Subject: Early Israel and the Surrounding Nations.
From: <Saved by Microsoft Internet Explorer 5>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 21:39:40 +1000

The Project Gutenberg EBook of Early Israel and the Surrounding Nations
by Archibald Sayce

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net

Title: Early Israel and the Surrounding Nations

Author: Archibald Sayce

Release Date: July 21, 2004 [EBook #12976]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EARLY ISRAEL ***

Produced by Jonathan Ingram, David King, and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team

EARLY ISRAEL AND THE SURROUNDING NATIONS

BY THE REV. A.H. SAYCE PROFESSOR OF ASSYRIOLOGY AT OXFORD

AUTHOR OF "THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE HEBREWS," &c

London
SERVICE & PATON
5 HENRIETTA STREET
COVENT
GARDEN
1899

INTRODUCTION

One of the first facts which strike the traveller in Palestine is the
smallness of a country which has nevertheless occupied so large a space in the
history of civilised mankind. It is scarcely larger than an English county, and
a considerable portion of it is occupied by rocky mountains and barren defiles
where cultivation is impossible. Its population could never have been great, and
though cities and villages were crowded together on the plains and in the
valleys, and perched at times on almost inaccessible crags, the difficulty of
finding sustenance for their inhabitants prevented them from rivalling in size
the European or American towns of to-day. Like the country in which they dwelt,
the people of Palestine were necessarily but a small population when compared
with the nations of our modern age.

And yet it was just this scanty population which has left so deep an impress
on the thoughts and religion of mankind, and the narrow strip of territory they
inhabited which formed the battle-ground of the ancient empires of the world.
Israel was few in numbers, and [pg vi] the Canaan it conquered was limited in extent;
but they became as it were the centre round which the forces of civilisation
revolved, and towards which they all pointed. Palestine, in fact, was for the
eastern world what Athens was for the western world; Athens and Attica were
alike insignificant in area and the Athenians were but a handful of men, but we
derive from them the principles of our art and philosophic speculation just as
we derive from Israel and Canaan the principles of our religion. Palestine has
been the mother-land of the religion of civilised man.

The geographical position of Palestine had much to do with this result. It
was the outpost of western Asia on the side of the Mediterranean, as England is
the outpost of Europe on the side of the Atlantic; and just as the Atlantic is
the highroad of commerce and trade for us of to-day, so the Mediterranean was
the seat of maritime enterprise and the source of maritime wealth for the
generations of the past. Palestine, moreover, was the meeting-place of Asia and
Africa. Not only was the way open for its merchants by sea to the harbours and
products of Europe, but the desert which formed its southern boundary sloped
away to the frontiers of Egypt, while to the north and east it was in touch with
the great kingdoms of western Asia, with Babylonia and Assyria, Mesopotamia and
the Hittites of the north. In days of which we are just beginning to have a
glimpse it had been a province [pg vii] of the Babylonian empire, and when Egypt threw
off the yoke of its Asiatic conquerors and prepared to win an empire for itself,
Canaan was the earliest of its spoils. In a later age Assyrians, Babylonians,
and Egyptians again contended for the mastery on the plains of Palestine; the
possession of Jerusalem allowed the Assyrian king to march unopposed into Egypt,
and the battle of Megiddo placed all Asia west of the Euphrates at the feet of
the Egyptian Pharaoh.

Palestine is thus a centre of ancient Oriental history. Its occupation by
Babylonians or Egyptians marks the shifting of the balance of power between Asia
and Africa. The fortunes of the great empires of the eastern world are to a
large extent reflected in its history. The rise of the one meant the loss of
Palestine to the other.

The people, too, were fitted by nature and circumstances for the part they
were destined to play. They were Semites with the inborn religious spirit which
is characteristic of the Semite, and they were also a mixed race. The highlands
of Canaan had been peopled by the Amorites, a tall fair race, akin probably to
the Berbers of northern Africa and the Kelts of our own islands; the lowlands
were in the hands of the Canaanites, a people of Semitic blood and speech, who
devoted themselves to the pursuit of trade. Here and there were settlements of
other tribes or races, notably the Hittites, who had descended from the
mountain-ranges [pg
viii] of the Taurus and spread over northern Syria. Upon all these varied
elements the Israelites flung themselves, at first in hostile invasion,
afterwards in friendly admixture. The Israelitish conquest of Palestine was a
slow process, and it was only in its earlier stages that it was accompanied by
the storming of cities and the massacre of their inhabitants. As time went on
the invaders intermingled with the older population of the land, and the heads
of the captives which surmount the names of the places captured by the Egyptian
Pharaoh Shishak in the kingdom of Judah all show the Amorite and not the Jewish
type of countenance. The main bulk of the population, in fact, must have
continued unchanged by the Israelitish conquest, and conquerors and conquered
intermarried together. The genealogies given by the Hebrew writers prove how
extensive this intermingling of racial elements must have been; even David
counted a Moabitess among his ancestors, and surrounded himself with guards of
foreign nationality. Solomon's successor, the first king of Judah, was the son
of an Ammonite mother, and we have only to read a few pages of the Book of
Judges to learn how soon after the invasion of Canaan the Israelites adopted the
gods and religious practices of the older population, and paid homage to the old
Canaanite shrines.

A mixed race is always superior to one of purer descent. It possesses more
enterprise and energy, [pg
ix] more originality of thought and purpose. The virtues and failings of
the different elements it embodies are alike intensified in it. We shall
probably not go far wrong if we ascribe to this mixed character of the
Israelitish people the originality which marks their history and finds its
expression in the rise of prophecy. They were a race, moreover, which was
moulded in different directions by the nature of the country in which it lived.
Palestine was partly mountainous; the great block of limestone known as the
mountains of Ephraim formed its backbone, and was that part of it which was
first occupied by the invading Israelites. But besides mountains there were
fertile plains and valleys, while on the sea-coast there were harbours, ill
adapted, it is true, to the requirements of modern ships, but sufficient for the
needs of ancient navigation. The Israelites were thus trained on the one hand to
the habits of hardy warriors, living a life of independence and individual
freedom in the fastnesses of the hills, and on the other hand were tempted to
become agriculturists and shepherds wherever their lot was cast in the lowlands.
The sea-coast was left to the older population, and to the Philistines, who had
settled upon it about the time of the Hebrew exodus from Egypt; but the
Philistines eventually became the subject-vassals of the Jewish kings, and
friendly intercourse with the Phoenicians towards the north not only brought
about the rise of a mixed people, partly [pg x] Canaanite and partly Israelitish, but also
introduced among the Israelites the Phoenician love of trade.

Alike, therefore, by its geographical position, by the characteristics of its
population, and by the part it played in the history of the civilised East,
Palestine was so closely connected with the countries and nations which
surrounded it that its history cannot be properly understood apart from theirs.
Isolated and alone, its history is in large measure unintelligible or open to
misconception. The keenest criticism is powerless to discover the principles
which underlie it, to detect the motives of the policy it describes, or to
estimate the credibility of the narratives in which it is contained, unless it
is assisted by testimony from without. It is like a dark jungle where the
discovery of a path is impossible until the sun penetrates through the foliage
and the daylight streams in through the branches of the trees.

Less than a century ago it seemed useless even to hope that such external
testimony would ever be forthcoming. There were a few scraps of information to
be gleaned from the classical authors of Greece and Rome, which had been so
sifted and tortured as to yield almost any sense that was required; but even
these scraps were self-contradictory, and, as we now know, were for the most
part little else than fables. It was impossible to distinguish between the true
and the false; to determine whether the Chaldæan fragments [pg xi] of Berossos were to be
preferred to the second and third hand accounts of Herodotus, or whether the
Egyptian chronology of Manetho was to be accepted in all its startling
magnitude. And when all was said and done, there was little that threw light on
the Old Testament story, much less that supplemented it.

But the latter part of the nineteenth century has witnessed discoveries which
have revolutionised our conceptions of ancient Oriental history, and illuminated
the pages of the Biblical narrative. While scholars and critics were disputing
over a few doubtful texts, the libraries of the old civilised world of the East
were lying underground, waiting to be disinterred by the excavator and
interpreted by the decipherer. Egypt, Assyria, and Babylonia have yielded up
their dead; Arabia, Syria, and Asia Minor are preparing to do the same. The
tombs and temples of Egypt, and the papyri which have been preserved in the
sandy soil of a land where frost and rain are hardly known, have made the old
world of the Egyptians live again before our eyes, while the clay books of
Babylonia and Assyria are giving us a knowledge of the people who wrote and read
them fully equal to that which we have of Greece or Rome. And yet we are but at
the beginning of discoveries. What has been found is but an earnest of the
harvest that is yet in store. It is but two years since that the French
excavator, de Sarzec, discovered a library of 30,000 tablets at Tello in
southern Chaldæa, [pg
xii] which had already been formed when Gudea ruled over the city in B.C.
2700, and was arranged in shelves one above the other. At Niffer, in the north
of Babylonia, the American excavators have found an even larger number of
tablets, some of which go back to the age of Sargon of Akkad, or 6000 years ago,
while fresh tablets come pouring into the museums of Europe and America from
other libraries found by the Arabs at Bersippa and Babylon, at Sippara and
Larsa. The Babylonia of the age of Amraphel, the contemporary of Abraham, has,
thanks to the recent finds, become as well known to us as the Athens of
Periklês; the daily life of the people can be traced in all its outlines, and we
even possess the autograph letters written by Amraphel himself. The culture and
civilisation of Babylonia were already immensely old. The contracts for the
lease and sale of houses or other estate, the documents relating to the property
of women, the reports of the law cases that were tried before the official
judges, all set before us a state of society which changed but little down to
the Persian era. Behind it lie centuries of slow development and progress in the
arts of life. The age of Amraphel, indeed, is in certain respects an age of
decline. The heyday of Babylonian art lay nearly two thousand years before it,
in the epoch of Sargon and his son Naram-Sin. It was then that the Babylonian
empire was established throughout western Asia as far as the Mediterranean, that
a postal [pg xiii]
service was organised along the highroads which led from one city of the empire
to another, and that Babylonian art reached its climax. It was then, too, that
the Babylonian system of writing practically took its final form.

The civilisation of western Asia is, as has been said, immensely old. That is
the net result of modern discovery and research. As far back as excavation can
carry us there is still culture and art. We look in vain for the beginnings of
civilised life. Even the pictures out of which the written systems of the
ancient East were developed belong to a past of which we have but glimpses. Of
savagery or barbarism on the banks of the lower Euphrates there is not a trace.
So far as our materials enable us to judge, civilised man existed from the
beginning in "the land of Shinar." The great temples of Babylonia were already
erected, the overflow of the rivers controlled, and written characters imprinted
on tablets of clay. Civilisation seems to spring up suddenly out of a night of
darkness, like Athena from the head of Zeus.

This is one of the chief lessons that have been taught us by Oriental
archaeology. Culture and civilisation are no new thing, at all events in the
East; long before the days of classical Greece, long before the days even of
Abraham, man was living in ease and comfort, surrounded by objects of art and
industry, acquainted with the art of writing, and carrying [pg xiv] on intercourse with
distant lands. We must rid ourselves once for all of the starveling ideas of
chronology which a classical training once encouraged, and of the belief that
history, in the true sense of the word, hardly goes back beyond the age of
Darius or Periklês. The civilisations of Babylonia and Egypt were already
decrepid when the ancestors of Periklês were still barbarians.

Another lesson is the danger of forming conclusions from imperfect evidence.
Apart from the earlier records of the Old Testament, there was no literature
which claimed a greater antiquity than the Homeric Poems of ancient Greece; no
history of older date than that of Hellas, unless indeed the annals of China
were to be included, which lay altogether outside the stream of European
history. Criticism, accordingly, deemed itself competent to decide dogmatically
on the character and credibility of the literature and history of which it was
in possession; to measure the statements of the Old Testament writings by the
rules of Greek and Latin literature, and to argue from the history of Europe to
that of the East. Uncontrolled by external testimony, critical scepticism played
havoc with the historical narratives that had descended to it, and starting from
the assumption that the world of antiquity was illiterate, refused to credit
such records of the past as dwarfed the proportions of Greek history, or could
not be harmonised with the [pg
xv] canons of the critic himself. It was quite sufficient for a fact to
go back to the second millennium B.C. for it to be peremptorily ruled out of
court.

The discoveries of Oriental archaeology have come with a rude shock to
disturb both the conclusions of this imperfectly-equipped criticism and the
principles on which they rest. Discovery has followed discovery, each more
marvellous than the last, and re-establishing the truth of some historical
narrative in which we had been called upon to disbelieve. Dr. Schliemann and the
excavators who have come after him have revealed to an incredulous world that
Troy of Priam which had been relegated to cloudland, and have proved that the
traditions of Mykenæan glory, of Agamemnon and Menelaos, and even of voyages to
the coast of Egypt, were not fables but veritable facts. Even more striking have
been the discoveries which have restored credit to the narratives of the Old
Testament, and shown that they rest on contemporaneous evidence. It was not so
long ago that the account of the campaign of Chedor-laomer and his allies in
Canaan was unhesitatingly rejected as a mere reflection into the past of the
campaigns of later Assyrian kings. Even the names of the Canaanite princes who
opposed him were resolved into etymological puns. But the tablets of Babylonia
have come to their rescue. We now know that long before the days of Abraham not
only did Babylonian armies [pg xvi] march to the shores of the Mediterranean, but
that Canaan was a Babylonian province, and that Amraphel, the ally of
Chedor-laomer, actually entitles himself king of it in one of his inscriptions.
We now know also that the political condition of Babylonia described in the
narrative is scrupulously exact. Babylonia was for a time under the domination
of the Elamites, and while Amraphel or Khammurabi was allowed to rule at Babylon
as a vassal-prince, an Elamite of the name of Eri-Aku or Arioch governed Larsa
in the south. Nay more; tablets have recently been found which show that the
name of the Elamite monarch was Kudur-Laghghamar, and that among his vassal
allies was Tudkhula or Tidal, who seems to have been king of the Manda, or
"nations" of Kurdistan. Khammurabi, whose name is also written Ammurapi, has
left us autograph letters, in one of which he refers to his defeat of
Kudur-Laghghamar in the decisive battle which at last delivered Babylonia from
the Elamite yoke.

The story of Chedor-laomer's campaign preserved in Genesis has thus found
complete verification. The political situation presupposed in it—however
unlikely it seemed to the historian but a few years ago—has turned out to be in
strict harmony with fact; the names of the chief actors in it have come down to
us with scarcely any alteration, and a fragment of old-world history, which
could not be fitted [pg
xvii] into the scheme of the modern historian, has proved to be part of a
larger story which the clay books of Babylonia are gradually unfolding before
our eyes. It is no longer safe to reject a narrative as "unhistorical" simply on
the ground of the imperfection of our own knowledge.

Or let us take another instance from the later days of Assyrian history, the
period which immediately precedes the first intercourse between Greece and the
East. We are told in the Books of the Chronicles that Manasseh of Judah rebelled
against his Assyrian master and was in consequence carried in chains to Babylon,
where he was pardoned and restored to his ancestral throne. The story seemed at
first sight of doubtful authenticity. It is not even alluded to in the Books of
the Kings; Nineveh and not Babylon was the capital of the Assyrian empire, and
the Assyrian monarchs were not in the habit of forgiving their revolted vassals,
much less of sending them back to their own kingdoms. And yet the cuneiform
inscriptions have smoothed away all these objections. Esar-haddon mentions
Manasseh among the subject princes of the West, and it was just Esar-haddon who
rebuilt Babylon after its destruction by his father, and made it his residence
during a part of the year. Moreover, other instances are known in which a
revolted prince was reinstated in his former power. Thus Assur-bani-pal forgave
the Egyptian prince of Sais when, like Manasseh, he had [pg xviii] been sent in chains to Assyria
after an unsuccessful rebellion, and restored him to his old principality. What
was done by Assur-bani-pal might well have been done by the more merciful
Esar-haddon, who showed himself throughout his reign anxious to conciliate the
conquered populations. It is even possible that Assur-bani-pal himself was the
sovereign against whom Manasseh rebelled and before whom he was brought. In this
case Manasseh's revolt would have been part of that general revolt of the
Assyrian provinces under the leadership of Babylon, which shook the empire to
its foundations, and in which the Assyrian king expressly tells us Palestine
joined. The Jewish king would thus have been carried to Babylon after the
capture of that city by the Assyrian forces of Assur-bani-pal.

But the recent history of Oriental archaeology is strewn with instances of
the danger of historical scepticism where the evidence is defective, and a
single discovery may at any moment throw new and unexpected light on the
materials we possess. Who, for instance, could have supposed that the name of
the Israelites would ever be found on an Egyptian monument? They were but a
small and despised body of public slaves, settled in Goshen, on the extreme
skirts of the Egyptian territory. And yet in 1886 a granite stela was found by
Professor Flinders Petrie containing a hymn of victory in honour of Meneptah the
son of Ramses II., and declaring how, among other triumphs, "the [pg xix] Israelites" had
been left "without seed." The names of all the other vanquished or subject
peoples mentioned in the hymn have attached to them the determinative of place;
the Israelites alone are without it; they alone have no fixed habitation, no
definite locality of their own, so far at least as the writer knew. It would
seem that they had already escaped into the desert, and been lost to sight in
its recesses. Who could ever have imagined that in such a case an Egyptian poet
would have judged it worth his while even to allude to the vanished serfs?

Still more recently the tomb of Menes, the founder of the united Egyptian
monarchy, and the leader of the first historical dynasty, has been discovered by
M. de Morgan at Negada, north of Thebes. It was only a few months previously
that the voice of historical criticism had authoritatively declared him to be
"fabulous" and "mythical." The "fabulous" Menes, nevertheless, has now proved to
be a very historical personage indeed; some of his bones are in the museum of
Cairo, and the objects disinterred in his tomb show that he belonged to an age
of culture and intercourse with distant lands. The hieroglyphic system of
writing was already complete, and fragments of obsidian vases turned on the
lathe indicate commercial relations with the Ægean Sea.

If we turn to Babylonia the story is the same. Hardly had the critic
pronounced Sargon of Akkad to be a [pg xx] creature of myth, when at Niffer and Telloh
monuments both of himself and of his son were brought to light, which, as in the
case of Menes, proved that this "creature of myth" lived in an age of advanced
culture and in the full blaze of history. At Niffer he and his son Naram-Sin
built a platform of huge bricks, each stamped with their names, and at Telloh
clay bullæ have been discovered, bearing the seals and addresses of the
letters which were conveyed during their reigns by a highly organised postal
service along the highroads of the kingdom. Numberless contract-tablets exist,
dated in the year when Sargon "conquered the land of the Amorites," as Syria and
Canaan were called, or accomplished some other achievement; and a cadastral
survey of the district in which Telloh was situated, made for the purpose of
taxation, incidentally refers to "the governor" who was appointed over "the
Amorites."

Perhaps, however, the discovery which above all others has revolutionised our
conceptions of early Oriental history, and reversed the critical judgments which
had prevailed in regard to it, was that of the cuneiform tablets of Tel
el-Amarna. The discovery was made in 1887 at Tel el-Amarna on the eastern bank
of the Nile, midway between the modern towns of Minia and Siût. Here is the site
of the city built by Khu-n-Aten, the "Heretic" Pharaoh, when the dissensions
between himself and the Theban priesthood [pg xxi] became too acute to allow him to remain any
longer in the capital of his fathers. He migrated northward, accordingly, with
his court and the adherents of the new creed which he sought to impose upon his
subjects, carrying with him the archives of the kingdom and the foreign
correspondence of the empire. It was this foreign correspondence which was
embodied in the cuneiform tablets. They make it clear that even under Egyptian
rule the Babylonian language and the Babylonian system of writing continued to
be the official language and script of western Asia, and that the Egyptian
government itself was forced to keep Babylonian secretaries who understood them.
The fact proves the long and permanent influence of Babylonian culture from the
banks of the Euphrates to the shores of the Mediterranean, and is intelligible
only in the light of the further fact that the empire of Sargon of Akkad had
been founded more than two thousand years before. Nothing but a prodigiously
long lapse of time could explain the firm hold thus obtained by a foreign
language, and a system of writing the most complex and difficult to learn that
has ever been invented.

The tablets further prove the existence throughout the Oriental world of
schools and libraries where the Babylonian language and characters could be
taught and learned and its voluminous literature stored and studied. The age of
Khu-n-Aten, which is also the age of Moses, was essentially a literary age; a
knowledge [pg xxii]
of reading and writing was widely spread, and an active correspondence was being
constantly carried on from one part of the civilised world to the other. Even
the Bedâwin shêkhs, who acted as free-lances in Palestine, sent letters to the
Pharaoh and read his replies. The archive-chambers of the cities of Canaan
contained numberless documents contemporaneous with the events they recorded,
and the libraries were filled with the treasures of Babylonian literature, with
legends and stories of the gods, and the earlier history of the East. Doubtless,
as in Babylonia, so too in Palestine there were also in them contracts and
inventories of property, dated in the Babylonian fashion by the events which
characterised the years of a king's reign. The scribes and upper classes could
read and write, and therefore had access to all these stores of literature and
historical materials.

There is no longer any reason, therefore, for doubting that Moses and his
contemporaries could have read and written books, or that the Hebrew legislator
was learned in "all the wisdom of the Egyptians." If we are to reject the
historical trustworthiness of the Pentateuch, it must be on other grounds than
the assumption of the illiterateness of the age or the impossibility of
compiling at the time an accurate register of facts. The Tel el-Amarna tablets
have made it impossible to return to the old critical point of view; the
probabilities henceforward are in favour of the early [pg xxiii] date and historical truth of
the Old Testament narratives, and not against them. Accurately-dated history and
a reading public existed in Babylonia long before the days of Abraham; in the
age of Moses the whole Eastern world from the Nile to the Euphrates was knit
together in the bonds of literary intercourse, and all who were in contact with
the great nations of the East—with Egypt, with Babylonia, or with Assyria—came
of necessity under its influence and held the book and its author in the highest
reverence.

But besides thus revolutionising our ideas of the age that preceded the
Hebrew Exodus, the Tel el-Amarna letters have thrown a welcome light on the
political causes of the Exodus itself. They have made it clear that the reaction
against the reforms and government of "the Heretic King" Khu-n-Aten was as much
national as religious. It was directed quite as much against the foreigner who
had usurped the chief offices of state, as against the religion which the
foreigner was believed to have brought with him. The rise of the Nineteenth
dynasty marks the triumph of the national uprising and the overthrow of Asiatic
influence. The movement of which it was the result resembled the revolt of Arabi
in our own days. But there was no England at hand to prevent the banishment of
the stranger and his religion; the Semites who had practically governed Egypt
under Khu-n-Aten were expelled or slain, and hard measure was [pg xxiv] dealt out to
such of their kinsfolk as still remained in the land. The free-born sons of
Israel in the district of Goshen were turned into public serfs, and compelled to
work at the buildings with which Ramses II. was covering the soil of Egypt, and
their "seed" was still further diminished by the destruction of their male
offspring, lest they should join the enemies of Egypt in any future invasion of
the country, or assist another attempt from within to subvert the old faith of
the people and the political supremacy of the Theban priests. That the fear was
not without justification is shown by the words of Meneptah, the son of Ramses,
at the time when the very existence of the Egyptian monarchy was threatened by
the Libyan invasion from the west and the sea-robbers who attacked it from the
Greek seas. The Asiatic settlers, he tells us, had pitched "their tents before
Pi-Bailos" (or Belbeis) at the western extremity of the land of Goshen, and the
Egyptian "kings found themselves cut off in the midst of their cities, and
surrounded by earthworks, for they had no mercenaries to oppose to" the foe. It
would seem that the Israelites effected their escape under cover of the Libyan
invasion in the fifth year of Meneptah's reign, and on this account it is that
their name is introduced into the pæan wherein the destruction of the Libyan
host is celebrated and the Pharaoh is declared to have restored peace to the
whole world.
[pg
xxv]

If the history of Israel thus receives light and explanation on the one side
from the revelations of Oriental archaeology, on the other side it sometimes
clears up difficulties in the history of the great nations of Oriental
antiquity. The Egyptologist, for instance, is confronted by a fact towards the
explanation of which the monuments furnish no help. This is the curious change
that passed over the tenure of land in Egypt during the period of Hyksos rule.
When the Fourteenth dynasty fell, a large part of the soil of Egypt was in the
hands of private holders, many of whom were great feudal landowners whose
acknowledgment of the royal supremacy was at times little more than nominal.
When, however, the Hyksos were at last driven back to Asia, and Ahmes succeeded
in founding the Eighteenth dynasty, these landowners had disappeared. All the
landed estate of the country had passed into the possession of the Pharaoh and
the priests, and the old feudal aristocracy had been replaced by a bureaucracy,
the members of which owed their power and position to the king. The history of
Joseph accounts for this, and it is the only explanation of the fact which is at
present forthcoming. Famine compelled the people to sell their lands to the king
and his minister, and a Hyksos Pharaoh and his Hebrew vizier thus succeeded in
destroying the older aristocracy and despoiling the natives of their estates. It
was probably at this [pg
xxvi] period also that the public granaries, of which we hear so much in
the age of the Eighteenth dynasty, were first established in Egypt, in imitation
of those of Babylonia, where they had long been an institution, and a
superintendent was appointed over them who, as in Babylonia, virtually held the
power of life and death in his hands.

One of the main results, then, of recent discovery in the East has been to
teach us the solidarity of ancient Oriental history, and the impossibility of
forming a correct judgment in regard to any one part of it without reference to
the rest. Hebrew history is unintelligible as long as it stands alone, and the
attempt to interpret it apart and by itself has led to little else than false
and one-sided conclusions; it is only when read in the light of the history of
the great empires which flourished beside it that it can be properly understood.
Israel and the nations around it formed a whole, so far as the historian is
concerned, which, like the elements of a picture, cannot be torn asunder. If we
would know the history of the one, we must know the history of the other also.
And each year is adding to our knowledge; new monuments are being excavated, new
inscriptions being read, and the revelations of to-day are surpassed by those of
to-morrow. We have already learnt much, but it is only a commencement; Egypt is
only now beginning to be scientifically explored, a few only of [pg xxvii] the
multitudinous libraries of Babylonia have been brought to light, and the soil of
Assyria has been little more than touched. Elsewhere, in Elam, in Mesopotamia,
in Asia Minor, in Palestine itself, everything still remains to be done. The
harvest truly is plentiful, but the labourers are few.

We have, however, learnt some needful lessons. The historian has been warned
against arguing from the imperfection of his own knowledge, and rejecting an
ancient narrative merely because it seems unsupported by other testimony. He has
been warned, too, against making his own prepossessions and assumptions the test
of historical truth, of laying down that a reported fact could not have happened
because it runs counter to what he assumes to have been the state of society in
some particular age. Above all, the lesson of modesty has been impressed upon
him, modesty in regard to the extent of his own knowledge and the fallibility of
his own conclusions. It does not follow that what we imagine ought to have
happened has happened in reality; on the contrary, the course of Oriental
history has usually been very different from that dreamed of by the European
scholar in the quietude of his study. If Oriental archæology has taught us
nothing else, it has at least taught us how little we know.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

I.
THE ISRAELITES

II.
CANAAN

III.
THE NATIONS OF THE SOUTH-EAST

IV.
THE NATIONS OF THE NORTH-EAST

V.
EGYPT

VI.
BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA

VII.
CONCLUSION

APPENDICES
[pg 33]

CHAPTER I

THE ISRAELITES

Israel traced its origin to Babylonia. It was from "Ur of the Chaldees" that
Abraham "the Hebrew" had come, the rock out of which it was hewn. Here on the
western bank of the Euphrates was the earliest home of the Hebrews, of whom the
Israelites claimed to be a part.

But they were not the only nation of the ancient Oriental world which derived
its ancestry from Abraham. He was the father not only of the Israelites, but of
the inhabitants of northern and central Arabia as well. The Ishmaelites who were
settled in the north of the Arabian peninsula, the descendants of Keturah who
colonised Midian and the western coast, were also his children. Moab and Ammon,
moreover, traced their pedigree to his nephew, while Edom was the elder brother
of Israel. Israel, in fact, was united by the [pg 34] closest ties of blood to all the populations
which in the historic age dwelt between the borders of Palestine and the
mountain-ranges of south-eastern Arabia. They formed a single family which
claimed descent from a common ancestor.

Israel was the latest of them to appear on the scene of history. Moab and
Ammon had subjugated or absorbed the old Amorite population on the eastern side
of the Jordan, Ishmael and the Keturites had made themselves a home in Arabia,
Edom had possessed itself of the mountain-fastnesses of the Horite and the
Amalekite, long before the Israelites had escaped from their bondage in Egypt,
or formed themselves into a nation in the desert. They were the youngest member
of the Hebrew family, though but for them the names of their brethren would have
remained forgotten and unknown. Israel needed the discipline of a long
preparation for the part it was destined to play in the future history of the
world.

The Hebrews belonged to the Semitic race. The race is distinguished by
certain common characteristics, but more especially by the possession of a
common type of language, which is markedly different from the other languages of
mankind. Its words are built on what is termed the principle of triliteralism;
the skeleton, as it were, of each of them consisting of three consonants, while
the vowels, which give flesh and life to the skeleton, vary according to the
grammatical [pg 35]
signification of the word. The relations of grammar are thus expressed for the
most part by changes of vocalic sound, just as in English the plural of "man" is
denoted by a change in the vowel. The verb is but imperfectly developed; it is,
in fact, rather a noun than a verb, expressing relation rather than time.
Compound words, moreover, are rare, the compounds of our European languages
being replaced in the Semitic dialects by separate words.

Perhaps one of the most remarkable characteristics of the Semitic family of
speech is its conservatism and resistance to change. As compared with the other
languages of the world, its grammar and vocabulary have alike undergone but
little alteration in the course of the centuries during which we can trace its
existence. The very words which were used by the Babylonians four or five
thousand years ago, can still be heard, with the same meaning attached to them,
in the streets of Cairo. Kelb is "dog" in modern Arabic as kalbu
was in ancient Babylonian, and the modern Arabic tayyîb, "good," is the
Babylonian tâbu. One of the results of this unchangeableness of Semitic
speech is the close similarity and relationship that exist between the various
languages that represent it. They are dialects rather than distinct languages,
more closely resembling one another than is the case even with the Romanic
languages of modern Europe, which are descended from Latin.
[pg 36]

Most of the Semitic languages—or dialects if we like so to call them—are now
dead, swallowed up by the Arabic of Mohammed and the Qorân. The Assyrian which
was spoken in Assyria and Babylonia is extinct; so, too, are the Ethiopic of
Abyssinia, and the Hebrew language itself. What we term Hebrew was originally
"the language of Canaan," spoken by the Semitic Canaanites long before the
Israelitish conquest of the country, and found as late as the Roman age on the
monuments of Phoenicia and Carthage. The Minæan and the Sabæan dialects of
southern Arabia still survive in modern forms; Arabic, which has now overflowed
the rest of the Semitic world, was the language of central Arabia alone. In
northern Arabia, as well as in Mesopotamia and Syria, Aramaic dialects were
used, the miserable relics of which are preserved to-day among a few villagers
of the Lebanon and Lake Urumîyeh. These Aramaic dialects, it is now believed,
arose from a mixture of Arabic with "the language of Canaan."

On the physical side, the Semitic race is not so homogeneous as it is on the
linguistic side. But this is due to intermarriage with other races, and where it
is purest it displays the same general characteristics. Thick and fleshy lips,
arched nose, black hair and eyes, and white complexion, distinguish the
pure-blooded Semite. Intellectually he is clever and able, quick to learn and
remember, with an innate capacity for trade [pg 37] and finance. Morally he is intense but sensuous,
strong in his hate and in his affections, full of a profound belief in a
personal God as well as in himself.

When Abraham was born in Ur of the Chaldees the power and influence of
Babylonia had been firmly established for centuries throughout the length and
breadth of western Asia. From the mountains of Elam to the coast of the
Mediterranean the Babylonian language was understood, the Babylonian system of
writing was taught and learned, Babylonian literature was studied, Babylonian
trade was carried on, and Babylonian law was in force. From time to time Syria
and Canaan had obeyed the rule of the Babylonian kings, and been formed into a
Babylonian province. In fact, Babylonian rule did not come to an end in the west
till after the death of Abraham; Khammurabi, the Amraphel of Genesis, entitles
himself king of "the land of the Amorites," as Palestine was called by the
Babylonians, and his fourth successor still gives himself the same title. The
loss of Canaan and the fall of the Babylonian empire seem to have been due to
the conquest of Babylon by a tribe of Elamite mountaineers.

The Babylonians of Abraham's age were Semites, and the language they spoke
was not more dissimilar from Canaanitish or Hebrew than Italian is from Spanish.
But the population of the country had not always been of the Semitic stock. Its
first settlers—those who had founded its cities, who had [pg 38] invented the cuneiform system of
writing and originated its culture—were of a wholly different race, and spoke an
agglutinative language which had no resemblance to that of the Semites. They
had, however, been conquered and their culture absorbed by the Semitic
Babylonians and Assyrians of later history, and the civilisation and culture
which had spread throughout western Asia was a Semitic modification and
development of the older culture of Chaldæa. Its elements, indeed, were foreign,
but long before it had been communicated to the nations of the west it had
become almost completely Semitic in character. The Babylonian conquerors of
Canaan were Semites, and the art and trade, the law and literature they brought
with them were Semitic also.

