) And they brought him on horses and he was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the city of David. (21) And all the people of Judah took

was evil in the sight of the LORD: he departed not from all the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin. (25) He restored the coast of Israel from the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according to the word of the LORD God of Israel, which he spake by the hand of his ser


B.C. 825.

B.C. 810.

[blocks in formation]

thinks the soldiery gave Azariah the name of Uzziah. At all events, the king may have taken a new name on his accession, though which of the two it was we cannot say. (Comp. chap. xxiv. 17.) Sennacherib on investing Esarhaddon with sovereignty named him Asshurebil-mukin-pal.

(22) He built Elath.-The pronoun is emphatic; he, in contrast with his father. "Built," either rebuilt or fortified. The verse is in close connection with the preceding narrative. Amaziah perhaps had not vigorously prosecuted the conquest of Edom, having been greatly weakened by his defeat in the struggle with Jehoash. He may even have suffered some further losses at the hands of the Edomites; and this, as Thenius supposes may have led to the conspiracy which brought about his death and the accession of his son. The warlike youth Uzziah took the field at once, and pushed his victorious arms to the southern extremity of Edom, the port of Elath (chap. ix. 26), and thus restored the state of things which had existed under Solomon and Jehoshaphat.

After that the king slept-i.e., immediately after the murder of Amaziah. Thenius explains the verse with most success, but this clause is still somewhat surprising.


(23) Reigned forty and one years. According to the statement of this verse, Jeroboam reigned fourteen years concurrently with Amaziah, who reigned altogether twenty-nine years (verse 2); and thirtyseven years concurrently with Azariah (chap. xv. 8), so that he reigned altogether not forty-one but fifty-one years. (The discrepancy originated in a confusion of the Hebrew letters, fifty-one, with 2, forty-one.)

(25) He restored.-Rather, He it was who restored the border, i.e., he wrested out of the hands of the Syrians the territory they had taken from Israel.

From the entering of Hamath-i.e., from the point where the territory of Hamath began. This was the originally determined boundary of Israel on the north (comp. Num. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 8; Josh. xiii. 5), and the prophet Ezekiel specifies it as the future limit (Ezek. xlvii. 16, xlviii. 1). Israel's territory first reached this limit under Solomon, who conquered a portion of the Hamathite domains (2 Chron. viii. 3, 4).

They made a conspiracy.-The fact that no individual conspirators are mentioned appears to indicate that Amaziah's death was the result of a general disaffection; and this inference is strengthened by the other details of the record. Thenius supposes that he had incensed the army in particular by some special act. Probably his foolish and ill-fated enterprise against Israel had something to do with it.

B.C. cir. 825.

Lachish.-Now Um Lakis. Of old it was a strong fortress. (Comp. 2 Chron. xi. 9; chap. xviii. 14, xix. 8.) Amaziah's flight thither seems to indicate either a popular rising in Jerusalem, or a military revolt.

They sent after him to Lachish.-This, too, may point to a military outbreak.

(20) They brought him on horses. - Rather, they carried him upon the horses-i.e., perhaps in the royal chariot wherein he had fled from Jerusalem. Or, perhaps, the corpse was literally carried on horseback by the regicides.

The orderly method of proceeding, the burial of the king in the royal sepulchres, and the elevation of Azariah, seem to prove that the murder of Amaziah was not an act of private blood-revenge.

(21) All the people of Judah.-Thenius explains, all the men of war, as in chap. xiii. 7.

Took. The expression seems to imply that Azariah was not the eldest son. As Amaziah was fifty-nine years old at his death he probably had sons older than sixteen. Azariah was therefore chosen as a popular, or perhaps military, favourite.

Azariah.-See Note on 2 Chron. xxvi. 1. Thenius

Jeroboam the Son of Joash.

Azariah, which was sixteen years old, and made him king instead of his father Amaziah. (22) He built Elath, and restored it to Judah, after that the king slept with his fathers.

Works of Jeroboam.

vant a Jonah, the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of Gath - hepher. (26) For the LORD saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter: for there was not any shut up, nor any left, nor any helper for Israel. (27) And the LORD said not that he would blot out the name of Israel from under heaven: but he saved them by the hand of Jeroboam the son of Joash.