In passing, therefore, from Babylonia to Canaan, Abraham was but passing from
one part of the Babylonian empire to another. He was not migrating into a
strange country, where the government and civilisation were alike unknown, and
the manners and customs those of another world. The road he traversed had been
trodden for centuries by soldiers and traders and civil officials, by
Babylonians making their way to Canaan, and by Canaanites intending to settle in
Babylonia for the sake of trade. Harran, the first stage on his journey, bore a
Babylonian name, and its great temple of the Moon-god had been founded by
Babylonian princes after the model of the temple of the [pg 39] Moon-god at Ur, the birthplace of the
patriarch. Even in Canaan itself the deities of Babylonia were worshipped or
identified with the native gods. Anu the god of the sky, Rimmon the god of the
air, Nebo the interpreter and prophet of Bel-Merodach, were all adored in
Palestine, and their names were preserved to later times in the geography of the
country. Even Ashtoreth, in whom all the other goddesses of the popular cult
came to be merged, was of Babylonian origin.

Abraham took with him to the west the traditions and philosophy of Babylonia,
and found there a people already well acquainted with the literature, the law,
and the religion of his fatherland. The fact is an important one; it is one of
the most striking results of modern discovery, and it has a direct bearing on
our estimate of the credibility of the narratives contained in the Book of
Genesis. Written and contemporaneous history in Babylonia went back to an age
long anterior to that of Abraham—his age, indeed, marks the beginning of the
decline of the Babylonian power and influence; and consequently, there is no
longer any reason to treat as unhistorical the narratives connected with his
name, or the statements that are made in regard to himself and his posterity.
His birth in Ur, his migration to Harran and Palestine, have been lifted out of
the region of doubt into that of history, and we may therefore accept without
further [pg 40]
questioning all that we are told of his relationship to Lot or to the tribes of
north-western Arabia.

In Canaan, however, Abraham was but a sojourner. Though he came there as a
Babylonian prince, as an ally of its Amoritish chieftains, as a leader of armed
troops, even as the conqueror of a Babylonian army, his only possession in it
was the burial-place of Machpelah. Here, in the close neighbourhood of the later
Hebron, he bought a plot of ground in the sloping cliff, wherein a twofold
chamber had been excavated in the rock for the purposes of burial. The sepulchre
of Machpelah was the sole possession in the land of his adoption which he could
bequeath to his descendants.

Of these, however, Ishmael and the sons of Keturah moved southward into the
desert, out of the reach of the cultured Canaanites and the domination of
Babylonia. Isaac, too, the son of his Babylonian wife, seemed bent upon
following their example. He established himself on the skirts of the southern
wilderness, not far on the one hand from the borders of Palestine, nor on the
other from the block of mountains within which was the desert sanctuary of
Kadesh-barnea. His sons Esau and Jacob shared the desert and the cultivated land
between them. Esau planted himself among the barren heights of Mount Seir,
subjugating or assimilating its Horite and Amalekite inhabitants, and securing
the road which carried the [pg
41] trade of Syria to the Red Sea; while Jacob sought his wives among the
settled Aramæans of Harran, and, like Abraham, pitched his tent in Canaan. At
Shechem, in the heart of Canaan, he purchased a field, not, as in the case of
Abraham, for the sake of burial, but in order that he might live upon it in tent
or house, and secure a spring of water for his own possession.

In Jacob the Israelites saw their peculiar ancestor. His twelve sons became
the fathers and representatives of the twelve tribes of Israel, and his own name
was changed to that of Israel. The inscribed tablets of early Babylonia have
taught us that both Israel and Ishmael were the names of individuals in the
Patriarchal age, not the names of tribes or peoples, and consequently the
Israelites, like the Ishmaelites, of a later day must have been the descendants
of an individual Israel and Ishmael as the Old Testament records assert. Already
in the reign of the Babylonian king Ammi-zadok, the fourth successor of
Amraphel, the contemporary of Abraham, a high-priest in the district of northern
Chaldasa assigned to "Amorite" settlers from Canaan, bore the name of Sar-ilu or
Israel.1
[pg 42]

The fuller and older form of Jacob is Jacob-el. We find it in contracts drawn
up in Babylonia in the time of Abraham; we also find it as the name of an
Egyptian king in the period when Egypt was ruled by Asiatic conquerors. The
latter fact is curious, taken in connection with the further fact, that the son
of the Biblical Jacob—the progenitor of the Israelites—was the viceroy of an
Egyptian Pharaoh, and that his father died in the Egyptian land of Goshen.
Goshen was the district which extends from Tel el-Maskhuta or Pithom near
Ismailîya to Belbeis and Zagazig, and includes the modern Wadi Tumilât; the
traveller on the railway passes through it on his way from Ismailîya to Cairo.
It lay outside the Delta proper, and, as the Egyptian inscriptions tell us, had
from early times been handed over to the nomad Bedâwin and their flocks. Here
they lived, separate from the native agriculturists, herding their flocks and
cattle, and in touch with their kinsmen of the desert. Here, too, the children
of Israel were established, and here they multiplied and became a people.

The growth of a family into a tribe or people is in accordance with Arab
rule. There are numerous historical instances of a single individual becoming
the forefather of a tribe or a collection of tribes which under favourable
conditions may develop into a nation. The tribe or people is known as the "sons"
of their ancestor; his name is handed down from generation [pg 43] to generation, and the
names of his leading descendants, the representatives of the tribe, are handed
down at the same time. Where we speak of the population of a country, the Arab
speaks of the "children" of a certain man. Such a mode of expression is in
harmony with Semitic habits of thought. The genealogical method prevails alike
in history and geography; a colony is the "daughter" or "son" of its
mother-city, and the town of Sidon is the "first-born" of Canaan.

Jacob had twelve sons, and his descendants were accordingly divided into
twelve tribes. But the division was an artificial one; it never at any time
corresponded exactly with historical reality. Levi was not a tribe in the same
sense as the rest of his brethren; no territory was assigned to him apart from
the so-called Levitical cities; and he represented the priestly order wherever
it might be found and from whatever ancestors it might be derived. Simeon and
Dan hardly existed as separate tribes except in name; their territories were
absorbed into that of Judah, and it was only in the city of Laish in the far
north that the memory of Dan survived. The tribe of Joseph was split into two
halves, Ephraim and Manasseh, while Judah was a mixture of various elements—of
Hebrews who traced their origin alike to Judah, to Simeon, and to Dan; of
Kenites and Jerahmeelites from the desert of Arabia; and of Kenizzites from
Edom. Benjamin or Ben-Oni was, as a tribe, [pg 44] merely the southern portion of the house of
Joseph, which had settled around the sanctuary of Beth-On or Beth-el. Benjamin
means the "Southerner," and Ben-Oni "the inhabitant of Beth-On." It is even
questionable whether the son of Jacob from whom the tribe was held to be
descended bore the name of Benjamin. Had the name of Esau not been preserved we
should not have known the true name of the founder of Edom, and it may be that
the name of the tribe of Benjamin has been reflected back upon its ancestor.

In Goshen, at all events, the tribes of Israel would have been distinguished
by the names of their actual forefathers. They would have been "the sons" of
Reuben or Judah, of Simeon or Gad. But they were all families within a single
family. They were all "Israelites" or "sons of Israel," and in an inscription of
the Egyptian king Meneptah they are accordingly called Israelu,
"Israelites," without any territorial adjunct. They lived in Goshen, like the
Bedâwin of to-day, and their social organisation was that of Arabia.

The immediate occasion of the settlement of Israel on the outskirts of Egypt
was that which has brought so many Bedâwin herdsmen to the valley of the Nile
both before and since. The very district of Goshen in which they settled was
occupied again, shortly after their desertion of it, by nomads from Edom who had
besought the Pharaoh for meadow-land on which to feed their flocks. The need of
pasturage from time [pg
45] immemorial has urged the pastoral tribes of the desert towards the
fertile land of the Nile. When want of rain has brought drought upon Canaan,
parching the grass and destroying the corn, the nomad has invariably set his
face toward the country which is dependent for its fertility, not upon the rains
of heaven, but upon the annual overflow of its river. It was a famine in Canaan,
produced by the absence of rain, which made Jacob and his sons "go down into
Egypt."

But besides this immediate cause there was yet another. They were assured of
a welcome in the kingdom of the Nile and the gift of a district in which they
might live. One of the sons of Jacob had become the Vizier of the Egyptian
Pharaoh. Joseph, the Hebrew slave who had been sold into bondage by his
brothers, had risen to be the first minister of the king and the favourite of
his sovereign. He had foretold the coming years of plenty and dearth; but he had
done more—he had pointed out how to anticipate the famine and make it subserve
the interests of despotism. He was not a seer only, he was a skilful
administrator as well. He had taken advantage of the years of scarcity to effect
a revolution in the social and political constitution of Egypt. The people had
been obliged to sell their lands and even themselves to the king for bread, and
become from henceforth a population of royal slaves. The lands of Egypt were
[pg 46] divided between
the king and the priests; the peasantry tilled them for the state and for the
temples, while the upper classes owed their wealth and position to the offices
which they received at court.

It would seem that the Israelites entered Egypt when the country was governed
by the last of those foreign dynasties from Asia which had conquered the kingdom
of the Pharaoh, and are known by the name of the Hyksos or Shepherd kings. The
Egyptian monuments have shown us that during their dominion its internal
constitution underwent precisely the change which is described in the history of
Joseph. Before the Hyksos conquest there was a great feudal aristocracy, rich in
landed estates and influence, which served as a check upon the monarch, and at
times even refused to obey his authority. When the Hyksos conquerors are finally
expelled, we find that this feudal aristocracy has disappeared, and its place
has been taken by a civil and military bureaucracy. The king has become a
supreme autocrat, by the side of whom the priests alone retain any power. The
land has passed out of the hands of the people; high and low alike are dependent
for what they have on the favour of the king.

The Hyksos dynasties were allied in race and sympathies with the settlers
from Asia. Joseph must have died before their expulsion, but it is probable that
he saw the outbreak of the war which ended in it, and which after five
generations of conflict restored the [pg 47] Egyptians to independence. The Eighteenth dynasty
was founded by the native princes of Thebes, and the war against the Asiatic
stranger which had begun in Egypt was carried into Asia itself. Canaan was made
an Egyptian province, and the Egyptian empire was extended to the banks of the
Euphrates.

But the conquest of Asia brought with it the introduction of Asiatic
influences into the country of the conqueror. The Pharaohs married Asiatic
wives, and their courts became gradually Asiatised. At length Amenophis IV.,
under the tutelage of his mother, attempted to abolish the national religion of
Egypt, and to substitute for it a sort of pantheistic monotheism, based on the
worship of the Asiatic Baal as represented by the Solar Disk. The Pharaoh
transferred his capital from Thebes to a new site farther north, now known as
Tel el-Amarna, changed his own name to Khu-n-Aten, "the Glory of the Solar
Disk," and filled his court with Asiatic officials and the adherents of the new
cult. The reaction, however, soon came. The native Egyptians rose in revolt; the
foreigner fled from the valley of the Nile, and the capital of Khu-n-Aten fell
into ruin. A new dynasty, the Nineteenth, arose under Ramses I., whose grandson,
Ramses II., reigned for sixty-seven years, and crowded Egypt with his buildings
and monuments.

One of the cities he built has been shown by the excavations of Dr. Naville
to have been Pa-Tum, the [pg
48] Pithom of the Old Testament. Ramses II., therefore, must have been
the Pharaoh of the Oppression. The picture set before us in the first chapter of
Exodus fits in exactly with the character of his reign. The dynasty to which he
belonged represented the reaction against the domination and influence of the
foreigner from Asia, and the oppression of the Israelites would naturally have
been part of its policy. Such of the Asiatics as still remained in Egypt were
turned into public serfs, and measures were taken to prevent them from
multiplying so as to be dangerous to their masters. The free spirit of the
Bedâwin was broken by servitude, and every care was used that they should be
unable to help their brethren from Asia in case of another "Hyksos" invasion.
The incessant building operations of Ramses needed a constant supply of workmen,
and financial as well as political interests thus suggested that merciless
corvée of the Israelites which rendered them at once politically harmless
and serviceable to the state.

In spite of all repression, however, the oppressed people continued to
multiply, and eventually escaped from their "house of bondage." The stela of
Meneptah, on which the name of "Israelites" occurs, implies that they had
already been lost to sight in the desert. The other nationalities over whom
Meneptah is said to have triumphed all have the term "country" attached to their
names; the "Israelites" alone are without local habitation. Egyptian legend, as
reported [pg 49] by the
native historian Manetho, placed the Exodus in the reign of Meneptah, and as
Meneptah was the son and successor of Ramses II., the correctness of the
statement is antecedently probable. It was in the fifth year of his reign that
the Delta was attacked by a formidable combination of foes. The Libyans
threatened it on the west: on the north, bands of sea-pirates from the coasts of
Asia Minor and the islands of the Mediterranean attacked it by sea and land. A
mutilated inscription of Meneptah tells us how the tents of the invaders had
been pitched on the outskirts of the land of Goshen, within reach of the Bedâwin
shepherds who fed their flocks there, and how the troops of the Pharaoh, pressed
at once by the enemy and by the disaffected population of Goshen, had been
cooped up within the walls of the great cities, afraid to venture forth. The
fate of the invasion was sealed, however, by a decisive battle in which the
Egyptians almost annihilated their foes. But the land of Goshen was left empty
and desolate; the foreign tribes who had dwelt in it fled into the wilderness
under the cover of the Libyan invasion. The pressure of the invasion had forced
the Pharaoh to allow his serfs a free passage out of Egypt, quite as much as the
"signs and wonders" which were wrought by the hand of Moses. Egypt was protected
on its eastern side by a line of fortifications, and through these permission
was given that the Israelites should pass. But the permission was hardly [pg 50] given before it was
recalled. A small body of cavalry, not move than six hundred in number, was sent
in pursuit of the fugitives, who were loaded with the plunder they had carried
away from the Egyptians. They were a disorganised and unwarlike multitude,
consisting partly of serfs, partly of women and children, partly of stragglers
from the armies of the Libyan and Mediterranean invaders. Six hundred men were
deemed sufficient either to destroy them or to reduce them once more to
captivity.

But the fugitives escaped as it were by miracle. A violent wind from the east
drove back the shallow waters at the head of the Gulf of Suez, by the side of
which they were encamped, and the Israelites passed dryshod over the bed of "the
sea." Before their pursuers could overtake them, the wind had veered, and the
waters returned on the Egyptian chariots. The slaves were free at last, once
more in the wilderness in which Isaac had tended his flocks, and in contact with
their kinsmen of Edom and Midian.

Moses had led them out of Egypt, and Moses now became their lawgiver. The
laws which he gave them formed them into a nation, and laid the foundations of
the national faith. Henceforth they were to be a separate people, bound together
by the worship of one God, who had revealed Himself to them under the name of
Yahveh. First at Sinai, among the mountains of Seir and Paran, and then at
Kadesh-barnea, the [pg
51] modern 'Ain Qadîs, the Mosaic legislation was promulgated. The first
code was compiled under the shadow of Mount Sinai; its provisions were
subsequently enlarged or modified by the waters of En-Mishat, "the Spring of
Judgment."

The Israelites lay hidden, as it were, in the desert for many long years,
preparing themselves for the part they were afterwards to play in the history of
mankind. But from the moment of their departure from Egypt their goal had been
Canaan. They were not mere Bedâwin; they belonged to that portion of the Semitic
race which had made settlements and founded kingdoms in Moab and Ammon and Edom,
and their residence in the cultured land of the Nile had made it impossible for
them ever to degenerate into the lawless robbers of the wilderness. They were
settled Bedâwin, not Bedâwin proper; not Bedâwin by blood and descent, but
Semites who had adopted the wandering and pastoral habits of the Bedâwin tribes.
They were like their brethren of Edom, who, though they came to Egypt seeking
pasturage for their cattle, had nevertheless founded at home an elective
monarchy. The true Bedâwin of the Old Testament are the Amalekites, and between
the Israelite and the Amalekite there was the difference that there is between
the peasant and the gypsy. The fact is important, and the forgetfulness of it
has led more than one historian astray.
[pg 52]

The first attempt to invade Canaan failed. It was made from the south, from
the shelter of the block of mountains within which stood the sanctuary of
Kadesh-barnea. The Israelitish forces were disastrously defeated at Zephath, the
Hormah of later days, and the invasion of the Promised Land was postponed. The
desert life had still to continue for a while. In the fastness of 'Ain Qadîs the
forces of Israel grew and matured, and a long series of legislative enactments
organised it into a homogeneous whole. At length the time came when the
Israelites felt strong enough once more to face an enemy and to win by the sword
a country of their own. It was from the east that they made their second attack.
Aaron the high-priest was dead, but his brother Moses was still their leader.
The Edomites refused them a passage along the high-road of trade which led
northward from the Gulf of Aqaba; skirting Edom accordingly, they marched
through a waterless desert to the green wadis of Moab, and there pitched their
camp. The Amorite kingdoms of Sihon and Og fell before their assault. The
northern part of Moab, which Sihon had conquered, was occupied by the invaders,
and the plateau of Bashan, over which Og had ruled, fell into Israelitish hands.
The invaders now prepared to cross the Jordan and advance into the highlands of
Canaan. Moses died on the summit of a Moabite mountain and his place was taken
by Joshua.

Joshua was a general and not a legislator. He could [pg 53] win battles and destroy cities, but he
could not restore what he had destroyed, or organise his followers into a state.
Jericho, which commanded the ford across the Jordan, fell into his hands; the
confederate kings of southern Canaan were overthrown in battle, and the tribe of
Ephraim, to which Joshua belonged, was established in the mountainous region
which afterwards bore its name. Henceforward the mountains of Ephraim formed the
centre and the stronghold of Israelitish power in Palestine, from whence the
invading tribes could issue forth to conquest, or to which they could retreat
for shelter in case of need.

Beyond leading his people into Canaan and establishing them too firmly in its
midst to be ever dislodged, Joshua personally did but little. The conquest of
Canaan was a slow process, which was not completed till the days of the
monarchy. Jerusalem was not captured till the reign of David, Gezer was the
dowry received by Solomon along with his Egyptian wife. At first the Canaanites
were treated with merciless ferocity. Their cities were burned, the inhabitants
of them massacred, and the spoil divided among the conquerors. But a time soon
came when tribute was accepted in place of extermination, when leagues were made
with the Canaanitish cities, and the Israelites intermarried with the older
population of the country. As in Britain after the Saxon conquest, the invaders
settled in the country rather than in the towns, so that [pg 54] while the peasantry was Israelite the
townsfolk either remained Canaanite or were a mixture of the two races.

The mixture introduced among the Israelites the religion and the beliefs, the
manners and the immoralities, of the Canaanitish people. The Mosaic legislation
was forgotten; the institutions prescribed in the wilderness were ignored. Alone
at Shiloh, in the heart of Ephraim, was a memory of the past observed; here the
descendants of Aaron served in the tabernacle, and kept alive a recollection of
the Mosaic code. Here alone no image stood in the sanctuary of the temple; the
ark of the covenant was the symbol of the national God.

But the influence of Shiloh did not extend far. The age that succeeded the
entrance into Canaan, was one of anarchy and constant war. Hardly had the last
effort of the Canaanites against their invaders been overthrown on the banks of
the Kishon, when a new enemy appeared in the south. The Philistines, who had
planted themselves on the sea-coast shortly before the Israelites had invaded
the inland, now turned their arms against the new-comers, and contended with
them for the possession of the country. The descendants of Jacob were already
exhausted by struggle after struggle with the populations which surrounded them.
Moabites and Midianites, Ammonites and Bedâwin, even the king of distant
Mesopotamia, had sacked their villages, had overrun their fields, and [pg 55] exacted tribute from
the Israelitish tribes. The tribes themselves had lost coherence; they had
ranged themselves under different "judges" or "deliverers," had forgotten their
common origin and common faith, and had even plunged into interfraternal war.
Joshua was scarcely dead before the tribe of Benjamin was almost exterminated by
its brethren; and a few generations later, the warriors of Ephraim, the stalwart
champion of Israel, were massacred by the Israelites east of the Jordan. In the
south, a new tribe, Judah, had arisen out of various elements—Hebrew, Kenite,
and Edomite; and it was not long before there was added to the cleavage between
the tribes on the two banks of the Jordan, the further and more lasting cleavage
between Judah and the tribes of the north. Israel was a house divided against
itself, and planted in the midst of foes.

It needed a head, a leader who should bring its discordant elements into
peace and order, and lead its united forces against the common enemy. Monarchy
alone could save it from destruction. The theocracy had failed, the authority of
the high-priests and of the Law they administered was hardly felt beyond Shiloh;
an age of war and anarchy required military rather than religious control. The
Israelites were passing through the same experience as other kindred members of
the Semitic race. In Assyria the high-priests of Assur had been succeeded by
kings; in southern Arabia [pg
56] the high-priest had similarly been superseded by the king, and the
kings of Edom had but recently taken the place of alûphîm or "dukes."

The first attempt to found a monarchy was made by the northern tribes.
Jerubbaal, the conqueror of the Midianites, established his power among the
mixed Hebrew and Canaanite inhabitants of Ophrah and Shechem, and his son
Abimelech by a Canaanitish wife received the title of king. But the attempt was
premature. The kingdom of Manasseh passed away with Abimelech; the other tribes
were not yet ready to acknowledge the supremacy of a chieftain who was not
sprung from themselves, and Abimelech, moreover, was half-Canaanitish by
descent.

The pressure of Philistine conquest at last forced the Israelites with a
common voice to "demand a king." Reinforced by bodies of their kinsfolk from
Krete and the islands of the Greek seas, the Philistines poured over the
frontier of Judah, plundering and destroying as they went. At first they were
contented with raids; but the raids gradually passed into a continuous warfare
and a settled purpose to conquer Canaan, and reduce it to tribute from one end
to the other. The Israelitish forces were annihilated in a decisive battle, the
ark of the covenant was taken by the heathen, and the two sons of the
high-priest perished on the field of battle. The Philistine army marched
northward into the heart of the mountains [pg 57] of Ephraim, the sanctuary of Shiloh was destroyed
and its priesthood dispersed. It was not long before the Philistine domination
was acknowledged throughout the Israelitish territory on the western side of the
Jordan, and Canaan became Palestine, "the land of the Philistines."

In the more inaccessible parts of Benjamin, indeed, a few Israelites still
maintained a fitful independence, and Samuel, the representative of the
traditions of Shiloh, was allowed to judge his own people, and preside over a
Naioth or "monastery" of dervish-like prophets under the eye of a Philistine
garrison. Israel seemed about to disappear from among the nations of the
world.

But it had not yet wholly forgotten that it was a single people, the
descendants of a common forefather, sharers in a common history, and above all,
worshippers of the same God. In their extremity the Israelites called for a
king. Saul, the Benjamite of Gibeah, was elected, and events soon proved the
wisdom of the choice. Jabesh-gilead was rescued from the Ammonite king, the
Philistine garrisons were driven out of the centre of the country, and, for a
time at least, a large part of the Israelitish territory was cleared of its
enemies. Saul was able to turn his arms against the Amalekite marauders of the
desert, as well as the princes of Zobah to the north-east of Ammon.
[pg 58]

But the Philistine war still continued. Saul had incorporated in his
body-guard a young shepherd of Beth-lehem in Judah of the name of David. David
showed himself a brave and skilful soldier, and quickly rose to high command in
the Hebrew army, and to be the son-in-law of Saul. His victories over the
Philistines were celebrated in popular songs, and the king began to suspect him
of aiming at the throne. He was forced to fly for his life, and to hide among
the mountain fastnesses of Judah, where his boyhood had been spent. Here he
became a brigand-chief, outlaws and adventurers gathering around him, and
exacting food from the richer landowners. Saul pursued him in vain; David
slipped out of his hands time after time, thanks to the nature of the country in
which he had taken refuge; and the only result of the pursuit was to open the
road once more to Philistine invasion. Meanwhile David and his followers had
left the Israelitish territory, and offered their services to Achish of Gath;
the Philistine prince enrolled them in his body-guard and settled them in the
town of Ziklag.

Saul and the priests were now at open war. Samuel, perhaps naturally, had
quarrelled with the king who had superseded his authority, and had espoused the
cause of David. We are told, indeed, that he had anointed David as king in the
place of Saul. When, therefore, David escaped from the court, Saul accused the
Shilonite [pg 59]
priests who were established at Nob of intentionally aiding the rebel. The
high-priest vainly protested their innocence, but the furious king refused to
listen, and the priests were massacred in cold blood. Abiathar, the son of the
murdered high-priest, alone escaped to David to tell the tale. He carried with
him the sacred ephod through which the will of Yahveh was made known, and from
henceforth the influence of the priesthood was thrown against the king.

Saul had lost his best general, who had gone over to the enemy; he had
employed his troops in hunting a possible rival through the Judæan wilds when
they ought to have been guarding the frontier against the national foe, and the
whole force of Israelitish religion had been turned against him. There was
little cause for wonder, therefore, that the Philistine armies again marched
into the Israelitish kingdom, and made their way northward along the coast into
the plain of Jezreel. A battle on the slopes of Jezreel decided the fate of
Israel. The Hebrew army was cut to pieces, and Saul and his sons were slain. One
only survived, Esh-baal, too young or too feeble to take part in the fight.
Esh-baal was carried across the Jordan by Abner and the relics of the
Israelitish forces, and there proclaimed king at Mahanaim. The Philistines
became undisputed masters of Israel west of the Jordan, while their tributary
vassal, David, was proclaimed King of Judah at Hebron. His nephew Joab was made
commander-in-chief.
[pg
60]

War soon broke out between David and Esh-baal. Esh-baal grew continually
weaker, and his general Abner intrigued with David to betray him into the hands
of the Jewish king. Abner, however, was slain by Joab while in the act of
carrying out his treason, but Esh-baal was murdered shortly afterwards by two of
his servants. David declared himself his successor, and claimed rule over all
Israel.

This brought him into conflict with his Philistine overlords. It was
equivalent to revolt, and the Philistine army swept the lowlands of Judah. David
fled from Hebron and took refuge in his old retreat. Here he organised his
forces; the Philistines were defeated in battle after battle, and David not only
succeeded in driving them out of Judah and Israel, but in carrying the war into
their own country. The Philistine cities were conquered, and soldiers from Gath,
where David had himself once served as a mercenary, were drafted into the
body-guard of the Hebrew sovereign.

Before the Philistine war was over, Jerusalem had fallen into David's hands.
The stronghold of the Jebusites was one of the last of the Canaanitish cities to
surrender to the Israelites. Its older inhabitants were allowed to live in it
side by side with colonists from Judah and Benjamin. The city itself was made
the capital of the kingdom. Its central position, its natural strength, and its
independence of the history of any special tribe, all combined to justify the
choice. [pg 61] Here
David built his palace, and planned the erection of a temple to Yahveh.

Meanwhile the kingdom of Israel was passing into an empire. Joab and his
veterans gained victory after victory, and the Hebrew army became what the
Assyrian army was in later days, the most highly disciplined and irresistible
force in western Asia. Moab and Ammon were subdued; the Aramaic kinglets to the
north-east were made tributaries, and the kingdom of Zobah, which had risen on
the ruins of the Hittite power, was overthrown. The limits of David's rule were
extended to the banks of the Euphrates, and the Syrians on either side of the
river were utterly crushed. Even Edom, which had successfully defied the
Pharaohs in the days of Egyptian greatness, was compelled to submit to the
Jewish conqueror; its male population was mercilessly massacred, and its ports
on the Gulf of Suez fell into Israelitish hands. In the north Hamath made
alliance with the new power that had arisen in the Oriental world, while Hiram
of Tyre was glad to call himself the friend of the Israelitish king, and to
furnish him with skilled workmen and articles of luxury.

The latter years of David were troubled by revolts which had their origin
partly in the polygamy in which he had indulged, partly in the discontent of a
people still imperfectly welded together, and restless under military
conscription. His son Solomon secured his throne by putting to death all
possible rivals or opponents, [pg 62] including the grey-haired Joab. Solomon was
cultured and well-educated, but his culture was selfish, and his extravagance
knew no bounds. Palaces were built at Jerusalem in imitation of those of
Phoenicia or Egypt, and Phoenician architects and artisans erected there a
sumptuous temple in honour of the national God. Trade was encouraged and
developed: the possession of the Edomite seaports gave Solomon the command of
the Arabian trade, while his alliance with Hiram opened to him the harbours of
the Mediterranean coast. But the wealth which David had accumulated, the tribute
of the conquered provinces, and the trading monopolies of the king himself did
not suffice for the extravagance of his expenditure, and heavy fiscal burdens
had to be laid on the Israelitish tribes. Disaffection grew up everywhere except
in Judah, where the king resided, and where the wealth raised elsewhere was
spent.

Revolts broke out in Edom and the north. Garrisons, indeed, were planted in
Zobah, which secured the caravan road through Tadmor or Palmyra to the
Euphrates; but Damascus was lost, and became in a few years a formidable
adversary of Israel. The death of Solomon was the signal for a revolt in
Palestine itself. The northern tribes under Jeroboam separated from Judah and
established a kingdom of their own, while Judah and Benjamin remained faithful
to the house of David and to the capital, which lay on the frontier of [pg 63] both. The Levites also
naturally attached themselves to the kingdom which contained the great national
sanctuary, and to the royal family whose chapel it was. The disruption of the
monarchy necessarily brought with it the fall of the empire; Moab, however,
continued to be tributary to the northern kingdom and Edom to that of Judah.

Five years after the accession of Rehoboam, the son of Solomon, the kingdom
of Judah seemed in danger of perishing altogether. Shishak, the Egyptian
Pharaoh, invaded the country and sacked Jerusalem itself. But Jeroboam lost the
opportunity thus afforded him of extending his rule over the south; his own
territories had been partially overrun by the Egyptians, and he was probably not
in a position to commence a war. Judah had time to recover; the walls of
Jerusalem were rebuilt, and the Arabian trade soon supplied it with fresh
resources.

The long and prosperous reign of Asa, the grandson of Rehoboam, placed the
line of David on a solid foundation. The Jewish kingdom was compact; its capital
was central, and was not only a strongly-fortified fortress, but also an ancient
and venerable sanctuary. As time went on feelings of respect and affection
gathered round the royal house; the people of Judah identified it with
themselves, and looked back with pride and regret to the glorious days of David
and Solomon. Religion, moreover, lent its sanction to the [pg 64] Davidic dynasty. The Levitical
priesthood had its centre in the temple which had been built by Solomon, and
was, as it were, the private chapel of his descendants; here were preserved the
rites and traditions of the Mosaic Law, and the ark of the covenant between
Israel and its God. The northern kingdom, on the contrary, had none of these
elements of stability. The first king was a rebel, who had no glorious past
behind him, no established priesthood to support his throne, no capital even,
around which all his subjects could rally. The sword had given him his crown,
and the sword was henceforth the arbiter of his kingdom. The conservative forces
which were strong in Judah were absent in the north; there the army became more
and more powerful, and its generals dethroned princes and established
short-lived dynasties. Northern Israel, moreover, was not homogeneous; the
tribes on the two sides of the Jordan were never welded together like the
inhabitants of Judah, and the divergence of interests that had once existed
between them was never wholly forgotten.

Israel perished while Judah survived. Dynasty after dynasty had arisen in it;
its capital had been shifted from time to time; it did not even possess a
religious centre. Before a line of kings had time to win the loyalty of the
people they were swept away by revolution, and the army became the dominating
power in the state. There was no body of priests to preserve [pg 65] the memory of the
Mosaic Law and insist upon its observance, and the prophets who took their place
protested in vain against the national apostasy. Alliance with the neighbouring
kingdom of Phoenicia brought with it the worship of the Phoenician Baal, and
Yahveh was forsaken for a foreign god. In B.C. 722 Samaria, the later capital of
the country, was taken by the Assyrian king Sargon, and northern Israel ceased
to be a nation.

Judah, on the other hand, successfully defied the Assyrian power. The
invasion of Sennacherib was rolled back from the walls of Jerusalem, and though
the Jewish kings paid tribute to Nineveh, they were left in possession of their
territories. Edom, indeed, had long since been lost, and with it the trade with
the Arabian seas, but the Philistines continued to acknowledge the supremacy of
Judah, and commercial relations were kept up with Egypt. It was not until the
Babylonian empire of Nebuchadrezzar had arisen on the ruins of that of Assyria
that Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed, and the Davidic dynasty passed
away. But they had accomplished their work; a nation had been created which
through exile and disaster still maintained its religion and its
characteristics, and was prepared, when happier days should come, to return
again to its old home, to rebuild the temple, and carry out all the ordinances
of its faith. From henceforth Judah realised its mission as a peculiar people,
separated [pg 66] from
the rest of the world, whose instructor in religion it was to be. More and more
it ceased to be a nation and became a race—a race, moreover, which had its roots
in a common religious history, a common faith, and a common hope. Israel
according to the flesh became Israel according to the spirit.

Footnote
1: (return)

See Pinches in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, July 1897.
In a tablet belonging to a period long before that of Abraham, Isma-ilu or
Ishmael is given as the name of an "Amorite" slave from Palestine
(Thureau-Dangin, Tablettes chaldéennes inédites, p.
10).

[pg
69]

CHAPTER II

CANAAN

Canaan was the inheritance which the Israelites won for themselves by the
sword. Their ancestors had already settled in it in patriarchal days. Abraham
"the Hebrew" from Babylonia had bought in it a burying-place near Hebron; Jacob
had purchased a field near Shechem, where he could water his flocks from his own
spring. It was the "Promised Land" to which the serfs of the Pharaoh in Goshen
looked forward when they should again become free men and find a new home for
themselves.

Canaan had ever been the refuge of the Asiatic population of Egypt, the goal
at which they aimed when driven out of the land of the Nile. The Hyksos
conquerors from Asia had retreated to Jerusalem when the native Egyptians
recovered their independence and had expelled them from their seats in the
Delta. Though Moses had assured the Pharaoh that all the Israelites needed was
to go a short journey of three days into the wilderness, and there sacrifice to
their God, it was well understood that the desert was not [pg 70] to be the end of their pilgrimage.
Canaan, and Canaan only, was the destined country they had in view.

In the early inscriptions of Babylonia, Canaan is included in the rest of
Syria under the general title of "the land of the Amorites." The Amorites were
at the time the dominant population on the Mediterranean coast of western Asia,
and after them accordingly the whole country received its name. The "land of the
Amorites" had been overrun by the armies of Babylonia at a very remote period,
and had thus come under the influence of Babylonian culture. As far back as the
reigns of Sargon of Akkad and his son Naram-Sin (B.C. 3800), three campaigns had
laid it at the feet of the Chaldæan monarch, and Palestine and Syria became a
province of the Babylonian empire. Sargon erected an image of himself by the
shore of the sea, and seems even to have received tribute from Cyprus. Colonies
of "Amorite" or Canaanitish merchants settled in Babylonia for the purposes of
trade, and there obtained various rights and privileges; and a cadastral survey
of southern Babylonia made at the time mentions "the governor of the land of the
Amorites."

The Amorites, however, though they were the dominant people of Syria, were
not its original inhabitants; nor, it is probable, did they even form the
largest part of its population. They were essentially the inhabitants of the
mountains, as we are told in the Book of [pg 71] Numbers (xiii. 29), and appear to have come from
the west. We have learnt a good deal about them from the Egyptian monuments,
where the "Amurru" or Amorites are depicted with that fidelity to nature which
characterised the art of ancient Egypt. They belonged to the white race, and,
like other members of the white race, were tall in stature and impatient of the
damp heat of the plains. Their beard and eye-brows are painted red, their hair a
light red-brown, while their eyes are blue. The skin is a sunburnt white, the
nose straight and regular, the forehead high, and the lips thin. They wore
whiskers and a pointed beard, and dressed in long robes furnished with a sort of
cape. Their physical characteristics are those of the Libyan neighbours of the
Egyptians on the west, the forefathers of the fair-skinned and blue-eyed Kabyles
or Berbers who inhabit the mountains of northern Africa to-day. Anthropologists
connect these Libyans with the Kelts of our own islands. At one time, it would
seem, a Kelto-Libyan race existed, which spread along the northern coast of
Africa to western Europe and the British Isles. The Amorites would appear to
have been an eastern offshoot of the same race.

Wherever they went, the members of the race buried their dead in rude stone
cairns or cromlechs, the dolmens of the French antiquarians. We find them in
Britain and France, in the Spanish peninsula, and the [pg 72] north of Africa. They are also found in
Palestine, more especially in that portion of it which was the home of the
Amorites. The skulls found in the cairns are for the most part of the
dolichocephalic or long-headed type; this too is the shape of skull
characteristic of the modern Kabyle, and it has been portrayed for us by the
Egyptian artists in the pictures of their Amorite foes.

In the days of the Egyptian artists—the age of the Eighteenth and two
following dynasties (B.C. 1600-1200)—the special seat of the Amorites was the
mountainous district immediately to the north of Palestine. But Amorite kingdoms
were established elsewhere on both sides of the Jordan. Not long before the
Israelitish invasion, the Amorite king Sihon had robbed Moab of its territory
and founded his power on the ruins of that of the Egyptian empire. Farther
north, in the plateau of Bashan, another Amorite king, Og, had his capital,
while Amorite tribes were settled on the western side of the Jordan, in the
mountains of southern Canaan, where the tribe of Judah subsequently established
itself. We even hear of Amorites in the mountain-block of Kadesh-barnea, in the
desert south of Canaan; and the Amorite type of face, as it has been depicted
for us on the monuments of Egypt, may still be often observed among the Arab
tribes of the district between Egypt and Palestine.

Jerusalem, Ezekiel tells us, had an Amorite as well [pg 73] as a Hittite parentage, and Jacob
declares that he had taken his heritage at Shechem out of the hand of the
Amorite with his sword and bow. It must be remembered, however, that the term
"Amorite" is sometimes used in the Old Testament in its Babylonian sense, as
denoting an inhabitant of Canaan, whatever might be the race to which he
belonged; we cannot always infer from it the nationality or race of those to
whom it is applied. Moreover, individual branches of the Amorite stock had names
of their own. In the north they were known as Hivites, at Hebron they were
called Anakim, at Jerusalem they were Jebusites. The Amorite kings of Bashan are
described as Rephaim, a word which the Authorised Version translates "giants."
It was only on the northern frontier of Palestine and in the kingdom of Sihon
that the name of "Amorite" alone was used.

The Babylonian conquests introduced into Canaan the government and law, the
writing and literature, of Babylonian civilisation. The Babylonian language even
made its way to the west, and was taught, along with the script, in the schools
which were established in imitation of those of Chaldæa. Babylonian generals and
officials lived in Palestine and administered its affairs, and an active trade
was carried on between the Euphrates and the Mediterranean coast. The trade-road
ran through Mesopotamia past the city of Harran, and formed a link between the
Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf.
[pg 74]

From an early date libraries had existed in Babylonia stored with the
literature of the country. Similarly, libraries now grew up in "the land of the
Amorites," and the clay tablets with which they were filled made known to the
west the legends and records of Chaldæa. Amorite culture was modelled on that of
Babylonia.

Babylonian influence lasted for centuries in western Asia. In the age of
Abraham the Amorites still obeyed the suzerainty of the Babylonian kings.
Khammurabi, the Amraphel of the Book of Genesis, calls himself king of the
country of the Amorites as well as of Babylon, and his great-grandson does the
same. At a later date Babylonia itself was conquered by a foreign line of kings,
and Canaan recovered its independence. But this was of no long duration.
Thothmes III., of the Eighteenth Egyptian dynasty (B.C. 1503-1449), made it a
province of Egypt, and the Amorites were governed by Egyptian prefects and
commissioners. The cuneiform tablets found at Tel el-Amarna in Upper Egypt give
us a vivid picture of its condition at the close of the Eighteenth dynasty. The
Egyptian power was falling to pieces, and Palestine was threatened by Hittite
invaders from the north. The native governors were fighting with one another or
intriguing with the enemies of Egypt, while all the time protesting their
loyalty to the Pharaoh. Ebed-Asherah and his son Aziru governed the Amorites in
the north, and the [pg
75] prefect of Phoenicia sends bitter complaints to the Egyptian court of
their hostility to himself and their royal master. Aziru, however, was an able
ruler. He succeeded in clearing himself from the charge of complicity with the
Hittites against whom he had been sent, as well as in getting the better of his
Phoenician rival. The latter disappears from history, while the Amorites are
allowed to settle undisturbed in Zemar and other cities of inland Phoenicia.

Under Ramses II. of the Nineteenth dynasty, Canaan still yielded a reluctant
obedience to Egypt. In the troubles which had followed the fall of the
Eighteenth dynasty, it had shaken itself free from foreign authority, but had
been reconquered by Seti I., the father of Ramses. Egyptian authority was
re-established even on the eastern side of the Jordan; but it did not continue
for long. Ramses was hardly dead before Egypt was invaded by Libyans from the
west and robber hordes from the Greek seas, and though the invasion was
ultimately beaten back, its strength had been exhausted in the struggle. The
Egyptian empire in Canaan passed away for ever, and the Canaanites were left
free to govern themselves.

The kingdom of Sihon was one of the results of this ending of Egyptian rule.
The Amorites became a power once more. A few years later Egypt was again
attacked by armed invaders from the north. The assailants poured into it both by
sea and land. Fleets [pg
76] of ships filled with Philistines and Achæans and other northern
tribes entered the mouths of the Nile, while a vast army simultaneously attacked
it by land. The army, we are told, had encamped in "the land of the Amorites,"
and they carried with them on their farther march recruits from the countries
through which they passed. The Amorite "chief" himself was among those who
followed the barbarians to Egypt, eager for the spoils of the wealthiest country
in the ancient world.

Ramses III. of the Twentieth dynasty was now on the throne. He succeeded in
rolling back the wave of invasion, in gaining a decisive victory over the
combined military and naval forces of the enemy, and in pursuing them to the
frontiers of Asia itself. Gaza, the key to the military road which ran along the
sea-board of Palestine, fell once more into Egyptian hands; and the Egyptian
troops overran the future Judah, occupying the districts of Jerusalem and
Hebron, and even crossing the Jordan. But no permanent conquest was effected;
Ramses retired again to Egypt, and for more than two centuries no more Egyptian
armies found their way into Canaan. Gaza and the neighbouring cities became the
strongholds of the Philistine pirates, and effectually barred the road to
Asia.

The campaign of Ramses III. in southern Palestine must have taken place when
the Israelites were still [pg
77] in the desert. Between the two invasions of Egypt by the barbarians
of the north, there was no great interval of time. The Exodus, which had been
due in part to the pressure of the first of them in the reign of Meneptah, was
separated by only a few years from the capture of Hebron by Caleb, which must
have occurred after its evacuation by the Egyptian troops. The great movement
which brought the populations of Asia Minor and the Greek islands upon Canaan
and the Nile, and which began in the age of the Exodus, was over before the
children of Israel had emerged from the wilds of the desert.

In the Old Testament the Amorites are constantly associated with another
people, the Hittites. When Ezekiel ascribes an Amorite parentage to Jerusalem,
he ascribes to it at the same time a Hittite parentage as well. The same
interlocking of Amorite and Hittite that meets us in the Bible, meets us also on
the monuments of Egypt. Here, too, we are told that Kadesh on the Orontes, the
Hittite capital, was "in the land of the Amorites." It was, in fact, on the
shores of the Lake of Homs, in the midst of the district over which the Amorites
claimed rule.

The Hittites were intruders from the north. The Egyptian monuments have shown
us what they were like. Their skin was yellow, their eyes and hair were black,
their faces were beardless. Square and prominent cheeks, a protrusive nose, with
retreating chin [pg 78]
and forehead and lozenge-shaped eyes, gave them a Mongoloid appearance. They
were not handsome to look upon, but the accuracy of their portraiture by the
artists of Egypt is confirmed by their own monuments. The heads represented on
the Egyptian monuments are repeated, feature by feature, in the Hittite
sculptures. Ugly as they were, they were not the caricatures of an enemy, but
the truthful portraits of a people whose physical characteristics are still
found, according to Sir Charles Wilson, in the modern population of
Cappadocia.

The Hittites wore their hair in three plaits, which fell over the back like
the pigtail of a Chinaman. They dressed in short tunics over which a long robe
was worn, which in walking left one leg bare. Their feet were shod with boots
with turned-up ends, a sure indication of their northern origin. Such boots, in
fact, are snow-shoes, admirably adapted to the inhabitants of the
mountain-ranges of Asia Minor, but wholly unsuited for the hot plains of Syria.
When, therefore, on the walls of the Ramesseum we find the Theban artists
depicting the defenders of Kadesh on the Orontes with them, we may conclude that
the latter had come from the colder north just as certainly as we may conclude,
from the use of similar shoes among the Turks, that they also have come from a
northern home. In the Hittite system of hieroglyphic writing, the boot with
upturned end occupies a prominent place.
[pg 79]

When the Tel el-Amarna tablets were written (B.C. 1400), the Hittites were
advancing on the Egyptian province of Syria. Tunip, or Tennib, near Aleppo, had
fallen, and both Amorites and Canaanites were intriguing with the invader. The
highlands of Cappadocia and the ranges of the Taurus seem to have been the
cradle of the Hittite race. Here they first came into contact with Babylonian
culture, which they adopted and modified, and from hence they poured down upon
the Aramæan cities of the south. Carche-mish, now Jerablûs, which commanded the
chief ford across the Euphrates, fell into their hands, and for many centuries
remained one of their capitals. But it was not until the stormy period which
signalised the overthrow of the Eighteenth Egyptian dynasty, that the Hittites
succeeded in establishing themselves as far south as Kadesh on the Orontes. The
long war, however, waged with them by Ramses II. prevented them from advancing
farther; when peace was made at last between them and the Egyptians, both sides
had been exhausted by the struggle, and the southern limit of Hittite power had
been fixed.

The kings of Kadesh had, however, been at the head of a veritable empire;
they were able to summon allies and vassals from Asia Minor, and it is probable
that their rule extended to the banks of the Halys in Cappadocia, where Hittite
remains have been found. Military roads connected the Hittite cities of
Cappadocia [pg 80] with
the rest of Asia Minor, and monuments of Hittite conquest or invasion have been
met with as far west as the neighbourhood of Smyrna. These monuments are all
alike distinguished by the same peculiar style of art, and by the same system of
pictorial writing. The writing, unfortunately, has not yet been deciphered, but
as the same groups of characters occur wherever an inscription in it is found,
we may infer that the language concealed beneath it is everywhere one and the
same.

When the Assyrians first became acquainted with the West, the Hittites were
the ruling people in Syria. As, therefore, the Babylonians had included all the
inhabitants of Syria and Palestine, whatever might be their origin, under the
general name of Amorites, the Assyrians included them under the name of
Hittites. Even the Israelites and Ammonites are called "Hittites" by an Assyrian
king. It is possible that traces of this vague and comprehensive use of the name
are to be met with in the Old Testament; indeed, it has been suggested that the
Hittites, or "sons of Heth," from whom Abraham bought the cave of Machpelah,
owed their name to this cause. In the later books of the Hebrew Scriptures the
Hittites are described as a northern population, in conformity with the Egyptian
and Assyrian accounts.

The Hittites of Hebron, however, may really have been an offshoot of the
Hittite nations of the north. [pg 81] The "king of the Hittites" accompanied the
northern barbarians when they invaded Egypt in the reign of Ramses III., and
Hittite bands may similarly have followed the Hyksos conquerors of Egypt several
centuries before. One of these bands may easily have settled on its way at
Hebron, which, as we are told, was built seven years before Zoan, the Hyksos
capital. At Karnak, moreover, an Egyptian artist has represented the people of
Ashkelon with faces of a Hittite type, while Ezekiel bears witness to the
presence of a Hittite element in the founders of Jerusalem. But the fact that
Thothmes III. in the century before Moses calls the Hittite land of the north
"the Greater," is the best proof we can have that there was a Hittite colony
elsewhere, which was well known to the Egyptian scribes. The "Greater" implies
the Less, and the only Lesser Hittite land with which we are acquainted is that
of which the Book of Genesis speaks.

So far as we can judge from the evidence of proper names, the Hittites
belonged to a race which was spread from the Halys in Asia Minor to the shores
of Lake Urumiyeh. The early inhabitants of Armenia, who have left us
inscriptions in the cuneiform character, also belonged to it. So also did the
people of Comagênê, and it seems probable that the ruling class in northern
Mesopotamia did the same. Here there existed a kingdom which at one time
exercised a considerable amount of power, and whose princesses were [pg 82] married to the
Pharaohs of the Eighteenth dynasty. This was the kingdom of Aram Naharaim,
called Naharina in the Egyptian texts, Mitanni by its own inhabitants. The
language of Mitanni was of a very peculiar type, as we learn from the tablets of
Tel el-Amarna, one or two of which are written in it. Like the Hittites in
Syria, the Mitannians appear to have descended from the north upon the cities of
the Semites, and to have established themselves in them. Mitanni was at the
height of its influence in the sixteenth and fifteenth centuries before our era;
its armies made their way even into Canaan, and the Canaanite princes intrigued
from time to time against their Egyptian masters, not only with the Babylonians
and Hittites, but also with the kings of Mitanni.

Before the time of David the power and almost the name of Mitanni had passed
away. The Hittite empire also had been broken up, and henceforth we hear only of
"the kings of the Hittites" who ruled over a number of small states. The Semites
of Syria had succeeded in rolling back the wave of Hittite conquest, and in
absorbing their Hittite conquerors. The capture of Carchemish by Sargon of
Assyria in B.C. 717 marks the end of Hittite dominion south of the Taurus.

But the Hittite invasion had produced lasting results. It had severed the
Semites of Assyria and Babylonia from those of the West, and planted the barrier
of [pg 83] a foreign
population on the highroad that ran from Nineveh to the Mediterranean. The
tradition of Babylonian culture in western Asia was broken; new influences began
to work there, and the cuneiform system of writing to be disused. Room was given
for the introduction of a new form of script, and the Phoenician alphabet, in
which the books of the Old Testament were written, made its way into Canaan.
When Joshua crosses the Jordan there is no longer any trace in Palestine of
either Babylonian or Egyptian domination.

Like the Amorites and the Amorite tribe of Jebusites at Jerusalem, the
Hittites were mountaineers.2
The hot river-valleys and the sea-coast were inhabited by Canaanites. Canaan is
supposed to mean "the lowlands" of the Mediterranean shore; here the Canaanites
had built their cities, and ventured in trading ships on the sea. But they had
also settled in the inland plains, and more especially in the valley of the
Jordan. The plain of Jezreel formed, as it were, the centre of the Canaanitish
kingdoms.

The Canaanites were Semites in speech, if not in blood. The language of
Canaan is what we term Hebrew, and must have been adopted either by the
Israelites or by the patriarchs their forefathers. Between the dialect of the
Phoenician inscriptions and that of the Old Testament the difference is but
slight, [pg 84] and the
tablets of Tel el-Amarna carry back the record of this Canaanitish speech to the
century before the Exodus.

In person, as we learn from the Egyptian monuments, the Canaanites resembled
their descendants, the modern inhabitants of Palestine. They belonged to the
white race, but had black hair and eyes. They dressed in brilliantly-coloured
garments, stained with that purple or scarlet dye in search of which they
explored the coasts of the Greek seas, and which was extracted from the shell of
the murex. On their feet they wore high-laced sandals; their hair was bound with
a fillet. Their skill as sailors was famous throughout the Oriental world; the
cities of the Phoenician coast already possessed fleets of ships in the age of
the Eighteenth Egyptian dynasty, and their merchants carried on a maritime trade
with the islands of the Ægean and the coast of Africa. Before the time of
Solomon their vessels had found their way to Tartessus in Spain, perhaps even to
Cadiz, and the alliance between Hiram and the Israelitish king enabled the
Tyrians to import gold and other precious things from Africa and Arabia through
the ports of southern Edom. The Tel el-Amarna letters refer to the riches of
Tyre, and excavations on the site of Lachish have brought to light amber beads
ef the same age, which indicate intercourse with the Baltic. It is possible that
the tin which was needed in such large quantities for the [pg 85] bronze tools and weapons of the ancient
East was derived from Cornwall; if so, it would have been brought, like the
amber, across Europe along the road which ended at the extremity of the Adriatic
Gulf.

The wealth of the Canaanitish merchants was great. The spoils carried away to
Egypt by Thothmes III. after his conquest of Palestine are truly astonishing.
Beautiful vases of gold and silver, artistically moulded bronzes, furniture
carved out of ebony and cedar and inlaid with ivory and precious stones, were
among the booty. Iron, which was found in the hills, was freely used, and made
into armour, weapons, and chariots. It was "the chariots of iron" which
prevented the Israelites from capturing and sacking the cities of the plains.
Wealth brought with it a corresponding amount of luxury, which to the simpler
Hebrews of the desert seemed extravagant and sinful. It was associated with a
licentiousness which Canaanitish religion encouraged rather than repressed.

The religion was a nature-worship. The supreme deity was addressed as Baal or
"Lord," and was adored in the form of the Sun. And as the Sun can be baleful as
well as beneficent, parching up the soil and blasting the seed as well as
warming it into life, so too Baal was regarded sometimes as the friend and
helper of man, sometimes as a fierce and vengeful deity who could be appeased
only by blood. In times of national or individual distress his worshippers were
called upon [pg 86] to
sacrifice to him their firstborn; nothing less costly could turn away from them
the anger of their god. By the side of Baal was his colourless wife, a mere
reflection of the male divinity, standing in the same state of dependence
towards him as the woman stood to the man. It was only the unmarried goddess,
Ashêrah as she was called by the Canaanites, who had a personality of her own.
And since Ashêrah came in time to be superseded by Ashtoreth, who was herself of
Babylonian origin, it is probable that the idea of separate individuality
connected with Ashêrah. was due to the influence of Babylonian culture. Ashêrah
was the goddess of fertility, and though the fertility of the earth depends upon
the Sun, it was easy to conceive of it as an independent principle.

The name Baal was merely a title. It was applied to the supreme deity of each
city or tribe, by whatever special name he might otherwise be known. There were
as many Baals or Baalim as there were states or cults. Wherever a high-place was
erected, a Baal was worshipped. His power did not extend beyond the district in
which he was adored and to which he was territorially attached. The Baal of
Lebanon was distinct from the Baal of Tyre or Sidon, though in every case the
general conception that was formed of him was the same. It was the attributes of
particular Baalim which differed; Baal was everywhere the Sun-god, but in one
place he showed himself under one [pg 87] shape, in another place under another. The
goddesses followed the analogy of the gods. Over against the Baalim or Baals
stood the Ashtaroth or Ashtoreths. The Canaanitish goddess manifested herself in
a multitude of forms.

As the firstborn was sacrificed to the god, so chastity was sacrificed to the
goddess. The temples of Ashtoreth were crowded with religious prostitutes, and
the great festivals of Canaan were orgies of licentious sin. It was a
combination of nature-worship with the luxury that was born of wealth.

The Canaanites of Phoenicia believed that they had originally migrated from
the Persian Gulf. In Canaan, at all events, according to the Book of Genesis,
the "Fishers" city of Sidon was the first that was built. But Tyre also, a few
miles to the north of it, claimed considerable antiquity. The temple of Melkarth
or Melek-Kiryath, "the King of the City," the name under which the Baal of Tyre
was worshipped, had been built on the island-rock twenty-three centuries before
the time of Herodotus, or B.C. 2700. Gebal or Byblos, still farther to the
north, had been renowned for its sanctity from immemorial times. Here stood the
sanctuary of Baalith, the "lady" of Gebal, of whom we hear in the tablets of Tel
el-Amarna. Still farther north were other cities, of which the most famous was
Arvad, with its harbour and fleet. Southward were Dor and Joppa, the modern
Jaffa, while inland were [pg
88] Zemar and Arqa, mentioned in the Book of Genesis and the Tel
el-Amarna correspondence, but which ceased to be remembered after the age of the
Exodus. Before the Israelites entered Canaan they had been captured by the
Amorites, and had passed into insignificance.

Between the Canaanites of the coast and the Canaanites of the interior a
difference grew up in the course of centuries. This was caused by the sea-trade
in which the cities on the coast engaged. The "Phoenicians," as they were
termed, on the coast became sailors and merchants, while their brethren farther
inland were content to live on the products of agriculture and import from
abroad the luxuries they required. While Tyre and Sidon were centres of
manufacture and maritime trade, Megiddo and Hazor remained agricultural. After
the Hebrew invasion the difference between them became greater: Phoenicia
continued independent; the Canaanites of the interior were extirpated by the
Israelites or paid tribute to their conquerors. Little by little the latter
amalgamated with the conquered race; towns like Shechem contained a mixed
population, partly Hebrew and partly native; and the Israelites adopted the
manners and religion of the Canaanites, worshipping at the old high-places of
the country, and adoring the Baalim and Ashtaroth. The Amorite heads depicted at
Karnak above the names of the places captured by Shishak in Judah show how
little the population of [pg
89] southern Palestine had changed up to the time of Solomon's death.

Canaan was ruined by its want of union. The Canaanitish cities were
perpetually fighting with one another; even the strong hand of the Pharaoh in
the days of Egyptian supremacy could not keep them at peace. Now and again,
indeed, they united, generally under a foreign leader, but the union was brought
about by the pressure of foreign attack, and was never more than temporary.
There was no lack of patriotism among them, it is true; but the patriotism was
confined to the particular city or state to which those who were inspired by it
belonged. The political condition of Canaan resembled its religious condition;
as each district had its separate Baal, so too it had its separate political
existence. If there were many Baals, there were also many kinglets.

The fourteenth century B.C. was a turning-point in the history of Canaan. It
witnessed the fall of the Egyptian supremacy which had succeeded the supremacy
of Babylonia; it also witnessed the severance of western Asia from the kingdoms
on the Euphrates and Tigris, and the consequent end of the direct influence of
Babylonian culture. The Hittites established themselves in Syria "in the land of
the Amorites," while at the same time other invaders threatened Canaan itself.
The Israelites made their way across the Jordan; the Philistines seized the
southern portion of the coast.
[pg 90]

The Philistine invasion preceded that of the Israelites by a few years. The
Philistines were sea-robbers, probably from the island of Krete. Zephaniah calls
them "the nation of the Cherethites" or Kretans, and their features, as
represented on the Egyptian monuments, are of a Greek or Aryan type. They have
the straight nose, high forehead, and thin lips of the European. On their heads
they wear a curious kind of pleated cap, fastened round the chin by a strap.
They are clad in a pair of drawers and a cuirass of leather, while their arms
consist of a small round shield with two handles, a spear, and a short but broad
sword of bronze. Greaves of bronze, like those of the Homeric heroes, protected
their legs in battle.

The Philistines formed part of the host which invaded Egypt in the reign of
Ramses III. Along with their kinsfolk, the Zakkal, they had already made
themselves formidable to the coast of the Delta and of southern Canaan. The sea
had long been infested by their ships, bent on plunder and piracy; the Zakkal
had attacked Egypt in the time of Meneptah, and the road from Egypt to Asia
which skirted the sea had long been known as "the way of the Philistines." When
Ramses III. overran southern Canaan, Gaza still belonged to Egypt, as it had
done for the three preceding centuries; but it is probable that the Philistines
were already settled in its neighbourhood. At all events, it was not long before
they made themselves [pg
91] masters of Gaza, and thus closed for Egypt the way to Asia.
Henceforward Gaza and its four companion cities became the strongholds of the
Philistines (B.C. 1200). The southern coast as far north as Mount Carmel fell
into their hands: the Zakkal established themselves at Dor, and the port of
Joppa was lost to the Phoenicians.

Hardly were the Israelites planted in the Promised Land before they were
confronted by the Philistines. Shamgar, we are told, one of the earliest of the
Judges, slew six hundred of them "with an ox-goad." But it was not until the
close of the period of the Judges that they became really formidable to Israel.
Judah had become a distinct and powerful tribe, formed out of Hebrew, Kenite,
and Edomite elements, and its frontier adjoined Philistia. At first there was
desultory warfare; the Philistines made raids into Judæan territory, and the
Jews retaliated whenever the opportunity occurred. But the Philistines were a
nation of warriors, and their forces were recruited from time to time by fresh
arrivals from Krete or other parts of the eastern Mediterranean. Year by year,
therefore, the Philistine attack became more formidable; the raids of the enemy
were no longer confined to Judah, but extended into Benjamin and Mount Ephraim.
The Philistines began to dream of conquering the whole of Canaan, which was
henceforth to bear the name of Palestine, "the land of the
Philistines."
[pg 92]

The Israelitish army was shattered in a decisive battle, the ark of the
covenant between Israel and its national God was taken by the heathen, and the
priests of Shiloh, the central sanctuary, were slain. The victors marched
unresisted through the country, burning and spoiling, and securing the passes by
means of permanent garrisons. Shiloh and its temple were destroyed, and its
priesthood scattered abroad.

The Philistine supremacy lasted for several years. A few outlaws maintained a
guerilla warfare in the mountains of Benjamin, and the prophet Samuel, the
representative of Shiloh, was allowed to declare the oracles of Yahveh to his
countrymen. But the vanquished population was deprived of the means for revolt.
The Israelites were forbidden the use of arms, and no itinerant smith was
permitted to enter their territory. The Hebrew who wished to sharpen his
ploughshare or axe was forced to go to a Philistine city.

The condition of Israel became intolerable. There was but one remedy: the
people needed a leader who should organise them into an army and a nation, and
lead them forth against their foes. Saul was elected king, and the choice was
soon justified by the results. The Philistines were driven out of the country,
and Saul set up his court in the very spot where a Philistine garrison had
stood.

But the Philistines were not yet subdued. Civil war broke out in Israel
between Saul and his son-in-law [pg 93] David; the troops which should have been employed
in resisting the common enemy were used in pursuing David, and David himself
took service as a mercenary under Achish, King of Gath. Saul and his sons fell
in battle on Mount Gilboa; the relics of the Israelitish army fled across the
Jordan, and the Philistine again ruled supreme on the western side of the
Jordan. David was allowed to govern Judah as a tributary vassal of the
Philistine "lords."

The murder of the feeble scion of Saul's house who had the name of king on
the eastern side of the Jordan put an end to all this. David threw off his
allegiance to the Philistines, and was crowned King of Israel. This act of open
defiance was speedily followed by the invasion of Judah. At first the war went
against the Israelitish king; he was forced to fly from his capital, Hebron, and
take refuge in an inaccessible cavern. Here he organised his forces, and at last
ventured into the field. The Philistine forces were defeated in battle after
battle; the war was carried into their own territory, and their cities were
compelled to surrender. Philistia thus became a part of the Israelitish kingdom,
and never again made any serious attempt to recover its independence. At the
division of the Israelitish kingdom it fell to Judah, and its vassal princes
duly paid their tribute to the Jewish kings. It would seem from the Assyrian
inscriptions that they were played off one against the other, and that signs of
disaffection [pg 94] in
any one of them were speedily followed by his imprisonment in Jerusalem. At all
events, the Philistine cities remained in the possession of Judah down to the
time of the overthrow of the monarchy, and the most devoted of David's
body-guard were the Philistines of Gath.

It has been said above that Judah was a mixture of Hebrew, Kenite, and
Edomite elements. Kenite means "smith," and the tribe furnished those itinerant
smiths who provided Canaan with its tools and arms. Reference is made to one of
them in the Travels of a Mohar, a sarcastic description of a tourist's
misadventures in Palestine which was written by an Egyptian author in the reign
of Ramses II., and of which a copy on papyrus has been preserved to us. The
horses of the hero of the story, we are told, ran away and broke his carriage to
pieces; he had accordingly to betake himself to "the iron-workers" and have it
repaired. Similar itinerant ironsmiths wandered through Europe in the Middle
Ages, handing down from father to son the secrets of their craft.

The Kenites came from the desert, and were apparently of Midianitish descent.
Balaam had looked down upon their rocky strongholds from the heights of Moab;
and they had accompanied their Hebrew comrades of Judah from their first
camping-ground near Jericho to the wilderness south of Arad. Here they lived
among the Amalekite Bedâwin down to [pg 95] the days of Saul. To the last they maintained
their nomadic habits, and the Kenite family of Rechab still dwelt in tents and
avoided wine in that later age when the kingdom of Judah was about to fall.3

The Edomite element in Judah was stronger than the Kenite. It consisted of
the two clans of Jerahmeel and Kenaz, or the house of Caleb as it was called in
the time of David.4
Kenaz was a grandson of Esau, and the fact that the Kenizzites shared with the
Israelitish tribes in the conquest of Canaan throws light on the law of
Deuteronomy5
which gave the Edomite of "the third generation" all the rights and privileges
of a Jew. Caleb, the conqueror of Hebron, was a Kenizzite; so also was Othniel,
the first of the Judges of Israel. Edomites, rather than Hebrews, were the
founders of the future Judah.

This accounts for the comparatively late appearance of Judah as a separate
tribe in the history of Israel, as well as for the antagonism which existed
between it and the more pure-blooded tribes of the north. In the Song of Deborah
and Barak, Judah is not mentioned; Ephraim and Benjamin, and not Judah, are
still regarded as forming the bulwark of Israel against the Amalekite marauders
of the southern wilderness. It was the Philistine wars which first created the
Judah of later days. They forced Hebrews, Edomites, and [pg 96] Kenites to unite against the common
enemy, and welded them into a single whole. Though the three peoples still
continued to be spoken of separately, this was but a survival of ancient modes
of speech, and after the accession of David all distinction between them
disappears. From this time forward the kingdom of Judah is one undivided
community.

But the Amalekites were ever on its borders. The Amalekite of the Old
Testament is the Bedâwi of to-day. Now, as ever, he is the scourge of his more
settled neighbours, whose fields he harries and whose families he murders. He
lives by robbery and theft; too idle to work himself, he plunders those who do.
A strong government forces him to hide himself in the depth of the wilderness;
when the countries that skirt the desert fall into decay he emerges from his
retreat like a swarm of flies. The ancient Oriental world saw in Amalek "the
firstborn of nations;" he was for them the representative of the primitive
savage who had survived in the wilds of the desert. Untamed and untamable, his
hand was against every man, and every man's hand against him.