B.C. 822.


[ocr errors]

The sea of the plain-i.e., the Dead Sea (Num. iii. 17, iv. 49; Josh. iii. 16). The whole length of the Dead Sea is included (comp. Amos vi. 14, where virtually the same limits are specified), and the country beyond Jordan. (Comp. Note on 1 Chron. v. 17.)

[ocr errors]

CHAPTER XV.-(1) In the twenty and seventh year of Jeroboam king of Israel began Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah to reign. (2) Sixteen years old was he when he began to reign, and

(28) Now the rest of the acts of Jeroboam, and all that he did, and his might, how he warred, and how he recovered Matt 13, 39, 40, he reigned two and fifty years in JeruDamascus, and Hamath, which belonged salem. And his mother's name was

called Jonas.

Jonah, the son of Amittai, the prophet.Comp. Jonah i. 1. Ewald remarks that the activity of this prophet must have occupied a very large field, as tradition connects him with Nineveh. Hitzig and Knobel recognise the prophecy referred to here in Isa. xv., xvi. There is no difficulty in the supposition that Isaiah has "adopted and ratified the work of an earlier prophet," as Jeremiah has so often done. (See Cheyne's Isaiah, vol. i., p. 93.) But it is easier to prove that these chapters are not Isaiah's, than that they belong to Jonah.

Gath-hepher.-Josh. xix. 13. The present Meshed, Not far north of Nazareth.

(26) Affliction.-Better, oppression.

Bitter. So the LXX., Syriac, and Vulg. Better, stubborn, and so, inveterate, unyielding, enduring. (Comp. Deut. xxi. 18-20.) Targum, "hard;" Arabic, "strong" or "violent."

For there was . left.-Comp. Note on 1 Kings xiv. 10.

(27) Said not.-By any prophet.

Blot out the name. The figure is taken from blotting out writing. (Comp. Num. v. 23.) The Hebrews used inks that soon faded, and could easily be wiped off the parchment. (Hence the partial obliteration of words and letters which is one of the causes of textual corruption.)

(28) How he recovered Damascus, and Hamath.-Jeroboam II. was probably contemporary with Rammân-nirâri, king of Assyria (B.c. 812-783). This king has recorded his exaction of tribute from Tyre and Sidon, "the land of Omri" (i.e., Israel), Edom, and Philistia; and a siege of Damascus, followed by the submission of Mari', its king, and the spoiling of his palace. The prostration of his enemy thus accounts for the permanent success of Jeroboam, who was himself a vassal of Assyria.

B.C. 784.

He recovered.-This verb was rendered "he restored" in verse 25, and that is the meaning here.

Damascus and Hamath.-Not the entire states so named, which were powerful independent communities, but portions of their territory, which had belonged to Israel in the days of Solomon. (See Note on 2 Chron. viii. 3, 4.)

Which belonged to Judah.-This is really an epithet restrictive of the phrase, “Damascus and Ha

His Death.

to Judah, for Israel, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel? (29) And Jeroboam slept with his fathers, even with the kings of Israel; and Zachariah his son reigned in his stead.

B.C. cir. 810.

math," the sense being, "Judæan Damascus and Hamath." (Comp. the Note on chap. xv. 1.)

For Israel.-Heb., in Israel. The sense is obscure; but the particle "in" appears to refer to the re-incorporation of the Damascene and Hamathite districts with Israel. Ewald would cancel "which belonged to Judah," and read "to Israel" (so the Syriac and Arabic. But the LXX., Vulg., and Targum support the existing text.) Others explain: He restored Damascus and Hamath to Judah (i.e., to the theocratic people) through Israel (i.e., the northern kingdom, to which the recovered districts were actually annexed). No explanation, however, is really satisfactory. It may be that by an oversight the Judæan editor wrote "to Judah," instead of "to Israel," and that some scribe added a marginal note "in Israel," which afterwards crept into the text. It is curious to find certain districts of Hamath leagued with Azariah, king of Judah, against Tiglath Pileser. (See Note on chap. xv. 1.)