Before Babylonian culture had been brought to the West, Amalek already
existed. He was older than the oldest of the civilised kingdoms of the earth.
But civilisation had raised a barrier against him which he was ever on the watch
to break through. He never lost the opportunity of raiding the inhabitants [pg 97] of the cultivated
lands, and escaping again into the desert with his booty before he could be
overtaken and punished. The desert between Palestine and Egypt was his chief
camping-ground. He had occupied the wadis of Mount Seir before the Edomites had
entered them, and a part of the later population of the country traced its
descent from a mixture of the Bedâwi with the Edomite. The Egyptians had many
names for the Bedâwin hordes. Sometimes they were the Herusha or "Lords of the
Sands," sometimes the Shasu or "Plunderers," sometimes again the Sutê or
"Archers." The third name was borrowed from the Babylonians; in return, as we
learn from the tablets of Tel el-Amarna, the Babylonians adopted the second.

Hardly had the Israelites escaped from Egypt when they were called upon to
dispute with the Amalekites the possession of the desert. At Rephidim the
Bedâwin robbers fell upon the Israelitish camp. But they were beaten off with
slaughter, and never again ventured to molest the people of Yahveh during their
wanderings in the wilderness. The attack, however, was never forgotten, and
vengeance was exacted for it in the reign of Saul. Then the Amalekites were
pursued into their desert domain and mercilessly slaughtered. They had their
home, it is said, in the desert which extended from Shur to Havilah. Shur was
the line of fortification which defended the eastern [pg 98] frontier of Egypt, and ran pretty much
where the Suez Canal has been dug to-day; Havilah was the "sandy" desert of
northern Arabia. Here was the "city" of tents of which Agag was shêkh, and which
the troops of the Israelitish king burnt and spoiled.

But the remembrance of the expedition did not last long. When civil war had
weakened the power of Saul, and the march of the Philistine army to the north
had left the south of Canaan without defenders, an Amalekite tribe again poured
into Judah and sacked the Philistine town of Ziklag. The wives and property of
David and his followers were carried off into the wilderness. But the marauders
were overtaken by the Israelites they had robbed, and summary vengeance taken
upon them. Men, women, and children were alike put to the sword; four hundred
only escaped through the fleetness of their camels.

In the Tel el-Amarna tablets we find the Bedâwin and their shêkhs playing a
part in the politics of Canaan. Their services were hired by the rival princes
of Palestine, and from time to time we hear of their seizing or plundering its
cities on their own account. They have never ceased indeed to infest the land.
Amalekite bands joined with the Midianites in devastating the villages of
central Israel in the days of Gideon, and the Amalekite who brought to David the
news of Saul's death was one of those who had hovered on the skirts of the
contending armies, eager [pg
99] when the fight was over to murder the wounded and strip the slain. In
a later age the "Arabs" who, according to the inscriptions of Sennacherib,
formed the body-guard of Hezekiah were probably Bedâwin, and Geshem the Arabian
in the time of Nehemiah seems to have represented the Amalekite chieftain of an
earlier epoch. The Bedâwin still haunt the plains and unfrequented paths of
Palestine, waylaying the traveller and robbing the peasant of his flocks.

The peasantry or fellahin are the Perizzites of the Hebrew Scriptures.
"Perizzite," in fact, means "villager," and the word is a descriptive title
rather than the name of a people or a race. It denotes the agricultural
population, whatever their origin may have been. Another word of similar
signification is Hivite. If any distinction is to be drawn between them, it is
that the term Perizzite was specially applied to the fellahin of southern
Canaan, while the term Hivite was restricted to the inhabitants of the north. In
two passages, it is true, "Hivite" seems to be used with an ethnic meaning. Esau
is said in one of them to have married the granddaughter of "Zibeon the Hivite,"
while in the other we read of "the Hivite" who dwelt under Mount Hermon. But a
comparison of the first passage with the later verses of the same chapter shows
that "Hivite" must be corrected into "Horite," and in the second passage it is
probable that "Hittite" instead of "Hivite" should be read.
[pg 100]

Amorite and Hittite, Canaanite and Philistine, were all alike emigrants from
other lands. The Hittites had come from the mountains of Asia Minor, the
Amorites had probably wandered from the northern coast of Africa, the Canaanites
traced their ancestry to the Persian Gulf, the Philistines had sailed from the
harbours of the Greek seas. Canaan had been inhabited, however, before any of
them had found their way to it, and this prehistoric population of the country
was known to the Hebrews by the name of Rephaim. In the English translation of
the Bible the word is usually rendered "giants;" it seems, however, to have been
a proper name, which survived in the name of one of the cities of Bashan.
Doubtless it often included other elements besides that to which it was properly
applied. At times it was extended to the Amorites, whose occupation of Palestine
went back to a remote past, just as in the Babylonian inscriptions the name of
Amorite itself was extended to the aboriginal population. Among the Philistines
this older population was called Avvim, the people of "the ruins."

Such then were the races who lived in Canaan, and with whom the invading
Israelites had to contend. There was firstly the primitive population of the
country, whose rude rock-sculptures may still be seen in the Wadi el-Qana near
Tyre. Then there were the intrusive Amorites and Canaanites, [pg 101] the Amorites with
their fair skins and blue eyes who made themselves a home in the mountains, and
the Semitic Canaanites who settled on the coast and in the plains. The Amorite
migration went back to an epoch long before that of the first Babylonian
conquests in the West; the Canaanitish migration may have been coeval with the
latter event. Next came the Hittites, to whom the Jebusites of Jerusalem may
have belonged; then the Philistines, who seized the southern coast but a few
years previously to the Israelitish invasion. Canaan was a land of many races
and many peoples, who had taken shelter in its highlands, or had found their
further progress barred by the sea. Small as it was, it was the link between
Asia and Africa, the battle-ground of the great kingdoms which arose on the
Euphrates and the Nile. It formed, in fact, the centre of the ancient civilised
world, and the mixture of races within it was due in great measure to its
central position. The culture of Babylonia and Egypt met there and
coalesced.

Footnote
2: (return)

Numb. xiii. 29.

Footnote
3: (return)

1 Chr. ii. 55; Jer. xxxv. 3-10.

Footnote
4: (return)

1 Sam. xxx. 14.

Footnote
5: (return)

Deut. xxiii 8.

[pg 105]

CHAPTER III

THE NATIONS OF THE SOUTH-EAST

Israel was cut in two by the Jordan. The districts east of the Jordan were
those that had first been conquered; it was from thence that the followers of
Joshua had gone forth to possess themselves of Canaan. But this division of the
territory was a source of weakness. The interests of the tribes on the two sides
of the river were never quite the same; at times indeed they were violently
antagonistic. When the disruption of the monarchy came after the death of
Solomon, Judah was the stronger for the fact that the eastern tribes followed
those of the north. The eastern tribes were the first to lose their
independence; they were carried into Assyrian captivity twelve years before the
fall of Samaria itself.

The eastern side of Jordan, in fact, belonged of right to the kinsfolk of the
Israelites, the children of Lot. Ammon and Moab derived their origin from the
nephew of Abraham, not from the patriarch himself, the ancestor of Ammon being
Ben-Ammi, "the Son of Ammi," the national god of the race. It was [pg 106] said that the two
peoples were the offspring of incest, and the cave was pointed out where they
had been born. Ammon occupied the country to the north which in earlier days had
been the home of the aboriginal Zuzini or Zamzummim. But they had been treated
as the Canaanites were treated by the Israelites in later days; their cities
were captured by the invading Ammonites, and they themselves massacred or
absorbed into the conquerors.

To the north the territory of Ammon was bounded by the plateau of Bashan and
the Aramaic kingdoms of Gilead. Southward it extended towards the frontier of
Moab, if indeed the borders of the two nations did not at one time coincide.
When the Israelitish invasion, however, took place, the Amorites under Sihon had
thrust themselves between, and had carved for themselves a kingdom out of the
northern half of Moab. The land north of the Arnon became Amorite; but the
Ammonite frontier was too well defended to be broken through.

The kingdom of Ammon maintained itself down to the time of David. At one
time, in the days of the Judges, the Ammonites had made the Israelitish tribes
on the eastern side of the Jordan tributary to them, and had even crossed the
river and raided the highlands of Ephraim. Under Saul, Ammon and Israel were at
constant feud. Saul had begun his reign by rescuing Jabesh in Gilead from the
Ammonite king [pg 107]
Nahash, who had threatened to treat its inhabitants with innate Semitic
barbarity. When civil war broke out in Israel, Nahash naturally befriended
David, and the alliance continued after David's accession to the throne. Common
interests brought them together. Esh-Baal, the successor of Saul in Gilead, was
the enemy of both: his frontier adjoined that of Ammon, while between him and
the King of Judah there was perpetual war. David had strengthened himself by
marrying the daughter of the king of the Aramaic district of Geshur, which
bounded Gilead on the north, and Ammonites and Aramæans were in close alliance
with each other.

As long as Nahash lived, there was peace between him and David. But with the
accession of his son Hanun came a change. The King of Judah had become King of
Israel, and his general, Joab, had subdued the neighbouring kingdom of Moab, and
was looking out for a fresh field of fame. Hanun determined to forestall the war
which he believed to be inevitable, and, in alliance with the Aramæans, to crush
the rising power of David. Family quarrels also probably conspired to bring
about this resolution. In the after days of Absalom's rebellion we find David
entertained in Gilead by Shobi the brother of Hanun;6
it may be, therefore, that Hanun had had a rival in his brother, who had
received shelter and protection at David's [pg 108] court. At all events the Israelitish
ambassadors were grossly insulted, and a long war with Ammon began. Campaign
followed upon campaign; the City of Waters, Rabbah, the "capital" of Ammon, was
closely invested, and the Aramaic allies of Hanun were put to flight. Rabbah
fell at last; its defenders were tortured and slain, and the kingdom of Ammon
annexed to the Israelitish empire.

When it recovered its independence we do not know. In the days of Assyrian
conquest in the West it was already again governed by its own kings. One of
them, Baasha, the son of Rehob, was, like Ahab of Samaria, an ally of Damascus
against the Assyrian invader, and we hear of two others, one of whom bears the
same name as "Shinab, King of Admah." The storm of Babylonian conquest which
overwhelmed Judah spared Ammon; after the destruction of Jerusalem Baalis was
still king of the Ammonites, and ready to extend his power over the desolated
fields of Judah.7

The language of Ammon, if we may argue from the proper names, was, like that
of Moab, a mere dialectal variety of that of Israel. The "language of Canaan"
must have been adopted by the Ammonites and Moabites just as it was by the
Israelitish tribes. The Moabite Stone has proved this conclusively. Moabite and
Ammonite, Phoenician and Hebrew, were all alike [pg 109] dialects of one language, which
differed from one another merely as one English dialect differs from another.
Hebrew had retained a few "Arabisms," a few traces of its ancient contact with
Arabic-speaking tribes; that was all. In other respects it was the same as "the
language of Canaan" on either side of the Jordan.

The Ammonites believed themselves to be the children of the national god
Ammi. But Ammi was usually worshipped under the title of Malcham or Milcom, "the
King." It was to Milcom that Solomon erected an altar at Jerusalem, in honour of
that Ammonite wife whose son Rehoboam succeeded him on the throne, and it was
from the head of his image at Kabbah that his crown of gold and precious stones,
131 pounds in weight, was removed to grace the triumph of David.8

Moab was more exposed to the inroads of its nomadic neighbours from the
wilderness than its sister-kingdom of Ammon. It lay along the eastern shores of
the Dead Sea, and was a land of lofty mountains and fertile river-plains. Its
wadis were coveted by the tribes of the desert; the well-watered valley of the
Arnon attracted more powerful foes. When the Israelites encamped in "the plain
of Moab," Balak, the Moabite [pg 110] king, sent in terror to Balaam, the seer of
Pethor. He had indeed cause for alarm. The Amorites had already robbed him of
the fairest portion of his dominions; Moab north of the Arnon had fallen into
their hands. The Amorite song of triumph has been preserved in the Book of
Numbers. "Come unto Heshbon," it said; "let the city of Sihon be built and
fortified. For a fire has gone forth from Heshbon, a flame from the city of
Sihon; it hath consumed Ar of Moab, and the Baalim of the high-places of Arnon.
Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: [Chemosh] hath given
his sons that escaped [the battle], and his daughters, into captivity unto
Sihon, King of the Amorites."9

Moab was avenged by Israel. The Amorites were crushed by the Israelitish
forces, though the lands they had taken from Moab were not restored to their
original owners. The conquerors settled in them, and a mixed Israelitish and
Moabite population was the result. The Moabites, in fact, were powerless to
resist. The southern portion of the kingdom had been overrun by Midianite
hordes; the enemy with whom the Israelites had to contend on Moabite soil was
Midianite and not Moabite. Those who corrupted Israel on the high-place of Peor
were Midianites in race.

The Midianites seem to have continued in occupation of Moabite territory for
several generations. Reuben [pg 111] was enabled to pasture his flocks in peace in
its valleys, and it is probable that it was not till Hadad, the King of Edom,
"smote Midian in the plain of Moab" that Midianitish supremacy came finally to
an end. It may be that Gideon's success against the Midianite oppressors of
Gilead was one of the results of their overthrow by the Edomite prince.

At the same time, Midianitish supremacy did not mean the destruction of the
Moabite kingdom. Moab was still governed by its own kings, tributary vassals
though they were to the foreigner. One of them, Eglon, made himself master of
southern Palestine shortly after the Israelitish conquest of the country, and
was murdered by the Benjamite Ehud. Between Moab and Judah there was, as might
be expected from their geographical position, constant intercourse. A Moabitess
was the ancestress of David, and it was to the court of the King of Moab that
David entrusted his parents when hard pressed by Saul. Possibly the Moabite
prince was not ill pleased to befriend the enemy of his own enemy, the King of
Israel.

It had been better for the Moabites, however, had David never lived to
succeed Saul. The conquest of the Philistines by his troops was followed by the
conquest of Moab. The vanquished people were decimated, every second man being
mercilessly slain. So thoroughly was the country subdued that it was more than a
century before it ventured to break away from [pg 112] its Israelitish master. After the disruption of
Solomon's heritage it fell to the share of the northern kingdom, though native
kings once more sat upon its throne. Now and again they revolted, to be brought
back to obedience, however, when Israel recovered its strength. Such was the
case when Omri founded his dynasty at Samaria; Moab again became a dependency of
the Israelitish monarch, and its ruler was forced to pay tribute and homage to
his over-lord. The tribute consisted in sheep, or rather in their skins, which
were tanned by the Israelites into leather, while the fleeces upon them were
woven into cloth. In the time of Ahab, Mesha, the son of Chemosh-melech, sent
each year 100,000 lambs and 100,000 rams.

Mesha subsequently succeeded in shaking off the foreign yoke. He has left us
a record of his victories, the so-called Moabite Stone, which was discovered
among the ruins of his capital, Dibon. The country north of the Arnon was
wrested from Israelitish hands, and the King of Israel, in spite of help from
Judah and Edom, failed to recover it. Moab was permanently lost to the kingdom
of Samaria. The Assyrian texts mention some of its later rulers. One of them was
Shalman, who may be the spoiler of Beth-Arbel referred to by Hosea;10
another was Chemosh-nadab, the contemporary of Hezekiah.

Chemosh-nadab signifies "Chemosh is noble." Chemosh [pg 113] was the national god of Moab, as
Milcom or Ammi was of Ammon. Like Yahveh of Israel, he stood alone, with no wife
to share his divinity. So entirely, in fact, had the conception of a goddess
vanished from the mind of the Moabite, that, as we learn from the Moabite Stone,
the Babylonian Istar, the Ashtoreth of Canaan, had been transformed into a male
deity, and identified with Chemosh. It was to Ashtar-Chemosh, Mesha tells us,
and not to Ashtoreth, that he devoted the captive women of Israel.

The older population, expelled or enslaved by the conquering Moabites, went
by the name of Emim. It is probable that they belonged to the same stock as the
Zamzummim or Zuzim whose country had been seized by the Ammonites. We may gather
from the narrative in Genesis that the invaders forced their way eastward and
northward from the valley of the Jordan and the shores of the Dead Sea.

South of Moab were the rugged and barren mountains of Seir, the seat of the
kingdom of Edom. In prehistoric days they had been the home of the Horites,
whose name may denote that they were of the "white" Amorite race or that they
were dwellers in "caves." To the Egyptians it was known as "the Red Land," along
with the desert that stretched westward; "Edom" is merely the Hebrew or
Canaanitish translation of the Egyptian title. The title was one which well
befitted the red cliffs of Seir.
[pg 114]

Through the centre of the mountains a rift extended from the Dead Sea to the
Gulf of Aqaba. In geological times it had been the channel of the Jordan; now it
is called the Wadi el-Araba. It was this rift which brought wealth to Edom;
through it passed the highroad of commerce which connected Syria with the
harbours at the head of the gulf. The spices of Arabia, the gold of Africa, were
unshipped at Elath and Ezion-gaber, and carried from thence on the backs of
camels to the nations of the north. The tolls levied on the merchandise made the
kingdom of Edom wealthy, and at the same time an object of envy to its poorer
neighbours. In conquering Edom, David doubtless desired to secure the trade with
the Red Sea and the ports through which the trade passed.

Edom was the elder brother of Israel. The two nations never forgot that they
were of one blood and one parentage. Their languages were the same, as we may
gather from the Edomite proper names; indeed, it would seem that the dialect of
Edom agreed with Hebrew in those Arabising peculiarities which marked it off
from the language of the Canaanites. Edomites took part in the Israelitish
conquest of Palestine, and both Caleb and Othniel were Kenizzites by race.

The Edomite occupation of Seir was long subsequent to the settlement of the
Ammonites and Moabites in the regions which bore their names, though it preceded
the Israelitish settlement in Canaan. While [pg 115] Israel was herding its flocks in Egypt, Edom
was establishing itself in the mountains of Seir. Esau, the brother of Jacob,
had already gathered around him a body of followers, and had married into the
family of a Horite chief. His descendants, partly by conquest, partly by
absorption, planted themselves securely in the country which was henceforth to
be called Edom. Horite and Amalekite Bedâwin were alike absorbed into the
new-comers, whose position in Edom resembled that of the Israelites in
Canaan.

How long the work of conquest and settlement lasted we do not know. It
resulted in the formation of numerous tribes, each under its chieftain, the
alûph or "duke" as he was termed. These "dukes" corresponded with the
"princes" of the tribes of Israel. But whereas the "princes" of the Israelitish
tribes did not survive the life in the desert, the "dukes" of Edom give way only
to kings. For this there was a good reason. The invasion of Canaan and the
promulgation of the Mosaic Law changed the whole organisation of the Hebrew
people. On the one hand, the Israelites required a leader who should lead them
in the first instance against the Canaanites, in the second against the foreign
oppressors who enslaved them from time to time. On the other hand, the
high-priests at Shiloh exercised many of the functions which would naturally
have belonged to the head of the tribe. Neither "judge" nor high-priest was
[pg 116] needed in
Edom. There the native population was weak and uncivilised; it possessed neither
cities nor chariots of iron, and its subjugation was no difficult task. Once in
possession of the fastnesses of Seir, the Edomites were comparatively safe from
external attack. It was a land of dangerous defiles and barren mountains,
surrounded on all sides by the desert. There was no central sanctuary, no
Levitical priesthood, no Mosaic Law. The "duke" consequently had no rival; the
history of Edom knows nothing of judges or high-priests.

The law of evolution, however, which governed other Semitic communities
prevailed also in Edom. The dukes had to give place to a king. The tribes were
united under a single leader, and the loosely federated clans became a kingdom.
As in Israel, so too in Edom the kingdom was elective. But, unlike Israel, it
remained elective; there was no pressure of Philistine conquest, no commanding
genius like David, no central capital like Jerusalem to make it centralised and
hereditary. Several generations had to pass before the Edomites were called upon
to fight for their independence against a foreign invader, and when they did so
the struggle ended in their subjugation. The elective principle and the want of
a common centre and feeling of unity that resulted from it had much to do with
the victory of David.

The song of triumph with which the Israelitish [pg 117] fugitives celebrated the overthrow
of their Egyptian enemies mentions the alûphím or "dukes" of Edom. But
before the Israelites had emerged from the wilderness the dukes had been
supplanted by a king. It was a king who refused a passage through his dominions
to Moses and his followers, and in this king some scholars have seen the Aramæan
seer Balaam the son of Beor. At all events, the first Edomite king is said to
have been Bela or Balaam the son of Beor, and the name of the city of Din-habah,
from which he came, has a close resemblance to that of Dunip in northern
Syria.

A list of the kings of Edom is given in the thirty-sixth chapter of Genesis,
extracted from the state annals of the country. It seems to be brought down to
the time when Saul was elected king over Israel. The chronicles of Edom were
probably taken to Jerusalem at the time of its conquest by David; at any rate,
they would then have become accessible to an Israelitish writer. The conquest
was very thorough, all the male population being put to the sword, and a few
only escaping to Egypt. Among these was a member of the royal house, Hadad by
name, who grew up at the Egyptian court, and, after marrying the sister-in-law
of the Pharaoh, returned to his native mountains, where he played the part of a
bandit chief. The caravans which passed from the Gulf of Aqaba to the north were
attacked and plundered, and Solomon [pg 118] up to the end of his reign failed to suppress
the brigands. With the disruption of the Israelitish monarchy, Edom, as was
natural, fell to the lot of Judah, and for many years was governed by a viceroy.
It was not until after the death of Jehoshaphat that the Edomites succeeded in
revolting from their masters, and in recovering their ancient independence.
Three of their rulers are mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions, from which we
learn that there was a city of Edom, as well as a country of that name.

Of the religion of the Edomites we know but little. The supreme Baal was the
Sun-god Hadad; another god worshipped by them was Qaus or Kos. Of goddesses we
hear nothing. The Israelites, however, recognised in the Edomites brethren of
their own, whose religion was not far removed from that of the descendants of
Jacob. An Edomite of the third generation could enter "into the congregation of
the Lord," and we hear of no rival deity in Edom to Yahveh of Israel. Indeed, in
the old poetry of Israel Yahveh was said to have risen up "from Seir," and the
charge brought against Edom by the prophet Obadiah is not that of idolatry or
the worship of a "strange god," but of standing on the side of the "foreigners"
on the day that Jerusalem was destroyed.

The southern part of Edom was known as Teman; it was to the east of Teman
that the Kadmonites or "children of the East" pitched their tents. We first
[pg 119] hear of them
in an Egyptian papyrus of the age of the Twelfth dynasty (B.C. 2500). Then they
received with hospitality a political fugitive from Egypt; he married one of
their princesses and became one of their chiefs. Their wisdom was celebrated in
Palestine like that of their Edomite neighbours of Teman, and the highest praise
that could be bestowed on Solomon was that his "wisdom excelled all the wisdom
of the children of the East."

Not far from the camping-places of the Kadmonites was the land of Uz, famous
as the home of Job. Uz, in fact, was a province of Edom; Edomite colonists, so
we are told in the Book of Lamentations,11
inhabited it. Indeed, it has been suggested that the difficulties presented by
the language of the Book of Job are due to the fact that it is the language of
Edom rather than of the Jews, differing from the latter only as an English
dialect may differ from that of a neighbouring county. At all events, Job was as
much a hero of Hebrew as of Edomite tradition, while the last chapter of the
Book of Proverbs contains the wise sayings of a king whose territory adjoined
the land of Edom. Lemuel, according to the Hebrew text, which is mistranslated
in the Authorised Version, ruled over Massa, and Massa, the Mash of Genesis, is
described in the Assyrian inscriptions as that part of northern Arabia which
spread eastward from Edom. The Hebrew of [pg 120] Palestine doubtless included it in the country
of "the children of the East."

The larger part of northern Arabia, however, was the home of the Ishmaelites.
They lived, it is said, "from Havilah unto Shur," like the Amalekites or
Bedâwin. But whereas the Amalekites were the wild, untamable natives of the
desert, the Ishmaelites came of a cultured ancestry, half Babylonian, half
Egyptian, and the traditions of it were never forgotten. They lived a settled
life in fenced villages and fortified castles, as their descendants still do
to-day. Like the Israelites, they were divided into twelve tribes, the eldest
and most important of which were the Nabatheans, who spread from the frontiers
of Babylonia to Petra in the far west. Kedar was another powerful tribe; in the
days of the later Assyrian empire its kings contended in battle with the armies
of Nineveh.

The name of Ishmael is met with in Babylonian contracts of the age of
Abraham. It is a name which belongs to Canaan rather than to Babylonia or
Arabia. The Ishmaelite tribes, in fact, spoke dialects in which Canaanitish and
Arabic elements were mingled together. They are the dialects we term Aramaic,
and represent a mixture of Arabic with Canaanitish or Hebrew. As we go
northwards into Syria the Canaanitish element predominates; southward the Arabic
element is the more pronounced.
[pg 121]

The Ishmaelites were merchants and traders. They lived on the caravan-road
which brought the spices of southern Arabia to Canaan and Egypt, and the trade
was largely in their hands. In the history of Joseph we hear of them carrying
the balm of Gilead and the myrrh of the south on their camels to Egypt, and in
the second century before the Christian era the merchant princes of Petra made
their capital one of the wealthiest of Oriental cities. It was not until 105
A.D. that the Nabathean state was conquered by Rome, and the Ishmaelites of
northern Arabia transformed into Roman subjects. They have left their tombs and
inscriptions among the rocks of Petra, while the cliffs of the Sinaitic
Peninsula are covered with the scrawls of Nabathean travellers.

Southward of the Ishmaelites came the Midianites. Midianites and Ishmaelites
were alike of the same blood. Both traced their descent from Abraham; it was
only on the side of the mother that their origin was different. While the
Ishmaelites claimed connection with Egypt, the Midianites were more purely
Arabic in race. The name of Keturah their ancestress means "incense," and points
to the incense-bearing lands of the south. Midian was properly the district
which stretched along the western coast of the Gulf of Aqaba towards Mecca, if
not towards Yemen. But Midianite tribes had also pushed northwards and mingled
with the descendants of Ishmael. "Ishmaelites" [pg 122] and "Midianites" seem convertible terms in the
story of Joseph, and the Midianites who swarmed into the north of Israel in the
days of Gideon, along with the Amalekites and "the children of the East," must
have been as much Ishmaelite as Midianite in descent.

Between the Midianites and the Israelitish fugitives from Egypt there had
been close affinity. Moses had found a refuge in Midian, and his wife and
children were Midianite in race. His father-in-law, "the priest of Midian," had
visited him under the shadow of Sinai, and had given him his first lessons in
political organisation. A Midianite remained to guide the Israelites through the
wilderness, and the Kenites, who took part with the tribe of Judah in the
conquest of Canaan, appear to have migrated from Midian. It was not until just
before the invasion of Palestine that the old bonds of friendship and mixture
between Israel and Midian were broken asunder. Midianite hosts had overrun the
land of Moab as at a later time they overran the land of Israel, and the
Israelites had forsaken Yahveh for the worship of the Midianite Baal-Peor. This
was the result of intermarriage; the Israelites had taken Midianite wives and
conformed to the licentious rites of a Midianite god.

Israel, however, was saved by its Levite priests. They rallied round Yahveh
and Moses, and in the struggle that ensued the forces on the side of the [pg 123] national God proved
the stronger. The Midianitish faction was annihilated, its leaders put to death,
and the Midianites themselves attacked and despoiled. Among the slain was the
seer of Pethor, Balaam the son of Beor.

The Moabites must have hailed the Israelites as saviours. They had delivered
them from their two assailants, the Amorites on the north, the Midianites on the
east. But the Midianite power was broken only for a time. We hear at a
subsequent date of the Edomite king Hadad "who smote Midian in the field of
Moab," and a time came when Midianite shêkhs overran Gilead, and penetrated into
the valleys and villages of Manasseh on the western side of the Jordan. After
their defeat by Gideon, however, we hear of them no more. They passed out of the
Israelitish horizon; henceforth their raiding bands never approached the
frontiers of Israel. The land of Midian alone is mentioned as adjoining Edom;
the Midianites who had traversed the desert and carried terror to the
inhabitants of Canaan become merely a name.

Midian was originally governed by high-priests. This was the case among other
Semitic peoples as well. In Assyria the kings were preceded by the high-priests
of Assur, and recently-discovered inscriptions show that in southern Arabia, in
the land of Sheba, the high-priest came before the king. Jethro, [pg 124] "the priest of
Midian," represented a peculiarly Arabian institution.

The name of "Arab" was applied to certain tribes only of northern Arabia. We
hear of them in the Old Testament as well as in the Assyrian inscriptions. In
the Old Testament the name seems to include the Ishmaelite clans to the east of
Edom. Their "kings," it is said, brought tribute to Solomon; a colony of them
was established at Gur-Baal in the south of Judah. We learn from the Assyrian
texts that they could be governed by queens; two of their queens indeed are
mentioned by name.

It was also a "queen of the south," it will be remembered, who came to hear
the wisdom of Solomon. Sheba, the Saba of classical antiquity, was an important
kingdom of south-western Arabia, which had grown wealthy through its trade in
spicery. From time immemorial Egypt had imported frankincense from the southern
coasts of the Arabian peninsula, and the precious spices had been carried by
merchants to the far north. The caravan-road of trade ran northward to Midian
and Edom, touching on the one side on the frontier of Egypt, on the other on
that of Palestine. The road and the country through which it passed were in the
hands of the south Arabian kings. Their inscriptions have been discovered at
Teima, the Tema of the Old Testament, not far inland from El-Wej, and in the
days of Tiglath-pileser the kings of Saba claimed [pg 125] rule as far as the Euphrates. It was
no strange thing, therefore, for a queen of Sheba to have heard of the power of
Solomon, or to have sought alliance with so wealthy and luxurious a neighbour.
His province of Edom adjoined her own possessions; his ports on the Gulf of
Aqaba were open to her merchants, and the frankincense which grew in her
dominions was needed for the temple at Jerusalem.

The people of Sheba belonged to the south Arabian stock. In both blood and
language they differed considerably from the Semites of the north. Physically
they bore some resemblance to the Egyptians, and it has been suggested that the
Egyptians were originally emigrants from their shores. They lived in lofty
castles, and terraced the slopes of the mountains for the purpose of
cultivation, as they still do to-day. Civilisation among them was old; it was
derived, at least in part, from Babylonia, and the dynasty which reigned over
Babylon in the age of Abraham was of south Arabian descent. Some of them crossed
the Red Sea and founded colonies in Africa, in the modern Abyssinia, where they
built cities and introduced the culture of their former homes. Like the
Egyptians and the Babylonians, they were a literary people; their inscriptions
are still scattered thickly among the ruins of their towns, written in the
letters of the alphabet which is usually termed Phoenician. But it is becoming a
question whether it was not from south Arabia that [pg 126] Phoenicia first borrowed it, and
whether it would not be more truthfully called Arabian.

The religion of southern Arabia was highly polytheistic. Each district and
tribe had its special god or gods, and the goddesses were almost as numerous as
the gods. Along with Babylonian culture had come the adoption of several
Babylonian divinities;—Sin, the Moon-god, for instance, or Atthar, the Ashtoreth
of Canaan. How far westward the worship of Sin was carried may be judged from
the fact that Sinai, the sacred mountain whereon the law of Israel was
promulgated, took its name from that of the old Babylonian god.

In the tenth chapter of Genesis Sheba is one of the sons of Joktan, the
ancestor of the south Arabian tribes. Foremost among them is Hazarmaveth, the
Hadhramaut of to-day; another is Ophir, the port to which the gold of Africa was
brought. But the same chapter also assigns to Sheba a different origin. It
couples him with Dedan, and sees in him a descendant of Ham, a kinsman of Egypt
and Canaan. Both genealogies are right. They are geographical, not ethnic, and
denote, in accordance with Semitic idiom, the geographical relationships of the
races and nations of the ancient world. Sheba belonged not only to south Arabia
but to northern Arabia as well. The rule of the Sabæan princes extended to the
borders of Egypt and Canaan, and Sheba was the brother of Hazarmaveth [pg 127] and of Dedan alike.
For Dedan was a north Arabian tribe, whose home was near Tema, and whose name
may have had a connection with that sometimes given by the Babylonians to the
whole of the west.

Such, then, was Arabia in the days of the Hebrew writers. The south was
occupied by a cultured population, whose rule, at all events after the time of
Solomon, was acknowledged throughout the peninsula. The people of the north and
the centre differed from this population in both race and language, though all
alike belonged to the same Semitic stock. The Midianites on the western coast
perhaps partook of the characteristics of both. But the Ishmaelites were wholly
northern; they were the kinsmen of the Edomites and Israelites, and their
language was that Aramaic which represents a mixture of Arabic and Canaanitish
elements. Wandering tribes of savage Bedâwin pitched their tents in the desert,
or robbed their more settled neighbours, as they do to-day; these were the
Amalekites of the Old Testament, who were believed to be the first created of
mankind, and the aboriginal inhabitants of Arabia. Apart from them, however, the
peninsula was the seat of a considerable culture. The culture had spread from
the spice-bearing lands of the south, where it had been in contact with the
civilisations of Babylonia on the one side and of Egypt on the other, and where
wealthy and prosperous kingdoms had arisen, and powerful [pg 128] dynasties of kings had held sway. It
is to Arabia, in all probability, that we must look for the origin of the
alphabet—in itself a proof of the culture of those who used it; and it was from
Arabia that Babylonia received that line of monarchs which first made Babylon a
capital, and was ruling there in the days of Abraham. We must cease to regard
Arabia as a land of deserts and barbarism; it was, on the contrary, a trading
centre of the ancient world, and the Moslems who went forth from it to conquer
Christendom and found empires, were but the successors of those who, in earlier
times, had exercised a profound influence upon the destinies of the East.