(29) Even with the kings of Israel.-Probably some words have fallen out, and the original text was, and was buried in Samaria with the kings of Israel." (Comp. verse 16.) The Syriac and Arabic have," and was buried."



(1–7) The REIGN OF AZARIAH (Uzziah), KING OF JUDAH. (Comp. 2 Chron. xxvi.)

Azariah.- An Azriyâhu (Az-ri-ya-a-u), king of Judah, is mentioned in two fragmentary inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser II. (B.c. 745-727). The most important statement runs: "xix. districts of the city of Hamath (Hammatti) with the cities of their circuit, on the coast of the sea of the setting of the sun (i.e., the Mediterranean), which in their transgression had revolted to Azariah, to the border of Assyria I restored, my prefects my governors over them I appointed." The Eponym list records a three years' campaign of Tiglath Pileser against the Syrian state of Arpad in B.C. 742— 740. Schrader supposes that Azariah and Hamath were concerned in this campaign. (This conflicts with the ordinary chronology, which fixes 758 B.C. as the year of Azariah's death.)

(1) In the twenty and seventh year of Jeroboam. An error of transcription for the fifteenth year (, 15; 15, 27). The error is clear from chap. xiv. 2, 17, 23. Amaziah reigned twenty-nine years (chap. xiv. 2), fourteen concurrently with Joash, and fifteen with Jeroboam. It was, therefore, in the fifteenth of Jeroboam that Uzziah succeeded his father.


Azariah Smitten with Leprosy.

Jecholiah of Jerusalem. (3) And he did a ch. 10.30.
that which was right in the sight of the
LORD, according to all that his father
Amaziah had done; (4) save that the
high places were not removed: the
people sacrificed and burnt incense still
on the high places.

The Reign of Zachariah.

in Samaria six months. (9) And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, as his fathers had done: he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin. (10) And Shallum the son of Jabesh conspired against him, and smote him before the people, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.

(11) And the rest of the acts of Zachariah, behold, they are written in the b Matt. 1.9, called book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel. (12) This was "the word of the


(8) In the thirty and eighth year of Azariah king of Judah did Zachariah the son of Jeroboam reign over Israel

(5) And the LORD smote the king, so that he was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house. And Jotham the king's son was over the house, judging the people of the land.


(6) And the rest of the acts of Azariah, and all that he did, are they not written Heb., a month of LORD which he spake unto Jehu, saying, in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? (7) So Azariah slept with his fathers; and they buried him with his fathers in the city of David: and Jotham his son reigned in his stead.

Thy sons shall sit on the throne of Israel unto the fourth generation. And so it came to pass.

(13) Shallum the son of Jabesh began to reign in the nine and thirtieth year of Uzziah king of Judah; and he reigned a full month in Samaria. (14) For Menahem the son of Gadi went

B.C. cir. 772.


cir. 765.

B.C. cir. 758.

B.C. cir. 772.

B.C. cír. 733.

(3) And he did that which was right.-This statement is repeated word for word in Chronicles. Its exact meaning here, as in other instances, is that Azariah supported the legitimate worship, and lent his countenance to no foreign cultus. When the chronicler adds that he "sought God in the days of (the prophet) Zachariah," and that "as long as he sought Jehovah, God made him to prosper," he does not contradict the preceding general estimate of the king's religious policy, but simply gives additional information respecting his life and fortunes.

(5) And the Lord smote the king. The chronicler relates the reason-viz., because of his usurpation of priestly functions in the sanctuary. This happened towards the end of the reign. Jotham, the regent, was only twenty-five when Azariah died (verse 33).

Smote.-Or, struck. So we speak of a paralytic stroke, and the word plague literally means stroke.

In a several house.-Rather, in the sickhouse (or, hospital)-i.e., a royal residence outside of Jerusalem (Lev. xiii. 46; chap. vii. 3) set apart for such cases. (Strictly, in the house of freedom; because lepers were emancipated from all social relations and duties. Gesenius explains the word from an Arabic root said to mean prostration, weakness; but Lane gives for that term the special meaning smallness (or, narrowness) of the eye; weakness of sight. See his Arabic Lexicon, Bk. I., Pt. II., p. 772.

Over the house.-Not apparently as prefect of the palace (comp. 1 Kings iv. 6, xviii. 3), it as dwelling in the palace instead of his father.

Judging the people of the land.-As his father's representative. (Comp. 1 Sam. viii. 6, 20; 1 Kings iii. 9.)

This passage is strong evidence against the assumption of joint sovereignties of princes with their fathers, so often made by way of escaping chronological difficulties in Hebrew history. Jotham is not co-regent but viceroy of Azariah until the latter dies.

(6) The rest of the acts of Azariah.-Such as his wars with the Philistines and Arabs, his improvements in the organisation of the army and the defences

of the capital, his fondness for husbandry and cattlebreeding, and his success in all these directions, as well as his intrusion into the Sanctuary to offer incense at the golden altar. (See 2 Chron. xxv. and the Notes there.)


(8) In the thirty and eighth year of Azariah. -This agrees with the assumption that Jeroboam reigned fifty-one years (chap. xiv. 23).

(9) As his fathers-i.e., the dynasty of Jehu, of which he was the last member. Like all his predecessors, he upheld the illicit worship established by Jeroboam I.

(10) Son of Jabesh.-Not man of Jabesh Gilead, as Hitzig explains. The father's name is always given in the case of usurpers.

Before the people.-Rather, before people—i.e., in public. So all the versions except the LXX. The open assassination of the king is noted, in contrast with the secrecy with which former conspiracies had been concerted. It is a symptom of the rapidly-increasing corruption of morals, which allowed people to look on with indifference while the king was being murdered. (The LXX puts the Hebrew words into Greek letters thus: KeBλadu. The word qobol-"before"-is Aramaic rather than Hebrew, and only occurs here. Ewald acutely conjectured that Qōbolām "before people"-was really the proper name of another usurper, comparing Zech. xi. 8," the third king during that month;" but in that case the narrative is hardly coherent or complete. Grätz suggests the correction "in Ibleam.”

[ocr errors]

(12) This was the word of the Lord.-Thenius considers this remark as added by the Judæan editor to the short abstract of Zachariah's reign.

(13) A full month.-Literally, as margin. Thenius says Shallum cannot have reigned a full month, as Zech. xi. 8 obviously refers to the three kings Zachariah, Shallum, and Menahem

(14) For.-And.


Reign of Shallum

up from Tirzah, and came to Samaria, and smote Shallum the son of Jabesh in Samaria, and slew him, and reigned in his stead.

(15) And the rest of the acts of Shallum, and his conspiracy which he made, behold, they are written in the book of a 1 Chron. 5. 26. the chronicles of the kings of Israel.

(16) Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote

Menahem.—Tiglath Pileser II. records in his annals that in his eighth regnal year (i.e., B.C. 738) he took tribute of " Raçunnu (Rezin) the Damascene, and Menihimmè Samerinâ'a"-i.e., Menahem the Samaritan.

Gadi.-Or, a Gadite.

Went up from Tirzah.-Menahem was Zachariah's general, who at the time was quartered with the troops at Tirzah, near Samaria (1 Kings xiv. 17). On the news of the murder of Zachariah, Menahem marched to the capital. The month of Shallum's reign was probably taken up with preparations for hostilities on both sides. A battle at Samaria decided matters (Josephus). Perhaps, however, Menahem simply entered Samaria with a part of his forces.

(16) Then. After slaying Shallum, and seizing the

supreme power.

Tiphsah. The name means ford, and elsewhere denotes the well-known Thapsacus on the Euphrates (1 Kings iv. 24). Here, however, an Israelite city in the neighbourhood of Tirzah is obviously intended. The course of events was apparently this: after slaying Shallum, Menahem returned to Tirzah, and set out thence at the head of his entire army to bring the rest of the country to acknowledge him as king. Tiphsah resisting his claims, he made an example of it which proved efficient to terrorise other towns into submission. [Thenius would read Tappuah for Tiphsah by a slight change in one Hebrew letter. This agrees very well with the local indications of the text (comp. Josh. xvii. 7, 8), though, of course, there may have been an otherwise unknown Tiphsah near Tirzah.]