Footnote
6: (return)

2 Sam. xvii. 27.

Footnote
7: (return)

Jer. xl. 14.

Footnote
8: (return)

Rehoboam is an Ammonite name, compounded with that of the god Am or Ammi.
Rehob, which is the first element in it, was also an Ammonite name, as we
learn from the Assyrian inscriptions.

Footnote
9: (return)

Numb. xxi. 27-29.

Footnote
10: (return)

x. 14.

Footnote
11: (return)

iv. 21.

[pg 131]

CHAPTER IV

THE NATIONS OF THE NORTH-EAST

Canaan is but the southern continuation of Syria, which shades off, as it
were, into the waterless wilderness. The name of Syria is usually supposed to be
an abbreviation of Assyria, but it is more probable that it comes from Suri, the
name by which the Babylonians denoted Mesopotamia and Syria of the north, and in
which Assyria itself was sometimes included. As we have seen, the Syria of our
own maps, and more especially the southern half of it, was commonly known to the
Babylonians as the land of the Amorites; in the later inscriptions of Assyria
the place of the Amorites is taken by the Hittites. When Assyria appeared upon
the scene of history the Hittites had become the dominant people in the
west.

The main part of the population of Syria and Mesopotamia was Aramæan—that is
to say, it consisted of Semites from Arabia who spoke Aramaic dialects. But it
was exposed to constant attacks from the north, and from time to time passed
under the yoke of a northern conqueror. At one time it was the Hittites who
poured [pg 132] down
the slopes of Mount Taurus and occupied the fertile plains and cities of
northern Syria. At another time a kindred people from the highlands of Armenia
established a kingdom in Mesopotamia known as that of Mitanni to its own
subjects, as that of Aram-Naharaim to the Hebrews.

The northern invaders sundered the Semites of the West from those of the
East. The kings of Mitanni held guard over the fords of the Euphrates, and
intrigued in Palestine against the Egyptian Pharaohs. But this did not prevent
them from marrying into the Pharaoh's family, while their daughters were sent to
the harem of the Egyptian king. Towards the end of the Eighteenth dynasty the
sacred blood of the Pharaohs became contaminated by these foreign alliances. For
two generations in succession the queen-mother was a Mitannian princess, and a
king finally sat upon the Pharaohs' throne who attempted to supplant the
religion of which he was the official head by a foreign cult, and thereby
brought about the fall of his house and empire.

The power of Mitanni or Aram-Naharaim—Aram of the Two Rivers—does not seem to
have long survived this event. Chushan-rishathaim, we learn from the Book of
Judges, held Palestine in subjection for eight years, until he was driven out by
the Kenizzite Othniel, and about the same time Ramses III. of Egypt records his
victory over the Mesopotamian [pg 133] king. After this we hear no more of a king of
Aram-Naharaim in Canaan or on the frontier of Egypt, and when the name of
Mitanni is met with a little later in the Assyrian inscriptions it is that of a
small and insignificant state.

The Hittites had grown at the expense of Mitanni, but their glory too was of
no long duration. In the days of Ramses II., the Pharaoh of the Oppression,
their power was at its height. From their southern capital at Kadesh on the
Orontes their armies had gone forth to contend on equal terms with the forces of
the Nile, and after twenty-one years of warfare, peace was made between the two
combatants, neither side having gained an advantage in the long struggle. The
text of the treaty is engraved on the walls of Karnak. There we may read how the
two rivals swore henceforth to be friends and allies, how the existing
boundaries of their respective territories in Syria were to remain unchanged for
ever, and how a general amnesty was to be granted to the political fugitives on
either side. It was only the criminal to whom the right of asylum in the
dominions of the other was denied.

In the war they had waged with Egypt the Hittite princes of Kadesh had
summoned their vassal allies from the distant coasts of Asia Minor. Lycians and
Dardanians had come from the far west; and were joined by the troops of
Aram-Naharaim from the [pg
134] east. The extension of Hittite supremacy to the shores of the Ægean
Sea is testified by the monuments it has left behind. Hittite inscriptions have
been found near Smyrna engraved on the rocks, as well as the figures of Hittite
warriors guarding the westernmost pass of the ancient road. The summer
residences of the Hittite princes were on the eastern bank of the Halys. Here
the roads of Asia Minor converged, and here we still see the sculptured
bas-reliefs of a Hittite palace and long rows of Hittite deities.

The Hittite empire broke up into a multitude of small principalities. Of
these Carchemish, now Jerablûs, on the Euphrates, was perhaps the most
important. It commanded the ford across the river, and the high-road of commerce
from east to west. Its merchants grew rich, and "the mina of Carchemish" became
a standard of value in the ancient world. Its capture by Sargon destroyed a
rival of Assyrian trade, and opened the road to the Mediterranean to the armies
of Assyria.

The decay of the Hittite and Mitannian power meant the revival of the older
Aramæan population of the country. The foreigner was expelled or absorbed; Syria
and Mesopotamia became more and more Semitic. Aramæan kingdoms arose on all
sides, and a feeling of common kinship and interests arose among them at the
same time. To the north of the Gulf of Antioch, in the very heart of the Hittite
territory, [pg 135]
German excavators have lately found the earliest known monuments of Aramæan art.
The art, as is natural, is based on that of their Hittite predecessors; even the
inscriptions in the alphabet of Phoenicia are cut in relief like the older
hieroglyphs of the Hittites. But they prove that the triumph of the Aramæan was
complete. The foreigner and his works were swept away; no trace has been
discovered of a Hittite text, barely even of a Hittite name. The gods are all
Semitic—Hadad the Sun-god and Shahr the Moon-god, the Baal of Harran, and
Rekeb-el, "the Chariot of God."

Hittite inscriptions have been found at Hamath on the Orontes. But they must
belong to a period earlier than that of David. The rulers of Hamath who made
alliance with David bear Semitic names. The crown-prince came himself to
Jerusalem, bringing with him costly vessels of gold and silver and bronze. His
name was Hadoram, "Hadad is exalted;" but out of compliment to the Israelitish
king, the name of Hadad was changed into that of the God of Israel, and he
became known to history as Joram. A common enmity united Hamath and Israel. The
war with Ammon had brought David into conflict with Zobah, an Aramaic kingdom
which under Hadad-ezer was aiming at the conquest of the whole of Syria. In the
reign of Saul, Zobah was divided into a number of separate clans or states;
these had been welded [pg
136] together by Hadad-ezer, who had added to his empire the smaller
Aramaic principalities of central Syria. Geshur, Maachah, Damascus all
acknowledged his authority. He had secured the caravan-road which led across the
desert, past the future Palmyra, to the Euphrates, and eastward of that river
the Aramæan states sent him help in war. Like the Pharaohs of a former
generation, he had erected a monument of his victory on the banks of the great
river, marking the farthest limit of his dominions.

Hamath was threatened by the growing power of Hadad-ezer, when a new force
entered the field. Joab, the commander of the Israelitish army, was a consummate
general, and the veterans he led had been trained to conquer. Ammon was easily
crushed, and while its capital was closely invested the Israelitish troops fell
upon the Aramæans in campaign after campaign. Victory followed victory; the
forces of Zobah and its allies were annihilated, and the Aramæan states as far
as Hamath and even the Euphrates became the tributaries of David. Wealth flowed
into the royal treasury at Jerusalem; the cities of northern Syria were
plundered of their bronze, and the yearly tribute of the subject states, as well
as the proceeds of the desert trade, yielded an unfailing revenue to the
conqueror. The attempt of Hadad-ezer to found an Aramæan empire had failed.

But the empire of David was hardly longer lived. [pg 137] The murder of Joab, and the
unwarlike character and extravagance of Solomon, brought about its downfall.
Damascus revolted under Rezon; and though in the war that ensued Solomon
succeeded in keeping the cities of Zobah which kept guard over the caravan road,
it never returned to Israelitish rule. When the disruption of the Israelitish
kingdom came after Solomon's death, the Aramæans rallied round the successors of
Rezon. Damascus increased in strength, and at times laid northern Israel under
tribute. Between the two kingdoms there was indeed constant intercourse,
sometimes peaceful, sometimes hostile. Syrian merchants had bazaars in Samaria,
where they could buy and sell, undisturbed by tolls and exactions, and
Israelitish traders had similar quarters assigned to them by treaty in Damascus.
"Damask couches" were already famous, and Ahab sent a contingent of 10,000 men
and 2000 chariots to the help of Ben-Hadad II. in his war against Assyria. This
Ben-Hadad is called Hadad-idri or Hadad-ezer in the Assyrian texts; Ben-Hadad,
in fact, was a god, who was worshipped by the Syrians by the side of his father
Hadad.

In the struggle with Assyria the Aramæan forces were led by Hamath. Most of
the states of western Asia contributed troops; even the "Arabs" took part in the
conflict. But the confederates were overthrown with great slaughter at Karkar on
the Orontes in B.C. 853, and immediately afterwards we find Ahab at war [pg 138] with his late ally.
Hadad-idri lived only a few years longer. In B.C. 842 he was murdered by Hazael,
who seized the throne. But Hazael, like his predecessor, was soon called upon to
face an Assyrian army. Year after year the Assyrians invaded the territories of
Damascus, and though they never succeeded in capturing the capital, the country
was devastated, and a countless amount of booty carried away. The Syrian kingdom
was utterly exhausted, and in no condition to resist the attacks of the
Israelitish kings Jehoash and Jeroboam II. Jehoash, we are told, gained three
victories over his hereditary enemy, while Jeroboam occupied its cities. When an
Assyrian army once more appeared at the gates of Damascus in B.C. 797, its king
Mariha was glad to purchase peace by rich presents and the offer of homage. Gold
and silver, bronze and iron in large quantities were yielded up to the
conqueror, and Damascus for a while was the vassal of Nineveh.

But a respite was granted it in which to recover its strength. Civil war
sapped the strength of the kingdom of Israel, and Assyria fell into decay. Freed
from its enemies, Damascus again amassed wealth through the trade across the
desert, and was recognised as the head of the smaller Aramæan states. In
conjunction with the Israelitish king Pekah, Rezon II. proposed to overthrow
Judah and supplant the Davidic dynasty by a Syrian vassal-prince. The fall of
Judah would have [pg
139] meant the fall also of Edom and the submission of the Philistines,
as well as that of Moab and Ammon. The strength of its capital made Judah the
champion and protector of southern Canaan; with Jerusalem in their hands, the
confederate rulers of Damascus and Samaria could do as they chose. Ahaz of Judah
turned in his despair to the Assyrians, who had once more appeared on the scene.
Tiglath-pileser III. had overthrown the older Assyrian dynasty and put new life
into the kingdom. In the interests of the merchants of Nineveh he aimed at
incorporating the whole of western Asia and its commerce into his empire, and
the appeal of Ahaz gave him an excuse for interfering in the affairs of
Palestine. Ahaz became his vassal; Pekah was put to death, and an Assyrian
nominee made king in his place, while Rezon was shut up in his capital and
closely besieged. For two years the siege continued; then Damascus was taken,
its last king slain, and its territory placed under an Assyrian satrap.

Hamath had already fallen. A portion of its population had been transported
to the north, and their places filled with settlers from Babylonia. Its king had
become an Assyrian vassal, who along with the other subject princes of Asia
attended the court held by Tiglath-pileser at Damascus after its capture, there
to pay homage to the conqueror and swell his triumph. A few years later, on the
accession of Sargon, Hamath made a final effort to recover its freedom. But the
[pg 140] effort was
ruthlessly crushed, and henceforward the last of the Aramæan kingdoms was made
an Assyrian province. When an Aramæan tribe again played a part in history it
was in the far south, among the rocky cliffs of Petra and the desert fortress of
the Nabathean merchants.

In the Book of Genesis, Mesopotamia, the country between the Euphrates and
Tigris, is called not only Aram-Naharaim, "Aram of the Two Rivers," but also
Padan-Aram, "the acre of Aram." Padan, as we learn from the Assyrian
inscriptions, originally signified as much land as a yoke of oxen could plough;
then it came to denote the "cultivated land" or "acre" itself. The word still
survives in modern Arabic. In the Egypt of to-day land is measured by
feddans, the feddan (or paddmi) being the equivalent of our
acre. Paddan was used in the same sense in the Babylonia of the age of
Abraham. Numerous contracts have been found for the lease or sale of estates in
which the "acreage" or number of paddani is carefully stated. The
application of the name to the plain of Mesopotamia was doubtless clue to the
Babylonians. An early Babylonian king claims rule over the "land of Padan," and
elsewhere we are told that it lay in front of the country of the Arman or
Aramæans.

It was in western Padan that the kingdom of Mitanni was established. Its
founders, as we have [pg
141] seen, came from the north. From the river Halys in Asia Minor to
Lake Urumiyeh, east of Armenia, there was a multitude of tribes, most of whom
seem to have belonged to the same race and to have spoken dialects of the same
language. The Hittites of Cappadocia and the ranges of the Taurus have already
been described. East of them came the Meshech and Tubal of the Bible as well as
the kingdom of Comagênê, of which we often hear in the Assyrian texts. But of
all these northern populations the most important—at all events in the later Old
Testament age—were the inhabitants of a country called Biainas, but to which its
neighbours gave the name of Ararat. Ararat corresponded to southern Armenia,
Biainas being the modern Van, and the Mount Ararat of modern geography lying
considerably to the north of it. In the ninth century before our era a powerful
dynasty arose at Van, which extended its conquests far and wide, and at one time
threatened to destroy even the Assyrian empire. It signalised its accession to
power by borrowing the cuneiform writing of Nineveh, and numerous inscriptions
exist recording the names and victories of its sovereigns, the buildings they
erected, and the gods they served. The language of the inscriptions is strange
and peculiar; it seems to be distantly related to modern Georgian, and may be
akin to the dialects of the Hittites or of Mitanni.

If we may trust the representations of the Assyrian [pg 142] artists, the people of Ararat did
not all belong to the same race. Two ethnic types have been handed down to
us—one with beardless faces, resembling that of the Hittites, the other of a
people with high fore-heads, curved and pointed noses, thin lips, and
well-formed chin. Both, however, wear the same dress. On the head is a crested
helmet like that of the Greeks, on the feet the Hittite boot with upturned end;
the body is clad in a tunic which reaches to the knee, and a small round target
is used in battle.

For many centuries the Semites and the people of the north contended for the
possession of the Syrian plains. Horde after horde descended from the northern
mountains, capturing the Aramæan cities and setting up kingdoms in their midst.
At one time it seemed as if the Semites of the east and west were to be
permanently sundered from one another. The decay of Babylonia and Egypt enabled
the Mitannians and Hittites to establish themselves in Mesopotamia and Syria,
and to gain possession of the fords of the Euphrates and the great lines of
trade. But the northerner was not suited by nature for the hot and enervating
climate of the south. His force diminished, his numbers lessened, and the
subjugated Semite increased in strength. Mitanni perished like the Hittite
empire, and with the rise of the second Assyrian empire the intruding nations of
the north found themselves compelled to struggle for bare existence. Ararat
[pg 143] had become
the leader among them, and in the latter days of the older Assyrian dynasty had
wrested territory from the Assyrians themselves, and had imposed its dominion
from the borders of Cappadocia to the shores of Lake Urumiyeh. But on a sudden
all was changed. Tiglath-pileser swept the land of Ararat to the very gates of
its capital, destroying and plundering as he went, and a war began between north
and south which ended in the triumph of Assyria. Ararat indeed remained, though
reduced to its original dimensions in the neighbourhood of Lake Van; but its
allies in Comagênê and Cappadocia, in Cilicia and among the Hittites, were
subjugated and dispersed. The tribes of Meshech and Tubal retreated to the
coasts of the Black Sea, and Ararat and its sister-kingdom of Minni were too
exhausted to withstand the invasion of a new race from new quarters of the
world. The Aryan Kimmerians from Russia poured through them, settling on their
way in Minni; while other Aryans from Phrygia made themselves masters of Ararat,
which henceforth took the name of Armenia. The Aramæan was avenged: the invaders
who in days before the Exodus had already robbed him of his lands were
themselves pursued to their northern retreats. The south proved to them a land
of decay and destruction; Gog and his host were given, "on the mountains of
Israel," to the vulture and the beast of prey.
[pg 147]

CHAPTER V

EGYPT

Egypt had been the bondhouse of Israel. It was there that Israel had grown
from a family into a people, which the desert was to transform into a nation.
The Exodus out of Egypt was the beginning of Israelitish history, the era from
which it dated. Down to the last the kingdom of the Pharaohs exercised upon it
an influence more or less profound; the extravagant splendour of Solomon was
modelled after that of the Egyptian monarchs, his merchants found their best
market on the banks of the Nile, and the last Canaanitish city which passed into
Israelitish hands was the gift to him of the Pharaoh. The invasion of the
Egyptian king prevented Rehoboam from attempting to reconquer the revolted
tribes, and in the days of Assyrian ascendancy it was Egypt that was played off
against the Assyrian invader by the princes and statesmen of the west. The
defeat of Necho at Carchemish handed Palestine over to the Babylonians, and
indirectly brought about the destruction of Jerusalem; even in the age of the
Ptolemies Egypt still influenced [pg 148] the history of Israel, and the Jews of
Alexandria prepared the way for the Christian Church. For centuries Palestine
was the battle-ground of the nations; but it was so because it lay between the
two great powers of the ancient East, between Egypt on the one side and Assyria
and Babylonia on the other.

Egypt is the creation of the Nile. Outside the Delta and the strip of land
which can be watered from the river there is only desert. When the annual
inundation covers the fields the land of Egypt exists no more; it becomes a
watery plain, out of which emerge the villages and towns and the raised banks
which serve as roads. For more than 1600 miles the Nile flows without an
affluent; in the spring it falls so low that its channel becomes almost
unnavigable; but in the late summer, its waters, swollen by the rains and melted
snows of Central Africa, and laden with the fertilising silt of the Abyssinian
mountains, spread over the cultivated country, and bring fertility wherever they
go.

The waters of the inundation must have been confined by dykes, and made to
flow where the cultivator needed them, at a very remote date. Recent discoveries
have thrown light on the early history of the country. We find it inhabited by
at least one race, possibly of Libyan origin, which for the present we must term
pre-historic. Its burial-places are met with in various localities in Upper
Egypt. The members of the [pg
149] race were not acquainted with the use of metals, but they were
expert artificers in stone and clay. Stone was skilfully carved into vessels of
different forms, and vases of clay were fashioned, with brightly polished
surfaces. Sometimes the vases were simply coloured red and black, or adorned
with patterns and pictures in incised white lines; at other times, and more
especially in the later tombs, they were artistically decorated with
representations of men and animals, boats, and geometrical patterns in red upon
a pale drab ground.

The pre-historic race or races had already reached a fair level of
civilisation—neolithic in type though it may have been—when a new people
appeared upon the scene, bringing with them the elements of a high culture and a
knowledge of working in metals. These were the Pharaonic Egyptians, who seem to
have come from Babylonia and the coasts of southern Arabia. Cities were built
and kingdoms were founded on the banks of the Nile, and the older population was
forced to become the serfs of the new-comers, to cultivate their fields, to
confine the Nile within artificial boundaries, and to carry out those
engineering works which have made the valley of the Nile what it is to-day.

The Pharaonic Egyptians are the Egyptians of history. They were acquainted
with the art of writing, they mummified their dead, and they possessed to a high
degree the faculty of organisation. The gods they worshipped were beneficent
deities, forms of the [pg
150] Sun-god from whom their kings derived their descent. It was a
religion which easily passed into a sort of pantheistic monotheism in the more
cultivated minds, and it was associated with a morality which is almost
Christian in its character. A belief in a future world and a resurrection of the
flesh formed an integral part of it; hence came the practice of embalming the
body that it might be preserved to the day of resurrection; hence too the
doctrine of the dead man's justification, not only through his own good works,
but through the intercession of the Sun-god Horus as well. Horus was addressed
as "the Redeemer;" he had avenged the death of his father Osiris upon his enemy
Set, the lord of evil, and through faith in him his followers were delivered
from the powers of darkness. Horus, however, and Osiris were but forms of the
same deity. Horus was the Sun-god when he rises in the morning; Osiris the
Sun-god as he journeys at night through a world of darkness; and both were
identical with Tum, the Sun-god of the evening. The gods who watched over the
great cities of Egypt, some of which had been the capitals of principalities,
were identified with the Sun-god in these his various forms. Thus Ptah of
Memphis became one with Osiris; so also did Ra, the Sun-god of Heliopolis, while
in those later days when Thebes rose to sovereign power its local god Amon was
united with Ra.

Along with this higher and spiritual religion went—at [pg 151] least in historical times—a worship
of sacred animals. The anomaly can be explained only by that mixture of races of
which archaeology has assured us. Beast-worship must have been the religion of
the pre-historic inhabitants of Egypt, and just as Brahmanism has thrown its
protection over the superstitions of the aboriginal tribes of India and
identified the idols of the populace with its own gods, so too in ancient Egypt
a fusion of race must have brought about a fusion of ideas. The sacred animals
of the older cult were associated with the deities of the new-comers; in the
eyes of the upper classes they were but symbols; the lower classes continued to
see in them what their fathers had seen, the gods themselves. While the
Pharaonic Egyptian adored Horus, the older race knew of Horus only as a hawk. If
we may trust Manetho, the Egyptian historian, it was not till the beginning of
the Second historical dynasty that the sacred animals of popular worship were
received into the official cult.

The Pharaonic Egyptian resembled in body and character the typical native of
Central Egypt to-day. He was long-headed, with a high and intellectual forehead,
straight nose, and massive lower jaw. His limbs were well-proportioned and
muscular, his feet and hands were small. He belonged to the white race, but his
hair and eyes were black, the hair being also straight. His artistic and
intellectual faculties [pg
152] were highly developed, he was singularly good-tempered and
light-hearted, averse to cruelty, though subject at times to fits of fanatical
excitement and ferocity. At once obstinate and industrious, he never failed to
carry out what he had once taken in hand. The Nile valley was reclaimed for the
use of man, and swamp and jungle, the home of wild beasts and venomous serpents,
were turned by his labours into a fruitful paradise.

By the side of the long-headed Egyptian of the ruling classes we find in the
age of the earlier dynasties a wholly different type, of which the famous wooden
statue now in the Cairo Museum, and commonly known as the "Shêkh el-Beled," may
be taken as an illustration. Here the skull is round instead of long, the lips
and nostrils are thick and fleshy, the expression good-humoured rather than
intellectual. The type is that of a portion of the lower classes, and disappears
from the monuments after the fall of the Sixth dynasty. After that epoch the
races which inhabited Egypt were more completely fused together, and the rounded
skull became rare.

Egyptian history begins with Menes, the founder of the united monarchy, and
of the First historical dynasty. Our glimpses of the age that preceded him—the
age of the followers of Horus, as the Egyptians termed it—are few and scanty.
Egypt was divided into several kingdoms, which were gradually unified [pg 153] into two only,
those of the north and the south. The northern kingdom was symbolised by the
snake and papyrus, the southern kingdom by the vulture and aloe. The vulture was
the emblem of Nekheb, the goddess of the great fortress whose ruins are now
called El-Kab; and it is probable that the city of Nekhen, which stood opposite
it on the western bank of the Nile, was once the capital of the south. However
this may be, when Menes mounted the throne he was hereditary ruler of This, a
city which adjoined the sacred burial-place of Osiris at Abydos, and of which
Girgeh is the modern successor.

Menes made himself master of the north, and so united all Egypt under one
rule. He then undertook and carried through a vast engineering work, one of the
greatest the world has ever seen. The Nile was turned aside out of its old
channel under the Libyan cliffs into a new channel to the east. The dyke which
forced the river from its old course still remains, and two or three thousand
years before the bed of the valley had risen to its present level the
destruction of the dyke would have meant the return of the Nile to its former
path. North of the dyke English engineers have found that the alluvial soil
bears witness to interference with the natural course of the river of a
far-reaching kind, and its long straight course resembles that of a canal rather
than of the naturally winding stream of the Nile.
[pg 154]

On the embankment thus won from the waters Menes built his capital, which
bore the two names of Men-nefer or Memphis, "the Beautiful Place," and
Hâ-ka-Ptah or Ægyptos, "the Temple of the Double of Ptah." On the north side of
it, in fact, stood the temple of Ptah, the local god, the scanty remains of
which are still visited by the tourist. In front of the shrine was the sacred
lake across which, on days of festival, the image of the god was ferried, and
which now serves as a village pond.

Menes was followed by six dynasties of kings, who reigned in all 1478 years.
The tombs of the two first dynasties have been found at Abydos. Menes himself
was buried on the edge of the desert near Negada, about twenty miles to the
north of Thebes. His sepulchre was built in rectangular form, of crude bricks,
and filled with numerous chambers, in the innermost and largest of which the
corpse of the king was laid. Then wood was heaped about the walls and the whole
set on fire, so that the royal body and the objects that were buried with it
were half consumed by the heat. The mode of burial was peculiar to Babylonia.
Here, in an alluvial plain, where stone was not procurable, and where the
cemeteries of the dead adjoined the houses of the living, brick was needful
instead of stone, and sanitary considerations made cremation necessary. But in
the desert of Egypt, at the foot of rocky cliffs, such customs were [pg 155] out of place; their
existence can be explained only by their importation from abroad. The use of
seal-cylinders of Babylonian pattern, and of clay as a writing material, in the
age of Menes and his successors, confirms the conclusion to which the mode of
burial points. The culture of Pharaonic Egypt must have been derived from the
banks of the Euphrates.

That Menes should have been buried at Negada, and not, like the rest of his
dynasty, in the sacred necropolis of his mother-city, is strange. But we are
told that he was slain by a hippopotamus, the Egyptian symbol of a foe. It may
be, therefore, that he fell fighting in battle, and that his sepulchre was
erected near the scene of his death. However that may be, the other monarchs of
the first two dynasties were entombed at Abydos, The mode of burial was the same
as in the case of Menes.

The objects found in the tombs of Menes and his successors prove that the
culture of Egypt was already far advanced. The hieroglyphic system of writing
was fully developed, tools and weapons of bronze were used in large quantities,
the hardest stones of the Red Sea coast were carved into exquisitely-shaped
vases, plaques of ivory were engraved with high artistic finish, and even
obsidian was worked into vases by means of the lathe. As the nearest source of
obsidian to Egypt that is known are the islands of Santorin and Melos in the
Ægean Sea, there must have already been a maritime [pg 156] trade with the Greek seas. Art had
already reached maturity; a small dog carved out of ivory and discovered in the
tomb of Menes is equal to the best work of later days. Finally, the titles
assumed by the Pharaohs are already placed above the double name of the king,
and the symbols employed to denote them are the same as those which continued in
use down to the end of the Egyptian monarchy.

The first six dynasties are known to Egyptologists as the Old Empire. Kings
of the Fourth dynasty, Khufu, Khafra, and Menkaura, built the great pyramids of
Giza, the largest of which is still one of the wonders of the world. Its huge
granite blocks are planed with mathematical exactitude, and, according to
Professor Flinders Petrie, have been worked by means of tubular drills fitted
with the points of emeralds or some equally hard stone. It was left for the
nineteenth century to re-discover the instrument when the Mont Cenis tunnel was
half completed. The copper for the bronze tools employed by the workmen was
brought from the mines of Sinai, where the Egyptian kings had kept an armed
garrison for many generations; the tin mixed with the copper must have come from
India and the Malayan Peninsula, or else from Spain and Britain.

While the Fifth and Sixth dynasties were reigning, exploring expeditions were
sent into the lands of the Upper Nile. The two dynasties had sprung from the
island of Elephantinê, opposite Assuan; it was, therefore, [pg 157] perhaps natural
that they should take an interest in the country to the south. One expedition
made its way into the land of Punt, to the north of Abyssinia, and brought back
a Danga dwarf, whose tribal name still survives under the form of Dongo. Later
expeditions explored the banks of the Nile as far south as the country of the
Dwarfs, as well as the oases of Libya.

The Old Empire was followed by a period of decline. Egypt was overrun by
barbarians, its kings lost their power, and the whole land suffered decay. The
pyramid tombs of the Old Empire were entered and despoiled; the bodies of the
monarchs within them were torn to pieces, and the precious objects that had been
buried with them were carried away. As the power of the kings diminished, that
of the great landowners and nobles increased; a feudal aristocracy grew up,
which divided Egypt between its members, and treated the royal authority with
only nominal respect. Memphis ceased to be the capital, and a new dynasty, the
Ninth, was founded by the feudal prince of Herakleopolis, now Ahnas, south of
the Fayyûm. For a time the Tenth dynasty succeeded in reducing its rebellious
vassals to obedience, but the princes of Thebes steadily grew in strength, and
at length one of them seized the throne of the Pharaohs and established the
Eleventh dynasty. Thebes became the capital of the kingdom, and under the
Twelfth dynasty was the capital of an empire.
[pg 158]

Once more Egypt revived. The power of the aristocracy was broken, and the
local princes became court officials. Temples were built, and engineering works
undertaken all over the country. The ancient temple of Ra at Heliopolis was
restored, and two obelisks, one of which is still standing, were planted in
front of it. The depression west of the Nile, now known as the Fayyûm, was
drained of its waters, and by means of embankments transformed from a
pestiferous marsh into fertile fields. The Nile was brought to it by a
river-like canal, and the supply of water regulated by locks. Fresh exploring
expeditions were sent to the Somali coast and elsewhere. The gold-mines of
Hammamât were worked in the eastern desert, and Egypt became the California or
Australia of the ancient world. The eastern frontier was defended against the
Asiatic tribes, while campaign after campaign was carried on in the south,
resulting in the conquest of the Sudan.

The Thirteenth dynasty came to an end in the midst of internal troubles. The
short reigns of the kings of the dynasty that followed show that the line of the
Pharaohs was again becoming feeble. It closed in disaster and overthrow. Hordes
of invaders poured into Egypt from Asia and overran the whole country. They are
known as the Hyksos or Shepherds, and the greater part of them were of Semitic
descent. For 669 years they ruled the valley of the Nile in three [pg 159] dynasties, and the
recollection of their hated sway never faded from the Egyptian mind. At first
they burned and plundered, then they established themselves in Memphis and Zoan,
and from thence governed the rest of the country. But they soon submitted to the
influence of Egyptian culture. The conquered people took their conquerors
captive, and the Hyksos kings became veritable Pharaohs. The manners and
customs, the writing and titles of the native monarchs were adopted, and, in
course of time, even the language also. The court was filled with native
officials, the cities and temples were restored, and Egyptian learning was
patronised. One of the few Egyptian treatises on mathematics that have come down
to us is dedicated to a Hyksos sovereign. It was only in religion that the new
rulers of Egypt remained foreign.

They continued to worship a form of the Semitic Baal, who was invoked under
the Hittite name of Sutekh. An attempt to impose his worship upon the native
Egyptians led to the war of independence which ended in the expulsion of the
stranger. Apophis III., of the Seventeenth dynasty, sent messengers to
Skenen-Ra, the prince of Thebes, bidding him renounce Amon of Thebes for the god
of his suzerain. Skenen-Ra resisted, and a long war followed, which, after
lasting through five generations, resulted in the complete triumph of the
Egyptians. The Hyksos were driven back into Asia, and the prince of [pg 160] Thebes was
acknowledged the Pharaoh of an united Egypt (B.C. 1600).

It was while the Hyksos kings were reigning that Abraham visited the Delta.
Their court was held at Zoan, now Sân, close to the Asiatic frontier, and on the
frontier itself stood their fortress of Avaris, which served at once to bar the
way from Asia and to overawe the conquered Egyptians. The Pharaoh of Joseph was
probably Apophis III. If so, the Hebrew vizier would have witnessed the outbreak
of the war of independence towards the close of the long reign of the Hyksos
king. It may be that the policy which transferred the soil of Egypt from the
people to the king and the priests gave its first impulse to the movement.

The Eighteenth dynasty founded an Egyptian empire. Its kings carried the war
into Asia, and planted the boundaries of Egyptian dominion on the banks of the
Euphrates. Thothmes III. (B.C. 1503-1449) made Canaan an Egyptian province,
dividing it into districts, each under a governor or a vassal prince, who was
visited from time to time by a royal commissioner. Carriage roads were
constructed, with posting inns at intervals along them where food and lodging
could be procured. The country east of the Jordan equally obeyed Egyptian rule.
The plateau of Bashan was governed by a single prefect; Ammon and Moab were
tributary; Edom alone retained its [pg 161] independence, thanks to its barren mountains,
and inaccessible ravines. Thebes, the capital of the dynasty, was adorned with
splendid buildings, and all the wealth and luxury of Asia was poured into it.
Thothmes established zoological and botanical gardens, where the strange plants,
birds, and animals he had collected in his campaigns could be preserved. His
immediate predecessor, Queen Hatshepsu, had already revived the exploring
expeditions of earlier centuries. An exploring fleet had been sent by her to
Punt, the land of frankincense, and it returned home with rarities of all kinds,
including apes and giraffes. The history of the expedition and the treasures it
brought back were depicted on the walls of the temple built by the queen at Dêr
el-Bâhari, after the design of the architect Sen-Mut.