The coasts thereof.-Literally, her borders (or, territories). (Comp. Josh. xvii. 8.)

From Tirzah-i.e., starting from Tirzah. This shows that the districts of Tirzah and Tiphsah (or, Tappuah) were conterminous.

Because they opened not to him.-Literally, for one opened not; an impersonal construction. The meaning is the gates were closed against him. The to him is added by all the versions except the Targum. And all the women.-Comp. chap. viii. 21; Hosea xiii. 16; Amos i. 13.


(17) Reigned ten years.-And some months over. (Comp. verse 23.)

(18) He did that which was evil.-Ewald says that at the outset Menahem appeared to be guided by better principles, referring to Zech. xi. 4-8.

All his days.—In the Hebrew these words occur at the end of the verse. They are not found in any other instance of the common formula which

B.C. 772.


B.C. 771.

and of Menahem.

it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.

(17) In the nine and thirtieth year of Azariah king of Judah began Menahem the son of Gadi to reign over Israel, and reigned ten years in Samaria. (18) And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD he departed not all his days from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin. (19) And "Pul the king of Assyria came against the land and Menahem gave Pul a

the verse repeats (comp. 1 Kings xv. 26, 34, xvi. 26, xxii. 53; 2 Kings iii. 1, x. 31, &c.), and almost certainly belong to the next verse.

From the sins.-Heb., from upon the sins, which is peculiar. The reading of the LXX., "from all the sins," appears right.

(19) And. As it stands, the verse begins abruptly. But the reading of the LXX. restores the connection: "In his days Pul the king of Assyria," &c. (Comp. verse 29.)

Pul. This name has been read in the cuneiform (Pu-u-lu, i.e., Pú an officer of Sargon's). For the identity of Pul, king of Assyria, with Tiglath Pileser II., see Note on 1 Chron. v. 26, and Schrader's Die Keilinschr. und das Alt. Test., pp. 227-240 (2nd edit., 1883). Prof. Schrader gives the following as the result of his elaborate and most interesting discussion: (1) Menahem of Israel and Azariah of Judah were contemporaries, according to the Bible as well as the Inscriptions. (2) According to the Bible, both these rulers were contemporary with an Assyrian king Pul; according to the Inscriptions, with Tiglath Pileser. (3) Berosus calls Pul a Chaldean; Tiglath Pileser calls himself king of Chaldea. (4) Pul-Porus became in 731 B.C. king of Babylon; Tiglath Pileser in 731 B.C. received the homage of the Babylonian king Merodach-Baladan, as he also reduced other Babylonian princes in this year, amongst them Chinzeros of Amukkan. (5) Poros appears in the canon of Ptolemy as king of Babylon; Tiglath Pileser names himself "king of Babylon." (6) Chinzeros became king of Babylon in 731 B.C. according to the canon, and, in fact, along with (or, under) a king of the name of Poros; the hypothesis that the vanquished king of Amukkan of the same name was entrusted by Tiglath Pileser with the vassal-kingship of Babylon is suggested at once by the coincidence of the chronological data. (7) In the year 727-726 B.C. a change of government took place in Assyria in consequence of the death of Tiglath Pileser, and in Babylonia in consequence of the death of Porus. (8) No king appears in the Assyrian lists by a name like Pul, which is anomalous as a royal designation; we can only identify Pul with some other name in the lists, and, on historical grounds, with Tiglath Pileser only. (9) Pul and Pōros are forms of the same name (comp. Babiru for Bâbilu in Persian inscriptions). (10) From all this, the conclusion is inevitable that Pul and Porus, Pul and Tiglath Pileser, are one and the same person.

Came against the land.-Rather, came upon the land (Isa. x. 28; Judges xviii. 27). The meaning here is, occupied it.

A thousand talents of silver.-About £375,000. That his hand might be with him. - Pul (Tiglath Pileser) came at the invitation of Menahem to establish the latter in the sovereignty against other

« PreviousContinue »