The authority of Egypt was not extended to the Euphrates only. Cyprus sent
tribute to the Pharaoh, the coasts of Asia Minor, perhaps also of Greece, were
harried, and the Sudan was conquered as far south as Berber, if not Khartûm.
Under Amen-hotep III., the grandson of Thothmes III., the empire underwent still
farther extension. Egyptian temples were erected on the banks of the Upper Nile,
and Napata, the future capital of Ethiopia, was built at Gebel Barkal, beyond
Dongola.

In Asia, Mitanni was the first neighbour of Egypt that had maintained its
independence. Assyria and [pg
162] the Mesopotamian prince of Singar or Shinar had paid tribute to
Thothmes III.; so, too, had the Hittite king, and even Babylonia had been forced
to acquiesce sullenly in the annexation by Egypt of her old province of Canaan,
and to beg for gifts of gold from the Egyptian mines. But Mitanni was too
powerful to be attacked. Her royal family accordingly married into the Solar
race of Egypt. One of her princesses was the mother of Amen-hotep III.; another
was probably the mother of his son and successor, Amen-hotep IV.

Amen-hotep IV. was one of the most remarkable monarchs that have ever sat
upon a throne. His father died while he was still a boy, and he was brought up
under the Asiatic influences of his mother Teie. But he was a philosopher by
nature rather than a king. The purpose of his life was to reform the religion of
Egypt, to replace it, in fact, by a pantheistic monotheism, the visible symbol
of which was the solar disk. For the first time in history a religious
persecution was entered on; the worship of Amon, the god of Thebes, was
proscribed, and his very name erased from the monuments. Amen-hotep changed his
own name to Khu-n-Aten, "the glory of the solar disk," and every effort was made
to extirpate the state religion, of which he was himself the official head. But
the ancient priesthood of Thebes proved too strong for the king. He left the
city of his fathers, and built a new capital farther north, where its ruins are
now known as Tel [pg
163] el-Amarna. Here he lived with the adherents of the new creed, and
here he erected a temple to the god of his worship and a stately palace for
himself.

Along with the reformation in religion had gone a reformation in art. The old
conventionalised art of Egypt was cast aside, and an attempt was made to imitate
nature, exactly, even to the verge of caricature. The wall and floor paintings
that have been discovered at Tel el-Amarna are marvels of realistic art. Plants
and animals and birds are alike represented in them with a spirit and
faithfulness to nature which is indeed astonishing. Like the houses of his
followers, the palace of the king was adorned with similar frescoes. But it was
also decorated with a lavish profusion of precious materials; its walls and
columns were inlaid with gold and bronze and precious stones, statues almost
Greek in their type stood within it, and even its stuccoed floors were covered
with costly paintings. Roads were made in the desert eastward of the city, where
its wealthier inhabitants took their morning drives, and the king occupied the
earlier part of the clay in giving lectures or sermons on the articles of his
faith.

The archives of the empire had been transferred from Thebes to the new
capital. Among them was the foreign correspondence, written upon clay tablets in
the cuneiform characters, and (for the most part) in the language of Babylonia.
We have learnt from it that the Babylonian language and script were the [pg 164] common means of
intercommunication from the Euphrates to the Nile in the century before the
Exodus. It proves how long and how profound must have been the influence and
rule of Babylonia in western Asia. Throughout the civilised world of Asia the
educated classes were compelled to learn a foreign writing and language, and
when the empire passed from Babylonia to Egypt, Egypt itself, whose script and
literature went back to immemorial times, was forced to do the same. The
correspondence was active and far-reaching. There are letters in it from the
kings of Babylonia and Assyria, of Mitanni and Cappadocia, as well as from the
Egyptian governors in Canaan. Even Bedâwin shêkhs take part in it, and the
letters are sometimes on the most trivial of subjects. It is clear that schools
and libraries must have existed throughout the civilised East, where the
Babylonian characters could be taught and learned, and where Babylonian
literature and official correspondence could be stored up. Among the tablets
found at Tel el-Amarna are some fragments of Babylonian literature, one of which
has served as a lesson-book, and traces of dictionaries have also been
discovered there.

The religious reforms of Khu-n-Aten resulted in the fall of the dynasty and
the Egyptian empire. The letters from Canaan, more especially those from the
vassal-king of Jerusalem, show that the power of Egypt in Asia was on the wane.
The Hittites were advancing [pg 165] from the north, Mitanni and Babylonia were
intriguing with disaffected Canaanites, and the Canaanitish governors themselves
were at war with one another. The Pharaoh is entreated to send help speedily; if
his troops do not come at once, it is reputed, they will come too late. But it
would seem that the troops could not be spared at home. There, too, civil war
was breaking out, and though Khu-n-Aten died before the end came, his sepulchre
was profaned, his mummy rent to pieces, and the city he had built destroyed. The
stones of the temple of his god were sent to Thebes, there to be used in the
service of the victorious Amon; and the tombs prepared for his mother and his
followers remained empty. In the national reaction against the Asiatised court
and religion of Khu-n-Aten, the Canaanitish foreigners who had usurped the
highest offices were either put to death or driven into exile, and a new
dynasty, the Nineteenth, arose, whose policy was "Egypt for the Egyptians."

Ramses I. was regarded as the founder of the Nineteenth dynasty. His reign
was short, and he was followed by his son Seti I., who once more led his armies
into Asia and subdued the coast-land of Syria. Seti was succeeded by his son
Ramses II., who died at a great age after a reign of sixty-seven years (B.C.
1348-1281), and whose mummy, like that of his father, is now in the Cairo
Museum. He set himself to restore the Asiatic empire of Thothmes. But the [pg 166] Hittites barred his
way. They had established themselves at Kadesh on the Orontes, and a long war of
twenty-one years ended at last in a treaty of peace in which the two combatants
agreed to respect from henceforth the existing boundaries of Egypt and Kadesh.
Egypt was left with Palestine on both sides of the Jordan, a possession,
however, which it lost soon after Ramses' death. The treaty was cemented by the
marriage of the Hittite princess with the Pharaoh.

Ramses II. was the great builder of Egypt. Go where we will, we find the
remains of the temples he erected or restored, of the cities he founded, and of
the statues he set up. His architectural conceptions were colossal; the temple
of Abu-Simbel, hewn out of a mountain, and the shattered image of himself at
Thebes, are a proof of this. But he attempted too much for the compass of a
single reign, however long. Much of his work is pretentious but poor, and
indicative of the feverish haste with which it was executed.

Among the cities he built in the Delta were Ramses and Pithom. Pithom, or
Pa-Tum, is now marked by the mounds of Tel el-Maskhuta, on the line of railway
between Ismailîa and Zagazig; it lay at the eastern extremity of Qoshem or
Goshen, in the district of Succoth. Like Ramses, it had been built by
Israelitish labour, for the free-born Israelites of Goshen had been turned into
royal serfs. None had suffered more from the revolution which overthrew the
Asiatised [pg 167]
court of the Eighteenth dynasty and brought in a "new king which knew not
Joseph."

They had been settled in the strip of pasture-land which borders the
Freshwater Canal of to-day, and is still a place of resort for the Bedâwin from
the east. It lay apart from the cultivated lands of the Egyptian peasantry, it
adjoined the desert which led to Asia, and it was near the Hyksos capital of
Zoan. Meneptah, the son and successor of Ramses II., tells us that from of old
it had been given by the Pharaohs to the nomad shepherds of Asia; and after the
departure of the Israelitish tribes the same king is informed in a letter from
one of his officials that the deserted district had been again handed over to
Bedâwin from Edom. This was in the eighth year of the king's reign, three years
later than that in which the Exodus must have taken place.

For 400 years the Israelites had been "afflicted" by the Egyptians. But while
the Eighteenth dynasty was in power their lot could not have been hard. They
still remained the free herdsmen of the Pharaoh, feeding their flocks and cattle
on the royal demesne. During the reign of Khu-n-Aten, indeed, their own Semitic
kinsmen from Canaan held the chief offices of state, and the Pharaoh was
endeavouring to force upon his subjects a form of monotheism which had much in
common with that of Israel. The language of the hymns engraved on the walls of
the tombs at [pg 168]
Tel el-Amarna reads not unfrequently like the verses of a Hebrew Psalm.

The national reaction which found its expression in the rise of the
Eighteenth dynasty swept away the power and influence of Asia, and brought back
the gods and religion of Egypt. The Semites who had absorbed the government of
the country were expelled or slain; their weaker brethren, the Israelites in
Goshen, were enslaved. Egypt became for them a house of bondage, and they had to
toil under the lash of the taskmaster at the cities and temples which the
Pharaoh built. Ramses held his court at Zoan, like the Hyksos of old days, but
it was to keep guard over the Asiatic frontier, not to be in touch with a
kindred people in Canaan. Canaan itself was conquered afresh, and the
Canaanitish captives—the "mixed multitude" of the Bible—assisted the Israelites
in erecting the monuments of their conqueror.

Nevertheless, the people multiplied. The memory of the Hyksos invasion had
not passed away, and the Pharaoh and his subjects alike feared the possibility
of other invaders from Asia being joined by their disaffected kinsfolk in Egypt
itself. That their fears were justified is shown by what happened less than a
century later. When the Nineteenth dynasty fell in the midst of civil war, a
Canaanite, Arisu by name, seized the throne and made himself master of Egypt.
Ramses determined to prevent such a catastrophe by [pg 169] destroying as many as possible of
the male children of the Hebrews. The men were worn down in body and mind by
constant labour, the children were not allowed to live.

Egyptian testimony confirms the statement of Scripture that this policy was
actually carried out. A hymn of victory addressed to Meneptah alludes to "the
Israelites" to whom "no seed" had been left. But the policy was ineffectual. The
opportunity came at last when the serfs could fly from their enforced labour and
escape into the wilderness.

It was in the fifth year of Meneptah (B.C. 1276). Egypt was threatened by
formidable enemies. The Libyans advanced against it by land, the nations of the
Greek seas attacked it by water. Achæans came from the north, Lycians from Asia
Minor, Sardinians and Sicilians from the islands of the west. The Delta was
overrun by swarms of barbarians, who pitched their tents in front of Belbeis at
the western end of the land of Goshen. Plague after plague descended upon the
Egyptians, and the freedom of his serfs was wrung from the Pharaoh. They fled by
night, carrying with them the spoil they had taken from their masters, only to
find that the gate of the great line of fortification which protected the
eastern frontier of Egypt was closed against them. Meneptah had repented of his
act, and a squadron of six hundred chariots was sent in pursuit of the
fugitives.
[pg 170]

But a violent wind drove back the sea from the shallows at the southern
extremity of the forts, and enabled the Israelites to cross them. While their
pursuers were following in their footsteps, the dropping of the wind caused the
waters to return upon them, and chariots, horses, and men were alike
overwhelmed. The Israelites were saved as it were by miracle, and the Pharaoh
lost his bondsmen.

But Egypt also succeeded in repelling the storm of invasion which had fallen
upon it. The Libyans and their northern allies were annihilated in a decisive
battle, their king, Murai, fled from the field, and a countless amount of booty
and prisoners fell into the hands of the victorious Egyptians. Canaan, however,
was lost, with the exception of Gaza, which defended the road from Egypt, and
was still garrisoned by Egyptian troops. But Gaza, the Calais of Egypt, was not
destined to remain long in their power. Already the coast-road was made
dangerous by the attacks of Philistine pirates from Crete; and it was not long
before the pirates took permanent possession of the southern corner of
Palestine, and established themselves in its five chief towns. The Egyptian
domination in Asia had passed away for ever.

After Meneptah's death the Nineteenth dynasty soon came to an inglorious end.
Civil war distracted the country, and for a time it obeyed the rule of a foreign
chief. Then came the rise of the Twentieth dynasty, [pg 171] and a third Ramses restored the
prestige and prosperity of his kingdom. But once more the foreign invader was
upon its soil. The nations of the north had again poured southward, partly by
land, partly by sea, greedy for the wealth that was stored in the cultured lands
of the Oriental world, and eager to find new settlements for an expanding
population. Greek traditions spoke of the movement as a consequence of the
Trojan war, and delighted to dwell on the voyages of its heroes into unknown
seas, of the piratical descents to which it led, and of the colonies which were
planted by it. The Philistine occupation of southern Palestine was one of its
results.

As in the time of Meneptah, the Libyans took part with the northern tribes in
the assault upon Egypt, and Sardinians and Sicilians followed behind them. But
the main bulk of the invaders came from the Greek seas. The Danaans take the
place of the Achæans, and the Philistines are among their allies. The invaders
had swept through western Asia, plundering and destroying as they marched, and
bringing in their train contingents from the countries through which they
passed. Hittites, Mitannians, and Amorites all followed with them, and the
motley host of men and ships finally reached the Egyptian frontier. Here,
however, they were met by the Pharaoh. The battle raged by sea and land, and
ended in a triumph of the Egyptians. The invaders were utterly overthrown, [pg 172] their ships burned,
their kings and leaders made captive. Egypt was once more saved from
destruction, and Ramses III. was free to develop its resources and repair the
damage that had been done.

First came a campaign in Canaan and Syria, the object of which was not to
acquire territory, but to teach the Asiatic that there was once more an army in
Egypt. The Egyptian forces seem to have gone as far as Hamath; at all events,
they occupied southern Palestine, capturing Gaza, Hebron, and Jerusalem, and
made their way across the Jordan into Moab. Another campaign carried the
Egyptian troops into Edom, where they burned the "tents" of the Bedâwin, and for
the first and last time in history planted the Egyptian standard on the slopes
of Mount Seir. Ramses now turned to the internal administration of his country,
and the copper-mines of Sinai, like the gold-mines of the eastern desert, were
worked with fresh vigour. The spoil won from the northern invaders made the
Pharaoh the richest monarch of the age. Temples were built, and endowed with
lavish generosity, and the priesthood must have grieved when he died at last
after a reign of thirty-three years.

He was followed by a line of feeble princes. The high-priests of Amon at
Thebes usurped their power, and finally dispossessed the last of them of the
throne. A new dynasty arose in the Delta. In the south the government was
practically in the hands of the Theban [pg 173] high-priests. With a divided kingdom the
strength of Egypt passed away.

It was restored by a foreigner, Shishak I., the captain of the Libyan
mercenaries. The Pharaoh whose daughter was married by Solomon must have been
the last king of the old dynasty. Perhaps he sought to strengthen himself
against his enemies in Egypt by an alliance with his powerful neighbour. At all
events, the King of Israel allowed his army to march through Palestine as far as
Gezer. The Egyptians flattered themselves that they had thereby asserted their
old claim to sovereignty over Palestine, but the substantial gainer was the
Israelitish monarch. He won the last independent Canaanite city without effort
or expenditure, and was allowed to marry into the Solar race.

Shishak had no need of Israelitish alliances. On the contrary, Solomon was
connected by marriage with the dethroned dynasty, and the power of Israel, if
unchecked, was a menace to his own kingdom. But while Solomon lived he was
afraid to move. He kept at his court, however, an Israelitish rebel, who might
prove useful when the time came. Hardly was Solomon dead when Jeroboam returned
to his native country, and the kingdom of David was sundered in twain. Shishak
seized the opportunity of striking a blow at what remained of it. With
contemptuous impartiality he overran the territories of both Judah and the
revolted tribes, but it was Judah which suffered the most. [pg 174] The unfinished
fortifications of Jerusalem were stormed, the treasures accumulated by Solomon
carried to the Nile, and the King of Judah compelled to acknowledge himself the
vassal of Shishak. Judah never recovered from the blow: had it not been for the
Egyptian invasion, and the consequent loss of its hoarded wealth, it might have
been able to suppress the rebellion of Jeroboam, and to reduce all the tribes of
Israel once more under one sceptre. The names of the captured cities of
Palestine are still to be read on the walls of the temple of Karnak.

Shishak's successors of the Twenty-second dynasty did not inherit his
military vigour and skill. The central authority grew gradually weaker, and
Egypt again fell back into the condition from which he had rescued it. The
tribes of the Sûdan could no longer be hindered from attacking the enfeebled
land, and Ethiopian princes made their way to Memphis, carrying back with them
to their capital of Napata the spoil and tribute of a defeated and disunited
people. At last the Ethiopian raids changed into permanent conquest, and a negro
dynasty—the Twenty-fifth—sat on the throne of Menes.

But the kings who belonged to it, Shabaka and Taharka, were vigorous, and for
a short while there was peace in the valley of the Nile. Assyria, however, had
already arisen in its strength, and was claiming the empire over western Asia
which had belonged to [pg
175] Babylon in the dawn of history. The states of Palestine endeavoured
in vain to play off Assyria against Egypt. Again and again the Egyptian armies
were defeated on the borders of Canaan, and Taharka was saved from invasion only
by the disaster which befell Sennacherib during his siege of Jerusalem. But the
respite was only momentary. Asia at last submitted to the dominion of Nineveh,
the King of Judah became an Assyrian vassal, and Esar-haddon, the successor of
Sennacherib, was now ready to march against the land of the Nile. In B.C. 674 he
entered the Delta and scattered the forces of the Ethiopians. But two more
campaigns were needed before the country was thoroughly subdued. At last, in
June B.C. 670, he drove the Egyptian forces before him in fifteen days from the
frontier to Memphis, twice defeating them with heavy loss and wounding Taharka
himself. Three days later Memphis opened its gates, and Taharka fled to Egypt,
leaving Egypt in the hands of the Assyrian. It was divided among twenty satraps,
most of whom were Egyptians by birth.

Two years, however, were hardly past when it revolted, and while on the march
to subdue it Esar-haddon fell ill, and died on the 10th of Marchesvan or
October. But the revolt was quickly suppressed by his successor Assur-bani-pal,
and the twenty satrapies restored. It was not long, however, before the satraps
quarrelled with one another, intrigued with Taharka, [pg 176] and rebelled against their suzerain.
Headed by Necho of Sais, they invited the Ethiopians to return; but the plot was
discovered, and Necho and his fellow-conspirators sent in chains to Nineveh.
Sais, Mendes, and other cities of northern Egypt were sacked, and Taharka, who
had advanced as far as Thebes and even Memphis, fled to Ethiopia and there died.
Meanwhile Necho had been pardoned and loaded with honours by the Assyrian king;
his son, who took an Assyrian name, was made satrap of Athribis, near the modern
Benha, and the satraps of the Delta henceforward remained faithful to their
Assyrian master. But another Ethiopian prince, Tuant-Amon, made a last attempt
to recover the dominion of his fathers. Thebes received him with acclamation,
and Memphis was taken without difficulty. There the satrap of Goshen came to pay
him homage on behalf of his brother-governors in the north.

His triumph, however, was short-lived. Assur-bani-pal determined to inflict a
terrible punishment on the rebel country, and to reduce it to subjection once
for all. Thebes had been the centre of disaffection; its priesthood looked with
impatience on the rule of the Asiatic, and were connected by religion and
tradition with Ethiopia; on Thebes and its priesthood, therefore, the punishment
had to fall. The Ethiopian army retreated to Nubia without striking a blow, and
Egypt was left defenceless at the mercy of the Assyrian. The [pg 177] Assyrian army
entered Thebes, the No or "City" of Amon, bent on the work of destruction. Its
temple-strongholds were plundered and overthrown, its inhabitants carried into
slavery, and two obelisks, seventy tons in weight, were sent as trophies to
Nineveh. The sack of Thebes made a deep impression on the Oriental world; we
find it referred to in the prophecies of Nahum (iii. 8).

Egypt now enjoyed peace, but it was the peace of exhaustion and
powerlessness. Psammetikhos had succeeded his father Necho, who had been put to
death by Tuant-Amon. He was a man of vigour and ability, and he aimed at nothing
less than sovereignty over an united and independent Egypt. His opportunity came
in B.C. 655. The Assyrian empire was shaken to its foundations by a revolt of
which Babylonia was the centre and which had spread to its other provinces. For
a time it was called on to struggle for bare existence. While the Assyrian
armies were employed elsewhere, Psammetikhos shook himself free of its
authority, and, with the help of Greek and Karian mercenaries from Lydia,
overcame his rival satraps and mounted the throne of the Pharaohs. Once more,
under the Twenty-sixth dynasty, Egypt enjoyed rest and prosperity; the
administration was re-organised, the cities and temples restored, and art
underwent an antiquarian revival. Psammetikhos even dreamed of recovering the
old supremacy of Egypt in Asia; the [pg 178] Assyrian empire was falling into decay, and
Egypt was endeavouring to model its life after the pattern of the past. After a
long siege Ashdod was taken, and the control of the road into Palestine was thus
secured.

But the power of the Twenty-sixth dynasty rested upon its Greek mercenaries.
The kings themselves were, it is probable, Libyans by descent, and the feelings
of the native priesthood towards them do not seem to have been cordial. Their
policy and ideas were European rather than Egyptian. Necho, the son and
successor of Psammetikhos, cleared out the old canal which united the Red Sea
with the Nile, and did all that he could to encourage trade with the
Mediterranean. An exploring fleet was even sent under Phoenician pilots to
circumnavigate Africa. Three years were spent on the voyage, and the ships
finally returned through the Straits of Gibraltar to the mouths of the Nile.
Meanwhile, the Pharaoh had marched into Palestine. Gaza was captured, and the
Jewish king, Josiah, slain in his attempt to bar the way of his unexpected
enemy. Jerusalem surrendered, and a nominee of the Egyptians was placed upon its
throne.

The Asiatic empire of the Eighteenth dynasty was thus restored. But it lasted
barely three years. In B.C. 605 the Egyptians were defeated by Nebuchadrezzar
under the walls of Carchemish on the Euphrates, and Asia passed into the
possession of the Babylonians. [pg 179] Once more Palestine became a shuttlecock
between the kingdoms of the Nile and the Euphrates. Trusting to the support of
Egypt, Zedekiah of Judah revolted from his Babylonian master. His policy at
first seemed successful. The Babylonian army which was besieging Jerusalem
retired on the approach of Psammetikhos II., who had succeeded his father Necho,
and the Jewish statesmen again breathed freely. But the respite lasted for only
six years. The Babylonian troops returned with increased strength; the Egyptians
retreated to their own country, and Jerusalem fell in B.C. 588, one year after
the death of the Egyptian king.

His son Hophra or Apries had made a vain attempt to rescue Zedekiah. His
fleet had held the sea, while his army marched along the coast of Palestine and
occupied Tyre and Sidon. But the fall of Jerusalem obliged it to retire. The
dream of an Asiatic empire was over, and the Pharaoh had more than enough to do
to defend himself against his own subjects. They saw with growing impatience
that the power and wealth of the Greek mercenaries continually increased. The
native army had already deserted to Ethiopia; now the priests complained that
the revenues of the temples were sacrilegiously confiscated for the support of
the foreigner. In B.C. 570 discontent reached a head; civil war broke out
between Hophra and his brother-in-law Ahmes or Amasis, which [pg 180] ended in the defeat
of Hophra and his loss of the crown.

But Amasis found the Greeks more indispensable than ever, and they were
loaded with favours even more than before. They were moved to Memphis that they
might be close to the king, and at the same time overawe the native Egyptians,
and Amasis himself married a Greek wife. The invasion of Egypt by Nebuchadrezzar
in B.C. 567 showed that the policy of Amasis had been a wise one. The
Babylonians were unable to penetrate beyond the eastern part of the Delta; the
Greek troops fought too well. The limits of the Babylonian empire were
permanently fixed at the frontiers of Palestine.

That empire, however, was overthrown by Cyrus, and it was easy to see that
the conqueror who had proved so irresistible in Asia would not allow Egypt to
remain at peace. Amasis prepared himself accordingly for the coming storm.
Cyprus was occupied, and therewith the command of the sea was assured. The
maritime policy of the Twenty-sixth dynasty was an indication of Greek
influence; in older days the sea had been to the Egyptian a thing abhorred.

Kambyses carried out the invasion which his father, Cyrus, had planned.
Unfortunately for the Egyptians, Amasis died while the Persian army was on its
march, and the task of opposing it fell to his young and inexperienced son. The
Greek mercenaries fought [pg
181] bravely, but to no purpose: the battle of Pelusium gave Egypt to the
invader, Memphis was taken, and the Pharaoh put to death. In the long struggle
between Asia and Egypt, Asia had been finally the victor.

The Egyptians did not submit tamely to the Persian yoke. Kambyses indeed
seemed inclined to change himself into an Egyptian Pharaoh; he took up his
residence at Memphis and sent an expedition to conquer the Sudân. But under
Darius and his successors, whose Zoroastrian monotheism was of a sterner
description, there was but little sympathy between the conquered and their
conquerors. Time after time the Egyptians broke into revolt, once against
Xerxes, once again against Artaxerxes I., and a third time against Artaxerxes
II. The last insurrection was more successful than those which had preceded it,
and Egypt remained independent for sixty-five years. Then the crimes and
incompetence of its last native king, Nektanebo II., opened the way to the
Persian, and the valley of the Nile once more bowed its neck under the Persian
yoke. Its temples were ruined, the sacred Apis slain, and an ass set up in
mockery in its place.

A few years later Egypt welcomed the Macedonian Alexander as a deliverer, and
recognised him as a god. The line of the Pharaohs, the incarnations of the
Sun-god, had returned in him to the earth. It was not the [pg 182] first time that the Egyptian and the
Greek had stood side by side against the common Persian foe. Greek troops had
disputed the passage of Kambyses into Egypt. The first revolt of Egypt had saved
Greece from the impending invasion of Darius, and postponed it to the reign of
his feebler son, and during its second revolt Athenian ships had sailed up the
Nile and assisted the Egyptians in the contest with the Persians. If Egypt could
not be free, it was better that its master should be a Greek.

Alexander was followed by the Ptolemies. They were the ablest of his
successors, the earlier of them being equally great in war and in peace.
Alexandria, founded by Alexander on the site of the village of Rakotis, became
the commercial and literary centre of the world; thousands of books were
collected in its Library, and learned professors lectured in the halls of its
Museum. An elaborate fiscal system was devised and carefully superintended, and
enormous revenues poured into the treasury of the king. As time passed on, the
Ptolemies identified themselves more and more with their subjects; the temples
were rebuilt or restored, and the Greek king assumed the attributes of a
Pharaoh. The Jews flocked into the country, where special privileges were
granted to them, and where many of them were raised to offices of state. A rival
temple to that of Jerusalem was built at Onion near Heliopolis, the modern Tel
el-Yahudîya, or [pg
183] "Mound of the Jews," and the books of the Hebrew Scriptures were
translated into Greek. A copy of the Septuagint, as the Greek translation was
called, was needed for the Alexandrine Library.

Egypt, once the house of bondage, thus became a second house of Israel. It
gave the world a new version of the Hebrew Bible which largely influenced the
writers of the New Testament; it gave it also a new Canon which was adopted by
the early Christian Church. The prophecy of Isaiah was fulfilled: "The Lord
shall be known to Egypt, and the Egyptians shall know the Lord."

In the course of centuries, however, the monotheistic element in Egyptian
religion had grown clearer and more pronounced in the minds of the educated
classes. The gods of the official cult ceased to be regarded as different forms
of the same deity; they became mere manifestations of a single all-pervading
power. As M. Grébaut puts it: they were "the names received by a single Being in
his various attributes and workings.... As the Eternal, who existed before all
worlds, then as organiser of the universe, and finally as the Providence who
each day watches over his work, he is always the same being, reuniting in his
essence all the attributes of divinity." It was the hidden God who was adored
under the name whatever the latter might be, the God who is described in the
texts as "without form" and "whose name is a mystery," and [pg 184] of whom it is said
that He is the one God, "beside whom there is no other." In Ptah of Memphis or
Amon of Thebes or Ra of Heliopolis, the more educated Egyptian recognised but a
name and symbol for the deity which underlay them all.

Along with this growth in a spiritual conception of religion went, as was
natural, a growth in scepticism. There was a sceptical as well as a believing
school, such as finds its expression in the festal Dirge of King Antef of the
Eleventh dynasty. Here we read in Canon Rawnsley's versified translation—

"What is fortune? say the wise.

Vanished are the hearths and homes,

What he does or thinks, who dies,

None to tell us comes.

Eat and drink in peace to-day,

When you go, your goods remain;

He who fares the last, long way,

Comes not back again."

A curious work of much later date that has come down to us is in the form of
a discussion between an Ethiopian cat and the unbelieving jackal Kufi, in which
the arguments of a sceptical philosophy are urged with such force and sympathy
as to show that they were the author's own. But such scepticism was confined to
the few; the Egyptian enjoys this life too much, as a rule, to be troubled by
doubts about [pg 185]
another, and he has always been distinguished by an intensity of religious
belief.

With his religion there were associated ideas and beliefs some of which have
a strangely Christian ring. He was a believer in the resurrection of the body;
hence the care that was taken from the time of the Third dynasty onwards to
preserve it by embalmment, and to place above the heart the scarab beetle, the
symbol of evolution, which by its magical powers would cause it to beat again.
Hence, too, the long texts from the Ritual of the Dead which enabled the
deceased to pass in safety through the perils that encompassed the entrance to
the next world, as well as the endeavour to place the corpse where it should not
be found and injured.

The Egyptian believed also in a Messiah. Thus, in a papyrus of the time of
Thothmes III., we read that "a king will come from the south, Ameni the
truth-declaring by name.... He will assume the crown of Upper Egypt, and will
lift up the red crown of Lower Egypt.... The people of the age of the Son of Man
will rejoice, and establish his name for all eternity. They will be far from
evil, and the wicked will humble their mouths for fear of him. The Asiatics will
fall before his blows, and the Libyans before his flame."

Even the conception of a son who is born of a virgin and a god is met with in
the temples of Hatshepsu at Dêr el-Bâhari, and of Amenophis III. at Luxor. Here
[pg 186] Amon-Ra is
said to have "gone to" the queen, "that he might be a father through her. He
made her behold him in his divine form, so that she might bear a child at the
sight of his divine beauty. His charms penetrated her flesh, filling it with the
odours of Punt." And the god is finally made to declare to her: "Amen-hotep
shall be the name of the son that is in thy womb. He shall grow up according to
the words that proceed out of thy mouth. He shall exercise sovereignty and
righteousness in this land unto its very end. My soul is in him, and he shall
wear the twofold crown of royalty, ruling the two lands like the sun for
ever."

Religious dogmas did not weaken the firm hold the Egyptian had upon morality.
His moral code was very high. Even faith in Horus the "Redeemer" did not suffice
by itself to ensure an entrance for the dead man into the fields of Alu, the
Egyptian Paradise. His deeds were weighed in the balance, and if they were found
wanting, he was condemned to the fiery pains of hell. Each man, after death, was
called upon to make the "Negative Confession," to prove that he had not sinned
against his fellows, that he had not oppressed or taken bribes, had not judged
wrongfully, had not injured a slave or overtasked the poor man, had not murdered
or stolen, lied or committed adultery, had not given short weight or robbed the
gods and the dead, had made none to "hunger" or "weep." Only [pg 187] when all the
questions of the awful judges in the underworld had been answered satisfactorily
was he allowed to pass into the presence of Osiris and to cultivate the fields
of Alu with his own hands.

This was the last trial demanded from the justified Egyptian, and it was a
hard one for the rich and noble who had done no peasants' work in this present
life. Accordingly, small images of labourers were buried with the dead, and it
was supposed that their "doubles" or shadows would assist him in his labours.
The supposition rested on a theory which ascribed to all things, whether animate
or inanimate, a double or reflection which corresponded to the thing itself in
every particular. It was like a shadow, except that it was invisible to mortal
eyes, and did not perish with the object which had projected it.

The "double" was called ka, and the ka of a man was his exact
representation in the other world, a spiritual representation, it is true, but
nevertheless one which had the same feelings, the same needs, and the same moral
nature as himself. It thus differed from the ba or "soul," which flew
away to the gods on the dissolution of the body. It was, in fact, the
Personality of the man.

From the outset the Pharaonic Egyptians were a nation of readers and writers.
Nothing is more astonishing than the way in which the simplest articles of daily
use are covered with inscriptions. Even the rocks on [pg 188] the river-bank are scribbled over by
the generations who once passed beside them. Already in the time of Menes the
hieroglyphic system of writing was fully developed, and before the end of the
Third dynasty a "hieratic" or running hand had been formed out of it. The more
cumbrous and picturesque hieroglyphics were reserved for engraving on wood or
stone or metal, or for the sacred texts; the ordinary book was written in
hieratic. The papyrus which grew in the marshes of the Delta was the writing
material, and in spite of its apparently fragile character, it has been found to
last as long as paper. When its use was at last discontinued in the tenth
century of our era, the cultivation of the papyrus ceased also, and it became
extinct in its ancient home. Tradition, however, asserted that leather had been
employed by the scribe before papyrus, and in the time of Pepi of the Sixth
dynasty a description of the plan of the temple of Dendera was discovered
inscribed on parchment. Even in later ages leather was sometimes employed.

Egyptian literature covered a wide field. Two of the oldest books that have
come down to us are the wise sayings of Qaqemna and Ptah-hotep, the first of
whom lived under the Third, the second under the Fifth dynasty. They are moral
treatises like the Proverbs of Solomon or the Discourses of Confucius.
Ptah-hotep already laments that men were not as they had been. He had reached
the age of a hundred and [pg
189] ten years, and had fallen upon degenerate days. Perhaps he was
right, for it would seem that the examination system had already been introduced
for the disposal of official posts. Ptah-hotep's style, too, is involved and
elaborate; he writes for a blasé circle of readers who can no longer
appreciate simplicity.

The historical novel was an Egyptian invention. Several of the works that
have survived are examples of it. But light literature of every kind was much in
fashion. A tale written for Seti II. when he was crown-prince contains an
episode which closely resembles the history of Joseph and Potiphar's wife, and
the reign of Ramses II. produced a sarcastic account of the misadventures of a
tourist in Canaan, the object of which was to ridicule the style and matter of
another writer. Poetry—heroic, lyrical, and religious—flourished, and a sort of
Egyptian Iliad was constructed by the poet Pentaur out of a deed of personal
prowess on the part of Ramses II. during the war with the Hittites.

Reference has already been made to the work on mathematics that was composed
when the Hyksos were ruling Egypt. A century or two later a work on medicine was
written, a copy of which is known as the Ebers Papyrus. It shows that medicine
has not advanced very rapidly since the age of the Eighteenth Egyptian dynasty.
Diseases were already carefully diagnosed and treated, much as they are to-day.
The [pg 190] medical
prescriptions read like those of a modern doctor; we have the same formulæ, the
same admixture of various drugs.

The Egyptians were not only a people of scribes and readers, they were also a
people of artists. They had the same power as the Japanese of expressing in a
few outlines the form and spirit of an object; their drawing is accurate, and at
the same time spirited. It is true that their canon of perspective was not the
same as our own, but the greater difficulties it presented to the artist were
successfully overcome. Their portraits of foreign races are marvellously true to
life, and their caricatures are as excellent as their more serious drawings. It
was in statuary, however, that the Egyptian artist was at his best. The hardest
of stones were carved into living likenesses, or invested with a dignity and
pathos which it is difficult to match. Such at least was the case with the
statuary of the Old Empire, before the conventionalised art of a later day had
placed restrictions on the sculptor and stifled his originality. The great
statue of King Khaf-Ra of the Fourth dynasty, seated on his throne with the
imperial hawk behind his head, is carved out of diorite, and nevertheless the
sculptor has thrown an idealised divinity over the face, which we yet feel to be
a speaking likeness of the man. The seated scribe in the Museum of Cairo, with
his high forehead, sparkling eyes, and long straight hair divided in the middle,
has [pg 191] a
countenance that is the very ideal of intellectuality, and in the wooden figure
of the "Shêkh el-beled," we have an inimitable portrait of the sleek and wealthy
bourgeois as he walks about his farm. All these statues are older than
the Sixth dynasty.

In disposition the Egyptian was remarkably kindly. He was affectionate to his
family, fond of society, and, alone among the nations of antiquity, humane to
others. His laws aimed at saving life and reclaiming the criminal. Diodoros
states that punishments were inflicted not merely as a deterrent, but also with
a view towards reforming the evil-doer, and Wilkinson notices that at Medinet
Habu, where the artist is depicting the great naval battle which saved Egypt
from the barbarians in the reign of Ramses III., he has represented Egyptian
soldiers rescuing the drowning crew of an enemy's ship.

The Pharaoh derived his title from the Per-âa or "Great House" in which he
lived, and where he dispensed justice. The title thus resembles that of the
"Sublime Porte." Next to him, the priests were the most powerful body in the
kingdom; indeed, after the close of the struggle between Khu-n-Aten and the
priesthood of Thebes the latter obtained more and more power, until under the
kings of the Twentieth dynasty they were the virtual rulers of the state. They
stood between the labouring classes and the great army of bureaucracy which from
the days of the [pg
192] Eighteenth dynasty onward carried on the administration of the
kingdom. The labouring classes, however, knew how to defend their own interests;
the artisans formed unions and "went on strike." Curious accounts have been
preserved of strikes among them at Thebes in the time of Ramses III. The free
labouring population must be distinguished from the slaves, who were partly
negroes, partly captives taken in war. The greater part of the latter were
employed on the public works. The mines and quarries were worked by
criminals.

At home the well-to-do Egyptian was artistic in his tastes. The walls and
columns of his house were frescoed with pictures, and his furniture was at once
comfortable and tasteful. Chairs and tables are of patterns which might well be
imitated to-day, and the smallest and commonest articles of toilet were
aesthetically and carefully made. Nothing can exceed the beauty of the jewellery
found at Dahshur, and belonging to princesses of the Twelfth dynasty. Precious
stones are so exquisitely inlaid in gold as to look like enamel, and are formed
into the most beautiful of designs; small forget-me-nots, for example, alternate
with plain gold crosses on one of the coronets, and the workmanship of the
pectoral ornaments could hardly be equalled at the present day. In dress,
however, the Egyptian was simple; his limbs were not overloaded with jewellery,
and he preferred light [pg
193] and muslin-like linen, which was kept as scrupulously clean as his
own person.

But he was fond of social entertainments, and Egyptian cookery and
confectionery were famous throughout the world. Table and guests alike were
adorned with fragrant flowers, and musicians and singers were called in to
complete the banquet. The house was surrounded by a garden, if possible, near
the river. It was open to the air and sun. The Egyptian loved the country, with
its fresh air and sunshine, as well as its outdoor amusements—hunting and
fishing, fowling and playing at ball. Like his descendants to-day, he was an
agriculturist at heart. The wealth and very existence of Egypt depended on its
peasantry, and though the scribes professed to despise them and to hold the
literary life alone worth living, the bulk of the nation was well aware of the
fact. Even the walls of the tombs are covered with agricultural scenes. In one
of them—that of Pa-heri, at El-Kab—the songs of the labourers have been
preserved. Thus the ploughmen sing at the plough: "'Tis a fine day, we are cool,
and the oxen are drawing the plough; the sky is doing as we would; let us work
for our master!" and of the reapers we read: "In answering chant they say: 'Tis
a good day, come out to the country, the north wind blows, the sky is all we
desire, let us work and take heart." The best known, however, of the songs, is
that sung by the [pg
194] driver of the oxen who tread out the corn, which was first
deciphered by Champollion—

"Thresh away, oxen, thresh away faster,

The straw for yourselves, and the grain for your master!"

Such were the Egyptians and such was Egypt where the childhood of Israel was
passed. It was a land of culture, it was a land of wealth and abundance, but it
was also a land of popular superstition and idolatry, and the idolatry and
culture were too closely associated in the minds of the Israelites to be torn
apart. In turning their backs on the Egyptian idols, it was necessary that they
should turn them on Egyptian civilisation as well. Hence it was that intercourse
with Egypt was forbidden, and the King of Israel who began by marrying an
Egyptian princess and importing horses from the valley of the Nile, ended by
building shrines to the gods of the heathen. Hence, too, it was that the
distinctive beliefs and practices of Egypt are ignored or disallowed. Even the
doctrine of the resurrection is passed over in silence; the Pentateuch keeps the
eyes of the Israelite fixed on the present life, where he will meet with his
punishment or reward. The doctrine of the resurrection was part of the faith in
Osiris, Isis, and Horus, and Yahveh of Israel would have no other god beside
Himself.

Moreover, the Israelites saw but little of the better [pg 195] side of the Egyptians. They lived in
Goshen, on the outskirts of northern Egypt, where the native population was
largely mixed with foreign elements. When they first settled there the Pharaoh
and his court were Asiatic or of Asiatic descent. And in later days the rise of
a purely native government meant for them a bitter bondage and the murder of
their children. Between the Israelite and the Egyptian there was hostility from
the first; Joseph began by confiscating the lands of both peasant and noble; the
natives revenged themselves by reducing his kinsfolk to a condition of serfdom,
and the last act in the drama of the Exodus was the "spoiling of the
Egyptians."
[pg
199]

CHAPTER VI

BABYLONIA AND ASSYRIA

While the influence of Egypt upon Israel may be described as negative, that
of Babylonia was positive. Abraham was a Babylonian by birth; the Asiatic world
through which he wandered was Babylonian in civilisation and government, and the
Babylonian exile was the final turning-point in the religious history of Judah.
The Semitic Babylonians were allied in race and language to the Hebrews; they
had common ideas and common points of view. Though Egyptian influence is
markedly absent from the Mosaic Code, we find in it old Semitic institutions and
beliefs which equally characterised Babylonia.

But the Semites were not the first occupants of Babylonia. The civilisation
of the country had been founded by a race which spoke an agglutinative language,
like that of the modern Finns or Turks, and which scholars have now agreed to
call Sumerian. The Sumerians had been the builders of the cities, the reclaimers
of the marshy plain, the inventors of the picture-writing which developed into
the cuneiform [pg 200]
or wedge-shaped characters, and the pioneers of a culture which profoundly
affected the whole of western Asia. The Semites entered upon the inheritance,
adopting, modifying, and improving upon it. The Babylonian civilisation, with
which we are best acquainted, was the result of this amalgamation of Sumerian
and Semitic elements.

Out of this mixture of Sumerians and Semites there arose a mixed people, a
mixed language, and a mixed religion. The language and race of Babylonia were
thus like those of England, probably also like those of Egypt. Mixed races are
invariably the best; it is the more pure-blooded peoples who fall behind in the
struggle for existence.

Recent excavations have thrown light on the early beginnings of Babylonia.
The country itself was an alluvial plain, formed by the silt deposited each year
by the Tigris and Euphrates. The land grows at the rate of about ninety feet a
year, or less than two miles in a century; since the age of Alexander the Great
the waters of the Persian Gulf have receded more than forty-six miles from the
shore. When the Sumerians first settled by the banks of the Euphrates it must
have been on the sandy plateau to the west of the river where the city of Ur,
the modern Mugheir, was afterwards built. At that time the future Babylonia was
a pestiferous marsh, inundated by the unchecked overflow of the rivers which
flowed through it. The [pg
201] reclamation of the marsh was the first work of the new-comers. The
rivers were banked out and the inundation regulated by means of canals. All this
demanded no little engineering skill; in fact, the creation of Babylonia was the
birth of the science of engineering.

Settlements were made in the fertile plain which had thus been won, and
which, along with the adjoining desert, was called by the Sumerians the
Edin, or "Plain." On the southern edge of this plain, and on what was
then the coast-line of the Persian Gulf, the town of Eridu was built, which soon
became a centre of maritime trade. Its site is now marked by the mounds of Abu
Shahrein or Nowâwis, nearly 150 miles from the sea; its foundation, therefore,
must go back to about 7500 years, or 5500 B.C. Ur, a little to the north-west,
with its temple of the Moon-god, was a colony of Eridu.

In the plain itself many cities were erected, which rose around the temples
of the gods. In the north was Nippur, now Niffer, whose great temple of Mul-lil
or El-lil, the Lord of the Ghost-world, was a centre of Babylonian religion for
unnumbered centuries. After the Semitic conquest Mul-lil came to be addressed as
Bel or "Lord," and when the rise of Babylon caused the worship of its
patron-deity Bel-Merodach to spread throughout the country, the Bel of Nippur
became known as the "older Bel." Nippur was [pg 202] watered by the canal Kabaru, the Chebar of
Ezekiel, and to the south of it was the city of Lagas, now Tello, where French
excavators have brought to light an early seat of Sumerian power. A little to
the west of Lagas was Larsa, the modern Senkereh, famous for its ancient temple
of the Sun-god, a few miles to the north-west of which stood Erech, now Warka,
dedicated to the Sky-god Anu and his daughter Istar.

Northward of Nippur was Bab-ili or Babylon, "the Gate of God," a Semitic
translation of its original Sumerian name, Ka-Dimirra. It was a double city,
built on either side of the Euphrates, and adjoining its suburb of Borsippa,
once an independent town. Babylon seems to have been a colony of Eridu, and its
god, Bel-Merodach, called by the Sumerians "Asari who does good to man," was
held to be the son of Ea, the culture-god of Eridu. E-Saggil, the great temple
of Bel-Merodach, rose in the midst of Babylon; the temple of Nebo, his "prophet"
and interpreter, rose hard by in Borsippa. Its ruins are now known as the
Birs-i-Nimrûd, in which travellers have seen the Tower of Babel.

In the neighbourhood of Babylon were Kish (El-Hymar) and Kutha
(Tel-Ibrahim); somewhat to the north of it, and on the banks of the
Euphrates, was Sippara or Sepharvaim, whose temple, dedicated to the Sun-god,
has been found in the mounds of Abu-Habba. Sippara was the northern fortress of
the Babylonian [pg
203] plain; it stood where the Tigris and Euphrates approached most
nearly one another, and where, therefore, the plain itself came practically to
an end. Upi or Opis, on the Tigris, still farther to the north, lay outside the
boundaries of primæval Chaldæa.

East of Babylonia were the mountains of Elam, inhabited by non-Semitic
tribes. Among them were the Kassi or Kossæeans, who maintained a rude
independence in their mountain fastnesses, and who, at one time, overran
Babylonia and founded a dynasty there which lasted for several centuries. The
capital of Elam was Susa or Shushan, the seat of an early monarchy, whose
civilisation was derived from the Babylonians.

In the south the Tigris and Euphrates made their way to the region of
salt-marshes, called Marratu in the inscriptions, Merathaim by the prophet
Jeremiah. They were inhabited by the Semitic tribe of the Kaldâ, whose princes
owned an unwilling obedience to the Babylonian kings. One of them,
Merodach-baladan, succeeded in making himself master of Babylonia, and from that
time forward the Kaldâ became so integral a part of the population as eventually
to give their name to the whole of it. For the writers of Greece and Rome the
Babylonians are Chaldæans. It is probable that Nebuchadrezzar was of Kaldâ
origin; if so, this would have been a further reason for the extension of the
tribal name to the whole country.
[pg 204]

The settlement of the Kaldâ in the marshes was of comparatively late date.
Indeed, in the early age of Babylonian history these marshes did not as yet
exist; it was not until Eridu had ceased to be a seaport that they were
reclaimed from the sea. The Kaldâ were the advance-guard of the Nabatheans and
other Aramaic tribes of northern Arabia, who migrated into Babylonia and pitched
their tents on the banks of the Euphrates, first of all as herdsmen, afterwards
as traders. After the fall of the Babylonian monarchy their numbers and
importance increased, and the Aramaic they spoke—the so-called "Chaldee"—came
more and more to supersede the language of Babylonia.

When first we get a glimpse of Babylonian history, the country is divided
into a number of small principalities. They are all Sumerian, and among them the
principality of Kish occupies a leading place. The temple of Mul-lil at Nippur
is the central sanctuary, to which they bring their offerings, and from which a
civilising influence emanates. It is an influence, however, which reflects the
darker side of life. Mul-lil was the lord of the dead; his priests were
sorcerers and magicians, and their sacred lore consisted of spells and
incantations. Supplementing the influence of Nippur, and in strong contrast with
it, was the influence of Eridu. Ea or Oannes, the god of Eridu, was a god who
benefited mankind. He was the lord of wisdom, and his wisdom displayed itself in
delivering men from the [pg
205] evils that surrounded them, and in teaching them the arts of life.
But he was lord also of the water, and it was told of him how he had arisen,
morning after morning, from the depths of the Persian Gulf, and had instructed
the people of Chaldæa in all the elements of civilisation. Eridu was the home of
the hymns that were sung to the gods of light and life, and which came to be
looked upon as divinely inspired.

It is clear that the myth of Cannes points to foreign intercourse as the
ultimate cause of Babylonian culture. It is natural that such should have been
the case. Commerce is still the great civiliser, and the traders and sailors of
Eridu created tastes and needs which they sought to satisfy.

The small states of Babylonia were constantly at war with each other, even
though they shared in a common civilisation, worshipped the same gods, and
presented their offerings to the same sanctuary of Nippur. Southern Babylonia—or
Kengi, "the land of canals and reeds," as it was often named—was already divided
against the north. At times it exercised supremacy as far as Nippur.
En-sakkus-ana of Kengi conquered Kis, like one of his predecessors who had
dedicated the statue, the store of silver, and the furniture of the conquered
prince to Mul-lil. Kis claimed sovereignty over the Bedâwin "archers," who had
their home in the district now called Jokha. But Kis eventually revenged itself.
One of its rulers made himself master of Nippur, and [pg 206] the kingdom of Kengi passed away.
The final blow was struck by Lugal-zaggi-si, the son of the high-priest of the
city of Opis. Lugal-zaggi-si not only conquered Babylonia, he also created an
empire. On the vases of delicately-carved stone which he dedicated to the god of
Nippur, a long inscription of one hundred and thirty-two lines describes his
deeds, and tells how he had extended his dominion from the Persian Gulf to the
Mediterranean Sea. It may be that at this time the culture of Babylonia was
first brought to the west, and that his conquests first communicated a knowledge
of the Sumerian language and writing to the nations of western Asia. With the
spoils of his victories the walls of Ur were raised "high as heaven," and the
temple of the Sun-god at Larsa was enlarged. Erech was made his capital, and
doubtless now received its Sumerian title of "the City" par
excellence.

The dynasty of Erech was supplanted by the First dynasty of Ur. Erech was
captured by Lugal-kigub-nidudu of Ur, and took the second rank in the new
kingdom. The position of Ur on the western bank of the Euphrates exposed it to
the attacks of the Semitic tribes of northern Arabia, and thus accustomed its
inhabitants to the use of arms, while at the same time its proximity to Eridu
made it a centre of trade. In Abrahamic days it had long been a place of resort
and settlement by Arabian and Canaanite merchants.
[pg 207]

How long the supremacy of Ur lasted we do not know. Nor do we know whether it
preceded or was followed by the supremacy of Lagas. The kings of Lagas had
succeeded in overcoming their hereditary enemies to the north. The so-called
"Stela of the Vultures," now in the Louvre, commemorates the overthrow of the
forces of the land of Upe or Opis, and depicts the bodies of the slain as they
lie on the battlefield devoured by the birds of prey. E-ana-gin, the king of
Lagas who erected it, never rested until he had subjected the rest of southern
Babylonia to his sway. The whole of "Sumer" was subdued, and the memory of a
time when a king of Kis, Mesa by name, had subjected Lagas to his rule, was
finally wiped out.

High-priests now took the place of kings in Kis and the country of Opis. But
a time came when the same change occurred also at Lagas. doubtless in
consequence of its conquest by some superior power. One of the monuments
discovered at Tello, the ancient Lagas, describes the victories of the
"high-priest" Entemena over the ancestral foe, and the appointment of a certain
Ili as "high-priest" of the land of Opis. From henceforward Kis and Opis
disappear from history.

A new power had meanwhile appeared on the scene. While the Sumerian princes
were engaged in mutual war, the Semites were occupying northern Babylonia, [pg 208] and establishing
their power in the city of Agadê or Akkad, not far from Sippara. Here, in B.C.
3800, arose the empire of Sargani-sar-ali, better known to posterity as "Sargon"
of Akkad. He became the hero of the Semitic race in Babylonia. Legends told how
he had been hidden by his royal mother in an ark of bulrushes daubed with pitch,
and intrusted to the waters of the Euphrates, how he had been found and adopted
as a son by Akki the irrigator, and how the goddess Istar had loved him and
restored him to his kingly estate. At all events, the career of Sargon was a
career of victories. Babylonia was united under his rule, Elam was subjugated,
and three campaigns sufficed to make "the land of the Amorites," Syria and
Canaan, obedient to his sway. He caused an image of himself to be carved on the
shores of the Mediterranean, and demanded tribute from Cyprus, Uru-Malik or
Urimelech being appointed governor of Syria, as we learn from a cadastral survey
of the district of Lagas. A revolt of the Sumerian states, however, called him
home, and for a time fortune seemed against him. He was besieged in Akkad, but a
successful sally drove back the rebels, and they were soon utterly crushed. Then
Sargon marched into Suri or Mesopotamia, subduing that country as well as the
future Assyria. It was the last, however, of his exploits. His son Naram-Sin
succeeded him shortly afterwards (B.C. 3750), and continued the conquests of his
father, Canaan was already [pg 209] a Babylonian province, and Naram-Sin now
carried his arms against Magan, or the Sinaitic Peninsula, where he secured the
precious mines of copper and turquoise. Building stone from Magan had already
been imported to Babylonia by Ur-Nina, a king of Lagas, and grandfather of
E-ana-gin, but it must have been brought in the ships of Eridu.

Naram-Sin's son was Bingani-sar-ali. A queen, Ellat-Gula, seems to have sat
on the throne not many years later, and with her the dynasty may have come to an
end. At any rate, the empire of Akkad is heard of no more. But it left behind it
a profound and abiding impression on western Asia. Henceforward the culture and
art of the west was Babylonian,—Semitic Babylonian, however, and no longer
Sumerian Babylonian as in the days of Lugal-zaggi-si. Sargon was a patron of
literature as well as a warrior. Standard works on astronomy and astrology and
the science of omens were compiled for the great library he established at
Akkad, where numerous scribes were kept constantly at work. Sumerian books were
brought from the cities of the south and translated into Semitic; commentaries
were written on the older literature of the country, and dictionaries and
grammars compiled. It was now that that mixed language arose, or at least was
admitted into the literary dialect, which made Babylonian so much resemble
modern English. The lexicon was filled with Sumerian words which had put [pg 210] on a Semitic form,
and Semitic lips expressed themselves in Sumerian idioms.

Art, too, reached a high perfection. The seal-cylinders of the reign of
Sargon of Akkad represent the highest efforts of the gem-cutter's skill in
ancient Babylonia, and a bas-relief of Naram-Sin, found at Diarbekr in northern
Mesopotamia, while presenting close analogies to the Egyptian art of the Old
Empire, is superior to anything of the kind as yet discovered in Babylonia of
either an earlier or a later date. As in Egypt, so too in Babylonia, the
sculpture of later times shows retrogression rather than advance. It is
impossible not to believe that between the art of Egypt in the age of the Old
Empire and that of Babylonia in the reigns of Sargon and Naram-Sin there was an
intimate connection. The mines of the Sinaitic Peninsula were coveted by both
countries.

Sumerian princes still continued to rule in Sumer or southern Babylonia, but
after the era of Sargon their power grew less and less. A Second Sumerian
dynasty, however, arose at Ur, and claimed sovereignty over the rest of Chaldæa.
One of its kings, Ur-Bau, was a great builder and restorer of the temples, and
under his son and successor Dungi (B.C. 2700), a high-priest of the name of
Gudea governed Lagas, the monuments of which have given us an insight into the
condition of the country in his age. His statues of hard diorite from the
Peninsula of Sinai are now in the Louvre; [pg 211] one of them is that of the architect of his
palace, with a copy of its plan upon his lap divided according to scale. Gudea,
though owning allegiance to Dungi, carried on wars on his own behalf, and boasts
of having conquered "Ansan of Elam." The materials for his numerous buildings
were brought from far. Hewn stones were imported from the "land of the
Amorites," limestone and alabaster from the Lebanon, gold-dust and acacia-wood
from the desert to the south of Palestine, copper from northern Arabia, and
various sorts of wood from the Armenian mountains. Other trees came from Dilmun
in the Persian Gulf, from Gozan in Mesopotamia, and from Gubin, which is
possibly Gebal. The bitumen was derived from "Madga in the mountains of the
river Gurruda," in which some scholars have seen the name of the Jordan, and the
naphtha springs of the vale of Siddim.

The library of Gudea has been found entire, with its 30,000 tablets or books
arranged in order on its shelves, and filled with information which it will take
years of labour to examine thoroughly. Not long after his death, the Second
dynasty of Ur gave way to a Third, this time of Semitic origin. Its kings still
claimed that sovereignty over Syria and Palestine which had been won by Sargon.
One of them, Inê-Sin, carried his arms to the west, and married his daughters to
the "high-priests" of Ansan in Elam, and of Mer'ash in northern Syria. His
grandson, Gimil-Sin, [pg
212] marched to the ranges of the Lebanon and overran the land of
Zamzali, which seems to be the Zamzummim of Scripture.

But with Gimil-Sin the strength of the dynasty seems to have come to an end.
Babylonia was given over to the stranger, and a dynasty of kings from southern
Arabia fixed its seat at Babylon. The language they spoke and the names they
bore were common to Canaan and the south of Arabia, and sounded strangely in
Babylonian ears. The founder of the dynasty was Sumu-abi, "Shem is my father," a
name in which we cannot fail to recognise the Shem of the Old Testament. His
descendants, however, had some difficulty in extending and maintaining their
authority. The native princes of southern Babylonia resisted it, and the
Elamites harried the country with fire and sword. In B.C. 2280 Kudur-Nankhundi,
the Elamite king, sacked Erech and carried away the image of its goddess, and
not long afterwards we find another Elamite king, Kudur-Laghghamar or
Chedor-laomer, claiming lordship over the whole of Chaldsea. The western
provinces of Babylonia shared in the fate of the sovereign power, and an Elamite
prince, Kudur-Mabug by name, was made "Father" or "Governor of the land of the
Amorites." His son Eri-Aku, the Arioch of Genesis, was given the title of king
in southern Babylonia, with Larsa as his capital. Larsa had been taken by storm
by the Elamite forces, and [pg 213] its native king, Sin-idinnam, driven out. He
fled for refuge to the court of the King of Babylon, who still preserved a
semblance of authority.

Khammurabi or Amraphel, the fifth successor of Sumu-abi, was now on the
throne of Babylon. His long reign of fifty-five years marked an epoch in
Babylonian history. At first he was the vassal of Kudur-Laghghamar, and along
with his brother vassals, Eri-Aku of Larsa and Tudghula or Tidal of Kurdistan,
had to serve in the campaigns of his suzerain lord in Canaan. But an opportunity
came at last for revolt, it may be in consequence of the disaster which had
befallen the army of the invaders in Syria at the hands of Abram and his Amorite
allies. The war lasted long, and at the beginning went against the King of
Babylon. Babylon itself was captured by the enemy, and its great temple laid in
ruins. But soon afterwards the tide turned. Eri-Aku and his Elamite supporters
were defeated in a decisive battle. Larsa was retaken, and Khammurabi ruled once
more over an independent and united Babylonia. Sin-idinnam was restored to his
principality, and we now possess several of the letters written to him by
Khammurabi, in which his bravery is praised on "the day of Kudur-Laghghamar's
defeat," and he is told to send back the images of certain Elamite goddesses to
their original seats. They had doubtless been carried to Larsa when it fell into
the hands of the Elamite invaders.
[pg 214]

As soon as Babylonia was cleared of its enemies, Khammurabi set himself to
the work of fortifying its cities, of restoring and building its temples and
walls, and of clearing and digging canals. The great canal known as that of "the
King," in the northern part of the country, was either made or re-excavated by
him, and at Kilmad, near the modern Bagdad, a palace was erected. Art and
learning were encouraged, and a literary revival took place which brought back
the old glories of the age of Sargon. Once more new editions were made of
standard works, poets arose to celebrate the deeds of the monarch, and books
became multiplied. Among the literary products of the period was the great
Chaldæan Epic in twelve books, recording the adventures of the hero Gilgames,
and embodying the Chaldæan story of the Deluge.

The supremacy over western Asia passed to Khammurabi, along with sovereignty
over Babylonia, and he assumed the title of "King of the land of the Amorites."
So too did his great-grandson, Ammi-ditana. Two generations later, with
Samas-ditana the First dynasty of Babylon came to an end. It had made Babylon
the capital of the country—a position which it never subsequently lost. It had
raised Bel-Merodach, the god of Babylon, to the head of the pantheon, and it had
lasted for 304 years. It was followed by a Sumerian dynasty from the south,
which governed the country for 368 years, but of which we know little [pg 215] more than the names
of the kings composing it and the length of their several reigns.

It fell before the avalanche of an invasion from the mountains of Elam. The
Kassites poured into the Babylonian plain, and Kassite kings ruled at Babylon
for 576 years and a half. During their domination the map of western Asia
underwent a change. The Kassite conquest destroyed the Babylonian empire; Canaan
was lost to it for ever, and eventually became a province of Egypt. The
high-priests of Assur, now Kaleh Sherghat, near the confluence of the Tigris and
Lower Zab, made themselves independent and founded the kingdom of Assyria, which
soon extended northward into the angle formed by the Tigris and Upper Zab, where
the cities of Nineveh and Calah afterwards arose. The whole country had
previously been included by the Babylonians in Gutium or Kurdistan.

The population of Assyria seems to have been more purely Semitic than that of
Babylonia. Such at least was the case with the ruling classes. It was a
population of free peasants, of soldiers, and of traders. Its culture was
derived from Babylonia; even its gods, with the exception of Assur, were of
Babylonian origin. We look in vain among the Assyrians for the peace-loving
tendencies of the Babylonians; they were, on the contrary, the Romans of the
East. They were great in war, and in the time of the Second Assyrian empire
great also in law and administration. But they [pg 216] were not a literary people; education among
them was confined to the scribes and officials, rather than generally spread as
in Babylonia. War and commerce were their two trades.

The Kassite conquerors of Babylonia soon submitted to the influences of
Babylonian civilisation. Like the Hyksos in Egypt, they adopted the manners and
customs, the writing and language, of the conquered people, sometimes even their
names. The army, however, continued to be mainly composed of Kassite troops, and
the native Babylonians began to forget the art of fighting. The old claims to
sovereignty in the west, however, were never resigned; but the Kassite kings had
to content themselves with intriguing against the Egyptian government in
Palestine, either with disaffected Canaanites, or with the Hittites and
Mitannians, while at the same time they professed to be the firm friends of the
Egyptian Pharaoh. Burna-buryas in B.C. 1400 writes affectionately to his
"brother" of Egypt, begging for some of the gold which in Egypt he declares is
as abundant "as the dust," and which he needs for his buildings at home. He
tells the Egyptian king how his father Kuri-galzu had refused to listen to the
Canaanites when they had offered to betray their country to him, and he calls
Khu-n-Aten to account for treating the Assyrians as an independent nation and
not as the vassals of Babylonia.
[pg 217]

The Assyrians, however, did not take the same view as the Babylonian king.
They had been steadily growing in power, and had intermarried into the royal
family of Babylonia. Assur-yuballidh, one of whose letters to the Pharaoh has
been found at Tel el-Amarna, had married his daughter to the uncle and
predecessor of Burna-buryas, and his grandson became king of Babylon. A revolt
on the part of the Kassite troops gave the Assyrians an excuse for interfering
in the affairs of Babylonia, and from this time forward their eyes were turned
covetously towards the kingdom of the south.

As Assyria grew stronger, Babylonia became weaker. Calah, now Nimrud,
was founded about B.C. 1300 by Shalmaneser I., and his son and successor
Tiglath-Ninip threw off all disguise and marched boldly into Babylonia in the
fifth year of his reign. Babylon was taken, the treasures of its temple sent to
Assur, and Assyrian governors set over the country, while a special seal was
made for the use of the conqueror. For seven years the Assyrian domination
lasted. Then Tiglath-Ninip was driven back to Assyria, where he was imprisoned
and murdered by his son, and the old line of Kassite princes was restored in the
person of Rimmon-sum-uzur. But it continued only four reigns longer. A new
dynasty from the town of Isin seized the throne, and ruled for 132 years and six
months.
[pg 218]

It was while this dynasty was reigning that a fresh line of energetic
monarchs mounted the Assyrian throne. Rimmon-nirari I., the father of
Shalmaneser I. (B.C. 1330-1300) had already extended the frontiers of Assyria to
the Khabur in the west and the Kurdish mountains in the north, and his son
settled an Assyrian colony at the head-waters of the Tigris, which served to
garrison the country. But after the successful revolt of the Babylonians against
Tiglath-Ninip the Assyrian power decayed. More than a century later
Assur-ris-isi entered again on a career of conquest and reduced the Kurds to
obedience.

His son, Tiglath-pileser I., was one of the great conquerors of history. He
carried his arms far and wide. Kurdistan and Armenia, Mesopotamia and Comagênê,
were all alike overrun by his armies in campaign after campaign. The Hittites
paid tribute, as also did Phoenicia, where he sailed on the Mediterranean in a
ship of Arvad and killed a dolphin in its waters. The Pharaoh of Egypt, alarmed
at the approach of so formidable an invader, sent him presents, which included a
crocodile and a hippopotamus, and on the eastern bank of the Euphrates, near
Carchemish and Pethor, he hunted wild elephants, as Thothmes III. had done
before him. His son still claimed supremacy in the west, as is shown by the fact
that he erected statues in "the land of the Amorites." But the energy of the
dynasty was now exhausted, and Assyria [pg 219] for a time passed under eclipse. This was the
period when David established his empire; there was no other great power to
oppose him in the Oriental world, and it seemed as if Israel was about to take
the place that had once been filled by Egypt and Babylon. But the opportunity
was lost; the murder of Joab and the unwarlike character of Solomon effectually
checked all dreams of conquest, and Israel fell back into two petty states.

The military revival of Assyria was as sudden as had been its decline. In
B.C. 885, Assur-nazir-pal II. ascended the throne. His reign of twenty-five
years was passed in constant campaigns, in ferocious massacres, and the burning
of towns. In both his inscriptions and his sculptures he seems to gloat over the
tortures he inflicted on the defeated foe. Year after year his armies marched
out of Nineveh to slaughter and destroy, and to bring back with them innumerable
captives and vast amounts of spoil. Western Asia was overrun, tribute was
received from the Hittites and from Phoenicia, and Armenia was devastated by the
Assyrian forces as far north as Lake Van. The policy of Assur-nazir-pal was
continued by his son and successor Shalmaneser II., with less ferocity, but with
more purpose (B.C. 860-825). Assyria became dominant in Asia; its empire
stretched from Media on the east to the Mediterranean on the west. But it was an
empire which was without organisation or permanency. [pg 220] Every year a new campaign was needed
to suppress the revolts which broke out as soon as the Assyrian army was out of
sight, or to supply the treasury with fresh spoil. The campaigns were in most
cases raids rather than the instruments of deliberately planned conquest. Hence
it was that the Assyrian monarch found himself checked in the west by the petty
kings of Damascus and the neighbouring states. Ben-Hadad and Hazael, it is true,
were beaten again and again along with their allies, while Omri of Israel
offered tribute to the invader, like the rich cities of Phoenicia; but Damascus
remained untaken and its people unsubdued.

The war with Assyria, however, saved Israel from being swallowed up by its
Syrian neighbour. Hazael's strength was exhausted in struggling for his own
existence; he had none left for the conquest of Samaria. Shalmaneser himself,
towards the end of his life, was no longer in a position to attack others. A
great revolt broke out against him, headed by his son Assur-dain-pal, the
Sardanapallos of the Greeks, who established himself at Nineveh, and there
reigned as rival king for about seven years. His brother Samas-Rimmon, who had
remained faithful to his father, at last succeeded in putting down the
rebellion. Nineveh was taken, and its defenders slain. Henceforth Samas-Rimmon
reigned with an undisputed title.
[pg 221]

But Assyria was long in recovering from the effects of the revolt, which had
shaken her to the foundations. The dynasty itself never recovered. Samas-Rimmon,
indeed, at the head of the army which had overcome his brother, continued the
military policy of his predecessors; the tribes of Media and southern Armenia
were defeated, and campaigns were carried on against Babylonia, the strength of
which was now completely broken. In B.C. 812 Babylon was taken, but two years
later Samas-Rimmon himself died, and was succeeded by his son Rimmon-nirari III.
His reign was passed in constant warfare on the frontiers of the empire, and in
B.C. 804 Damascus was surrendered to him by its king Mariha, who became an
Assyrian tributary. In the following year a pestilence broke out, and when his
successor, Shalmaneser III., mounted the throne in B.C. 781, he found himself
confronted by a new and formidable power, that of Ararat or Van. The eastern and
northern possessions of Assyria were taken from her, and the monarchy fell
rapidly into decay. In B.C. 763 an eclipse of the sun took place on the 15th of
June, and was the signal for the outbreak of a revolt in Assur, the ancient
capital of the kingdom. It spread rapidly to other parts of the empire, and
though for a time the government held its own against the rebels, the end came
in B.C. 745. Assur-nirari, the last of the old dynasty, died or was put to
death, and Pulu or Pul, one of his [pg 222] generals, was proclaimed king on the 13th of
Iyyar or April under the name of Tiglath-pileser III.

Tiglath-pileser III. was the founder of the Second Assyrian empire, which was
based on a wholly different principle from that of the first. Occupation and not
plunder was the object of its wars. The ancient empire of Babylonia in western
Asia was to be restored, and the commerce of the Mediterranean to be diverted
into Assyrian hands. The campaigns of Tiglath-pileser and his successors were
thus carried on in accordance with a deliberate line of policy. They aimed at
the conquest of the whole civilised world, and the building up of a great
organisation of which Nineveh and its ruler were the head. It was a new
principle and a new idea. And measures were at once adopted to realise it.

The army was made an irresistible engine of attack. Its training, discipline,
and arms were such as the world had never seen before. And the army was followed
by a body of administrators. The conquered population was transported elsewhere
or else deprived of its leaders, and Assyrian colonies and garrisons were
planted in its place. The administration was intrusted to a vast bureaucracy, at
the head of which stood the king. He appointed the satraps who governed the
provinces, and were responsible for the taxes and tribute, as well as for the
maintenance of order. The bureaucracy was partly military, partly [pg 223] civil, the two
elements acting as a check one upon the other.

But it was necessary that Ararat should be crushed before the plans of the
new monarch could be carried out. The strength of the army was first tested in
campaigns against Babylonia and the Medes, and then Tiglath-pileser marched
against the confederated forces of the Armenian king. A league had been formed
among the princes of northern Syria in connection with that of the Armenians,
but the Assyrian king annihilated the army of Ararat in Comagênê, and then
proceeded to besiege Arpad. Arpad surrendered after a blockade of three years;
Hamath, which had been assisted by Azariah of Judah, was reduced into an
Assyrian province; and a court was held, at which the sovereigns of the west
paid homage and tribute to the conqueror (B.C. 738). Among these were Rezon of
Damascus and Menahem of Samaria. Tiglath-pileser was still known in Palestine
under his original name of Pul, and the tribute of Menahem is accordingly
described by the Israelitish chronicler as having been given to Pul.

The Assyrian king was now free to turn the full strength of his forces
against Ararat. The country was ravaged up to the very gates of its capital, the
modern Van, and only the strong walls of the city kept the invader out of it.
The Assyrian army next moved eastward to the southern shores of the Caspian,
striking [pg 224]
terror into the Kurdish and Median tribes, and so securing the lowlands of
Assyria from their raids. The affairs of Syria next claimed the attention of the
conqueror. Rezon and Pekah, the new king of Samaria, had attempted to form a
league against Assyria; and, with this end in view, determined to replace Ahaz,
the youthful king of Judah, by a creature of their own. Ahaz turned in his
extremity to Assyrian help, and Tiglath-pileser seized the opportunity of
accepting the vassalage of Judah, with its strong fortress of Jerusalem, and at
the same time of overthrowing both Damascus and Samaria. Rezon was closely
besieged in his capital, while the rest of the Assyrian army was employed in
overrunning Samaria, Ammon, Moab, and the Philistines (B.C. 734). Pekah was put
to death, and Hosea appointed by the Assyrians in his place. After a siege of
two years, Damascus fell in B.C. 732, Rezon was slain, and his kingdom placed
under an Assyrian satrap. Meanwhile Tyre was compelled to purchase peace by an
indemnity of 150 talents.

Syria was now at the feet of Nineveh. A great gathering of the western kings
took place at Damascus, where Tiglath-pileser held his court after the capture
of the city, and the list of those who came to do homage to him includes
Jehoahaz or Ahaz of Judah, and the kings of Ammon, Moab, Edom, and Hamath.
Hosea, it would seem, was not yet on the Israelitish throne.
[pg 225]

The old empire of Babylonia was thus restored as far as the Mediterranean.
All that remained was for the Assyrian usurper to legitimise his title by
occupying Babylon itself, and there receiving the crown of Asia. In B.C. 731,
accordingly, he found a pretext for invading Babylonia and seizing the holy city
of western Asia. Two years later he "took the hands" of Bel-Merodach, and was
thereby adopted by the god as his own son. But he did not live long to enjoy the
fruits of his victories. He died December B.C. 727, and another usurper, Ululâ,
possessed himself of the throne, and assumed the name of Shalmaneser IV. His
reign, however, was short. He died while besieging Samaria, which had revolted
after the death of its conqueror, and in December B.C. 722, a third general
seized the vacant crown. He took the name of the old Babylonian monarch, Sargon,
and the court chroniclers of after-days discovered that he was a descendant of
the legendary kings of Assyria. His first achievement was the capture of
Samaria. Little spoil, however, was found in the half-ruined city; and the upper
classes, who were responsible for the rebellion, were carried into captivity to
the number of 27,280 persons. The city itself was placed under an Assyrian
governor.

Sargon found that the empire of Tiglath-pileser had in great measure to be
re-conquered. Neither Tiglath-pileser nor his successor had been able to leave
the [pg 226] throne to
their children, and the conquered provinces had taken advantage of the troubles
consequent on their deaths to revolt. Babylonia had been lost. Merodach-baladan,
the Chaldæan prince, had emerged from the marshes of the south and occupied
Babylon, where he was proclaimed king immediately after Shalmaneser's death. For
twelve years he reigned there, with the help of the Elamites, and one of the
first tasks of Sargon was to drive the latter from the Assyrian borders. Sargon
had next to suppress a revolt in Hamath, as well as an invasion of Palestine by
the Egyptians. The Egyptian army, however, was defeated at Raphia, and the
Philistines with whom it was in alliance returned to their allegiance to the
Assyrian king.

Now came, however, a more serious struggle. Ararat had recovered from the
blow it had received at the hands of Tiglath-pileser, and had organised a
general confederacy of the northern nations against their dangerous neighbour.
For six years the struggle continued. But it ended in victory for the Assyrians.
Carchemish, the Hittite stronghold which commanded the road across the
Euphrates, was taken in B.C. 717, and the way lay open to the west. The barrier
that had existed for seven centuries between the Semites of the east and west
was removed, and the last relic of the Hittite conquests in Syria passed away.
In the following year Sargon overran the territories of [pg 227] the Minni between Ararat and Lake
Urumiyeh, and two years later the northern confederacy was utterly crushed. The
fortress of Muzazir, under Mount Rowandiz, was added to the Assyrian dominions,
its gods were carried into captivity, and the King of Ararat committed suicide
in despair. From henceforward Assyria had nothing to fear on the side of the
north. The turn of the Medes came next. They were compelled to acknowledge the
supremacy of Nineveh; so also was the kingdom of Ellipi, the later Ekbatana.
Sargon could now turn his attention to Babylonia.

Merodach-baladan had foreseen the coming storm, and had done his best to
secure allies. An alliance was made with the Elamites, who were alarmed at the
conquest of Ellipi; and ambassadors were sent to Palestine (in B.C. 711), there
to arrange a general rising of the population, simultaneously with the outbreak
of war between Sargon and the Babylonian king. But before the confederates were
ready to move, Sargon had fallen upon them separately. Ashdod, the centre of the
revolt in the west, was invested and taken by the Turtannu or
commander-in-chief; its ruler, a certain "Greek," who had been raised to power
by the anti-Assyrian party, fled to the Arabian desert in the vain hope of
saving his life, and Judah, Moab, and Edom were forced to renew their tribute.
The Egyptians, who had promised to assist the rebels [pg 228] in Palestine, prudently retired, and
the Assyrian yoke was fixed more firmly than ever upon the nations of Syria.
Merodach-baladan was left to face his foe alone. In B.C. 709 he was driven out
of Babylon, and forced to take refuge in his ancestral kingdom in the marshes.
Sargon entered Babylon in triumph, and "took the hands of Bel." His title to
rule was acknowledged by the god and the priesthood, and an Assyrian was once
more the lord of western Asia.

Four years later the old warrior was murdered by a soldier, and on the 12th
of Ab, or July, his son Sennacherib was proclaimed king. Sennacherib was a
different man from his father. Sargon had been an able and energetic general,
rough perhaps and uncultured, but vigorous and determined. His son was weak and
boastful, and under him the newly-formed Assyrian empire met with its first
check. It is significant that the Babylonian priests never acknowledged him as
the successor of their ancient kings; he revenged himself by razing the city and
sanctuary of Bel to the ground.

Merodach-baladan re-entered Babylon immediately after the death of Sargon in
B.C. 705, but he was soon driven back to his retreat in the Chaldæan marshes,
and an Assyrian named Bel-ibni was appointed king in his place. The next
campaign of importance undertaken by Sennacherib was in B.C. 701. Palestine had
revolted, under the leadership of Hezekiah of Judah. [pg 229] The full strength of the Assyrian
army was accordingly hurled against it. The King of Sidon fled to Cyprus, and
Phoenicia, Ammon, Moab, and Edom hastened to submit to their dangerous foe.
Hezekiah and his Philistine vassals alone ventured to resist.

The Philistines, however, were soon subdued. A new king was appointed over
Ashkelon, and Hezekiah was compelled to restore to Ekron its former prince, whom
he had imprisoned in Jerusalem on account of his loyalty to Assyria. The priests
and nobles of Ekron, who had given him up to Hezekiah, were ruthlessly impaled.
Meanwhile Tirhakah, the Ethiopian king of Egypt, on whose help Hezekiah had
relied, was marching to the assistance of his ally. Sennacherib met him at
Eltekeh, and there the combined forces of the Egyptians and Arabians were
defeated and compelled to retreat. Hezekiah now endeavoured to make peace by the
offer of rich and numerous presents, including thirty talents of gold and 800 of
silver. But nothing short of the death of the Jewish king and the transportation
of his people would content the invader. Hezekiah accordingly shut himself up
within the strong walls of his capital, while the Assyrians ravaged the rest of
the country and prepared to besiege Jerusalem. The cities and villages were
destroyed, and 200,150 persons were led away into captivity. But at this moment
a catastrophe befell the Assyrians which saved Hezekiah and "the remnant" of
Israel. [pg 230] The
angel of death smote the Assyrian army, and it was decimated by a sudden
pestilence. Sennacherib fled from the plague-stricken camp, carrying with him
his spoil and captives, and the scanty relics of his troops. It was the last
time he marched to the west, and his rebellious vassal remained unpunished.

In the following year troubles in Babylonia called him to the south.
Merodach-baladan was hunted out of the marshes, and fled with his subjects
across the Persian Gulf to the opposite coast of Elam, while a son of
Sennacherib was made king of Babylon. But his reign did not last long. Six years
later he was carried off to Elam, and a new king of native origin,
Nergal-yusezib by name, was proclaimed by the Elamites. This was in return for
an attack made by Sennacherib upon the Chaldæan colony in Elam, where the
followers of Merodach-baladan had found a refuge. Sennacherib had caused ships
to be built at Nineveh by Phoenician workmen, and had manned them with Tyrian,
Sidonian, and Ionian sailors who were prisoners of war. The ships sailed down to
the Tigris and across the gulf, and then fell unexpectedly upon the Chaldæans,
burning their settlement, and carrying away all who had escaped massacre.

Nergal-yusezib had reigned only one year when he was defeated and captured in
battle by the Assyrians; but the Elamites were still predominant in Babylonia,
and another Babylonian, Musezib-Merodach, was set [pg 231] upon the throne of the distracted
country (B.C. 693). In B.C. 691 Sennacherib once more entered it, with an
overwhelming army, determined to crush all opposition. But the battle of
Khalulê, fought between the Assyrians on the one side, and the combined
Babylonians and Elamites on the other, led to no definite result. Sennacherib,
indeed, claimed the victory, but so he had also done in the case of the campaign
against Hezekiah. Two years more were needed before the Babylonians at last
yielded to the superior forces of their enemy. In B.C. 689 Babylon was taken by
storm, and a savage vengeance wreaked upon it. The sacred city of western Asia
was levelled with the dust, the temple of Bel himself was not spared, and the
Arakhtu canal which flowed past it was choked with ruins. The Babylonian
chronicler tells us that for eight years there were "no kings;" the image of
Bel-Merodach had been cast to the ground by the sacrilegious conqueror, and
there was none who could legitimise his right to rule.

On the 20th of Tebet, or December, B.C. 681, Sennacherib was murdered by his
two sons, and the Babylonians saw in the deed the punishment of his crimes. His
favourite son, Esar-haddon, was at the time commanding the Assyrian army in a
war against Erimenas of Ararat. As soon as the news of the murder reached him,
he determined to dispute the crown with his brothers, and accordingly marched
[pg 232] against them.
They were in no position to resist him, and after holding Nineveh for forty-two
days, fled to the court of the Armenian king. Esar-haddon followed, and a battle
fought near Malatiyeh, on the 12th of Iyyar, or April, B.C. 680, decided the
fate of the empire. The veterans of Esar-haddon utterly defeated the
conspirators and their Armenian allies, and at the close of the day he was
saluted as king. He then returned to Nineveh, and on the 8th of Sivan, or May,
formally ascended the throne.

Esar-haddon proved himself to be not only one of the best generals Assyria
ever produced, but a great administrator as well. He endeavoured to cement his
empire together by a policy of reconciliation, and one of his first actions was
to rebuild Babylon, to bring back to it its gods and people, and to make it one
of the royal residences. Bel acknowledged him as his adopted son, and for twelve
years Esar-haddon ruled over western Asia by right divine as well as by the
right of conquest.

But a terrible danger menaced Assyria and the rest of the civilised Oriental
world at the very beginning of his reign. Sennacherib's conquest of Ellipi, and
the wars against Ararat and Minni, had weakened the barriers which protected the
Assyrian empire from the incursions of the barbarians of the north. The Gimirrâ
or Kimmerians, the Gomer of the Old Testament, driven by the Scyths from their
seats on the Dniester [pg
233] and the Sea of Azof, suddenly appeared on the horizon of western
Asia. Swarming through the territories of the Minni to the east of Ararat, they
swooped down upon the Assyrian frontier, along with other northern nations from
Media, Sepharad, and Ashchenaz. While a body of Kimmerians under Teuspa marched
westward, the rest of the allies, under Kastarit or Kyaxares of Karu-Kassi,
attacked the fortresses which defended Assyria on the north-east. At Nineveh all
was consternation, and public prayers, accompanied by fasting, were ordered to
be offered up for a hundred days and nights to the Sun-god, that he might
"forgive the sin" of his people, and avert the dangers that threatened them. The
prayers were heard, and the invaders were driven into Ellipi. Then Esar-haddon
marched against Teuspa, and forced him to turn from Assyria. The Kimmerians made
their way instead into Asia Minor, where they sacked the Greek and Phrygian
cities, and overran Lydia.

The northern and eastern boundaries of the empire were at length secured. It
was now necessary to punish the Arab tribes who had taken advantage of the
Kimmerian invasion to harass the empire on the south. Esar-haddon accordingly
marched into the very heart of the Arabian desert—a military achievement of the
first rank, the memory of which was not forgotten for years. The empire at last
was secure.

The Assyrian king was now free to complete the [pg 234] policy of Tiglath-pileser by
conquering Egypt. Palestine was no longer a source of trouble. Judah had
returned to its vassalage to Assyria, and the abortive attempts of Sidon and
Jerusalem to rebel had been easily suppressed. True to his policy of
conciliation, Esar-haddon had dealt leniently with Manasseh of Judah. He had
been brought in fetters before his lord at Babylon, and there pardoned and
restored to his kingdom. It was a lesson which neither he nor his successors
forgot, like the similar lesson impressed a few years later upon the Egyptian
prince Necho.

The Assyrian conquest of Egypt has been already described. The first campaign
of Esar-haddon against it was undertaken in B.C. 674; and it was while on the
march to put down a revolt in B.C. 668 that he fell ill and died, on the 10th of
Marchesvan, or October. The empire was divided between his two sons.
Assur-bani-pal had already been named as his successor, and now took Assyria,
while Saul-sum-yukin became king of Babylonia, subject, however, to his brother
at Nineveh. It was an attempt to flatter the Babylonians by giving them a king
of their own, while at the same time keeping the supreme power in Assyrian
hands.

The first few years of Assur-bani-pal's reign were spent in tranquillising
Egypt by means of the sword, in suppressing insurrections, and in expelling
Ethiopian invaders. After the destruction of Thebes in B.C. 661 the country
sullenly submitted to the foreign rule; [pg 235] its strength was exhausted, and its leaders and
priesthood were scattered and bankrupt. Elam was now almost the only civilised
kingdom of western Asia which remained independent. It was, moreover, a
perpetual thorn in the side of the Assyrians. It was always ready to give the
same help to the disaffected in Babylonia that Egypt was to the rebels in
Palestine, with the difference that whereas the Egyptians were an unwarlike
race, the Elamites were a nation of warriors. Assur-bani-pal was not a soldier
himself, and he would have preferred remaining at peace with his warlike
neighbour. But Elamite raids made this impossible, and the constant civil wars
in Elam resulting from disputed successions to the throne afforded pretexts and
favourable opportunities for invading it. The Elamites, however, defended
themselves bravely, and it was only after a struggle of many years, when their
cities had fallen one by one, and Shushan, the capital, was itself destroyed,
that Elam became an Assyrian province. The conquerors, however, found it a
profitless desert, wasted by fire and sword, and in the struggle to possess it
their own resources had been drained and well-nigh exhausted.

The second Assyrian empire was now at the zenith of its power. Ambassadors
came from Ararat and from Gyges of Lydia to offer homage, and to ask the help of
the great king against the Kimmerian and Scythian [pg 236] hordes. His fame spread to Europe;
the whole of the civilised world acknowledged his supremacy.

But the image was one which had feet of clay. The empire had been won by the
sword, and the sword alone kept it together. Suddenly a revolt broke out which
shook it to its foundations. Babylonia took the lead; the other subject nations
followed in its train.

Saul-suma-yukin had become naturalised in Babylonia. The experiment of
appointing an Assyrian prince as viceroy had failed; he had identified himself
with his subjects, and like them dreamed of independence. He adopted the style
and titles of the ancient Babylonian mouarchs; even the Sumerian language was
revived in public documents, and the son of Esar-haddon put himself at the head
of a national movement. The Assyrian supremacy was rejected, and once more
Babylon was free.

The revolt lasted for some years. When it began we do not know; but it was
not till B.C. 648 that it was finally suppressed, and Saul-suma-yukin put to
death after a reign of twenty years. Babylon had been closely invested, and was
at last starved into surrender. But, taught by the experience of the past,
Assur-bani-pal did not treat it severely. The leaders of the revolt, it is true,
were punished, but the city and people were spared, and its shrines, like those
of Kutha and Sippara, were purified, while penitential psalms were sung to
appease the angry deities, and the daily sacrifices which [pg 237] had been interrupted were restored.
A certain Kandalanu was made viceroy, perhaps with the title of king.

Chastisement was now taken upon the Arabian tribes who had joined in the
revolt. But Egypt was lost to the empire for ever. Psammetikhos had seized the
opportunity of shaking off the yoke of the foreigner, and with the help of the
troops sent by Gyges from Lydia, had driven out the Assyrian garrisons and
overcome his brother satraps.

Assur-bani-pal was in no position to punish him. The war with Elam and the
revolt of Babylonia had drained the country of its fighting men and the treasury
of its resources. And a new and formidable enemy had appeared on the scene. The
Scyths had followed closely on the footsteps of the Kimmerians, and were now
pouring into Asia like locusts, and ravaging everything in their path. The
earlier chapters of Jeremiah are darkened by the horrors of the Scythian
invasion of Palestine, and Assur-bani-pal refers with a sigh of relief to the
death of that "limb of Satan," the Scythian king Tugdamme or Lygdamis. This
seems to have happened in Cilicia, and Assyria was allowed a short interval of
rest.

Assur-bani-pal's victories were gained by his generals. He himself never
appears to have taken the field in person. His tastes were literary, his habits
luxurious. He was by far the most munificent patron of learning [pg 238] Assyria ever
produced; in fact, he stands alone in this respect among Assyrian kings. The
library of Nineveh was increased tenfold by his patronage and exertions;
literary works were brought from Babylonia, and a large staff of scribes was
kept busily employed in copying and re-editing them. Unfortunately, the
superstition of the monarch led him to collect more especially books upon omens
and dreams, and astrological treatises, but other works were not overlooked, and
we owe to him a large number of the syllabaries and lists of words in which the
cuneiform characters and the Assyrian vocabulary are explained.

When Assur-bani-pal died the doom of the Assyrian empire had already been
pronounced. The authority of his two successors, Assur-etil-ilani-yukin and
Sin-sar-iskun, or Saracos, was still acknowledged both in Syria and in
Babylonia, where Kandalanu had been succeeded as viceroy by Nabopolassar. One of
the contract-tablets from the north of Babylonia is dated as late as the seventh
year of Sin-sar-iskun. But not long after this the Babylonian viceroy revolted
against his sovereign, and with the help of the Scythian king, who had
established himself at Ekbatana, defeated the Assyrian forces and laid siege to
Nineveh. The siege ended in the capture and destruction of the city, the death
of its king, and the overthrow of his empire. In B.C. 606 the desolator of the
nations was itself laid desolate, and its site has never been inhabited
again.
[pg 239]

Nabopolassar entered upon the heritage of Assyria. It has been supposed that
he was a Chaldæan like Merodach-baladan; whether this be so or not, he was
hailed by the Babylonians as a representative of their ancient kings. The
Assyrian empire had become the prey of the first-comer. Elam had been occupied
by the Persians, the Scyths, whom classical writers have confounded with the
Medes, had overrun and ravaged Assyria and Mesopotamia, while Palestine and
Syria had fallen to the share of Egypt. But once established on the Babylonian
throne, Nabopolassar set about the work of re-organising western Asia, and the
military abilities of his son Nebuchadrezzar enabled him to carry out his
purpose. The marriage of Nebuchadrezzar to the daughter of the Scythian monarch
opened the road through Mesopotamia to the Babylonian armies; the Egyptians were
defeated at Carchemish in B.C. 604, and driven back to their own land. From Gaza
to the mouth of the Euphrates, western Asia again obeyed the rule of a
Babylonian king.

The death of Nabopolassar recalled Nebuchadrezzar to Babylon, where he
assumed the crown. But the Egyptians still continued to intrigue in Palestine,
and the Jewish princes listened to their counsels. Twice had Nebuchadrezzar to
occupy Jerusalem and carry the plotters into captivity. In B.C. 598 Jehoiachin
and a large number of the upper classes were carried into [pg 240] exile; in B.C. 588 Jerusalem was
taken after a long siege, its temple and walls razed to the ground, and its
inhabitants transported to Babylonia. The fortress-capital could no longer
shelter or tempt the Egyptian foes of the Babylonian empire.

The turn of Tyre came next. For thirteen years it was patiently blockaded,
and in B.C. 573 it passed with its fleet into Nebuchadrezzar's hands. Five years
later the Babylonian army marched into Egypt, the Pharaoh Amasis was defeated,
and the eastern part of the Delta overrun. But Nebuchadrezzar did not push his
advantage any further; he was content with impressing upon the Egyptians a sense
of his power, and with fixing the boundaries of his empire at the southern
confines of Palestine.

His heart was in Babylonia rather than in the conquests he had made. The
wealth he had acquired by them was devoted to the restoration of the temples and
cities of his country, and, above all, to making Babylon one of the wonders of
the world. The temples of Merodach and Nebo were rebuilt with lavish
magnificence, the city was surrounded with impregnable fortifications, a
sumptuous palace was erected for the king, and the bed of the Euphrates was
lined with brick and furnished with quays. Gardens were planted on the top of
arched terraces, and the whole eastern world poured out its treasures at the
feet of "the great king." His inscriptions, however, breathe a singular [pg 241] spirit of humility
and piety, and we can understand from them the friendship that existed between
the prophet Jeremiah and himself. All he had done is ascribed to Bel-Merodach,
whose creation he was and who had given him the sovereignty over mankind.

He was succeeded in B.C. 562 by his son Evil-Merodach, who had a short and
inglorious reign of only two years. Then the throne was usurped by
Nergal-sharezer, who had married a daughter of Nebuchadrezzar, and was in high
favour with the priests. He died in B.C. 556, leaving a child, whom the priestly
chroniclers accuse of impiety towards the gods, and who was murdered three
months after his accession. Then Nabu-nahid or Nabonidos, the son of
Nabu-balasu-iqbi, another nominee of the priesthood, was placed on the throne.
He was unrelated to the royal family, but proved to be a man of some energy and
a zealous antiquarian. He caused excavations to be made in the various temples
of Babylonia, in order to discover the memorial-stones of their founders and
verify the history of them that had been handed down. But he offended local
interests by endeavouring to centralise the religious worship of the country at
Babylon, in the sanctuary of Bel-Merodach, as Hezekiah had done in the case of
Judah. The images of the gods were removed from the shrines in which they had
stood from time immemorial, and the local priesthoods attached to them were
absorbed in that of the capital. The result was [pg 242] the rise of a powerful party opposed
to the king, and a spirit of disaffection which the gifts showered upon the
temples of Babylon and a few other large cities were unable to allay. The
standing army, however, under the command of the king's son, Belshazzar,
prevented this spirit from showing itself in action.

But a new power was growing steadily in the East. The larger part of Elam,
which went by the name of Anzan, had been seized by the Persians in the closing
days of the Assyrian empire, and a line of kings of Persian origin had taken the
place of the old sovereigns of Shushan. Cyrus II., who was still but a youth,
was now on the throne of Anzan, and, like his predecessors, acknowledged as his
liege-lord the Scythian king of Ekbatana, Istuvegu or Astyages. His first act
was to defeat and dethrone his suzerain, in B.C. 549, and so make himself master
of Media. A year or two later he obtained possession of Persia, and a war with
Lydia in B.C. 545 led to the conquest of Asia Minor. Nabonidos had doubtless
looked on with satisfaction while the Scythian power was being overthrown, and
had taken advantage of its fall to rebuild the temple of the Moon-god at Harran,
which had been destroyed by the Scythians fifty-four years before. But his eyes
were opened by the conquest of his ally the King of Lydia, and he accordingly
began to prepare for a war which he saw was inevitable. The camp was fixed near
Sippara, towards the northern boundary of Babylonia, and every [pg 243] effort was made to
put the country into a state of defence.

Cyrus, however, was assisted by the disaffected party in Babylonia itself,
amongst whose members must doubtless be included the Jewish exiles. In B.C. 538
a revolt broke out in the south, in the old district of the Chaldæans, and Cyrus
took advantage of it to march into the country. The Babylonian army moved
northward to meet him, but was utterly defeated and dispersed at Opis in the
beginning of Tammuz, or June, and a few days later Sippara surrendered to the
conqueror. Gobryas, the governor of Kurdistan, was then sent to Babylon, which
also opened its gates "without fighting," and Nabonidos, who had concealed
himself, was taken prisoner. The daily services in the temples as well as the
ordinary business of the city proceeded as usual, and on the 3rd of Marchesvan
Cyrus himself arrived and proclaimed a general amnesty, which was communicated
by Gobryas to "all the province of Babylon," of which he had been made the
prefect. Shortly afterwards, the wife—or, according to another reading, the
son—of Nabonidos died; public lamentations were made for her, and Kambyses, the
son of Cyrus, conducted the funeral in one of the Babylonian temples. Cyrus now
took the title of "King of Babylon," and associated Kambyses with himself in the
government. Conquest had proved his title to the crown, and the priests and god
of Babylon hastened to confirm it. [pg 244] Cyrus on his side claimed to be the legitimate
descendant of the ancient Babylonian kings, a true representative of the ancient
stock, who had avenged the injuries of Bel-Merodach and his brother-gods upon
Nabonidos, and who professed to be their devoted worshipper. Offerings to ten
times the usual amount were bestowed on the Babylonian temples, and the favour
of the Babylonian priesthood was secured. The images which Nabonidos had
sacrilegiously removed from their shrines were restored to their old homes, and
the captive populations in Babylonia were allowed to return to their native
soil. The policy of transportation had proved a failure; in time of invasion the
exiles had been a source of danger to the government, and not of safety.

Each people was permitted to carry back with it its ancestral gods. The Jews
alone had no images to take; the sacred vessels of the temple of Jerusalem were
accordingly given to them. It was a faithful remnant that returned to the land
of their fathers, consisting mostly of priests and Levites, determined
henceforward to obey strictly the laws of their God, and full of gratitude to
their deliverer. In Jerusalem Cyrus thus had a colony whose loyalty to himself
and his successors could be trusted, and who would form, as it were, an outpost
against attacks on the side of Egypt.

As long as Cyrus and his son Kambyses lived Babylonia [pg 245] also was tranquil. They flattered
the religious and political prejudices of their Babylonian subjects, and the
priesthood saw in them the successors of a Sargon of Akkad. But with the death
of Kambyses came a change. The new rulers of the empire of Cyrus were Persians,
proud of their nationality and zealous for their Zoroastrian faith. They had no
reverence for Bel, no belief in the claim of Babylon to confer a title of
legitimacy on the sovereign of western Asia. The Babylonian priesthood chafed,
the Babylonian people broke into revolt. In October B.C. 521 a pretender
appeared who took the name of Nebuchadrezzar II., and reigned for nearly a year.
But after two defeats in the field, he was captured in Babylon by Darius and put
to death in August 520. Once more, in B.C. 514, another revolt took place under
a second pretender to the name of "Nebuchadrezzar the son of Nabonidos." The
strong walls of Babylon resisted the Persian army for more than a year, and the
city was at last taken by stratagem. The walls were partially destroyed, but
this did not prevent a third rebellion in the reign of Xerxes, while the Persian
monarch was absent in Greece. On this occasion, however, it was soon crushed,
and Ê-Sagila, the temple of Bel, was laid in ruins. But a later generation
restored once more the ancient sanctuary of Merodach, at all events in part, and
services in honour of Bel continued to be [pg 246] held there down to the time when Babylon was
superseded by the Greek town of Seleucia, and the city of Nebuchadrezzar became
a waste of shapeless mounds.

Babylonian religion was a mixture of Sumerian and Semitic elements. The
primitive Sumerian had believed in a sort of animism. Each object had its
zi or "spirit," like men and beasts; the zi gave it its
personality, and endowed it, as it were, with vital force. The zi
corresponded with the ka or "double" of the Egyptians, which accompanied
like a shadow all things in heaven and earth. The gods themselves had each his
zi; it was this alone that made them permanent and personal. With such a
form of religion there could be neither deities nor priests in the usual sense
of the words. The place of the priest was taken by the sorcerer, who knew the
spells that could avert the malevolence of the "spirits" or bring down their
blessings upon mankind.

With the progress of civilisation, certain of the "spirits" emerged above the
rest, and became veritable gods. The "spirit" of heaven became Ana of Erech, the
Sky-god; the "spirit" of earth passed into El-lil of Nippur; and the "spirit" of
the deep into Ea of Eridu. The change was hastened by contact with the Semite.
The Semite brought with him a new religious conception. He believed in a god who
revealed himself in the sun, and whom he addressed as Baal or "Lord." By the
side of Baal stood his [pg
247] colourless reflection, the goddess Baalath, who owed her existence
partly to the feminine gender possessed by the Semitic languages, partly to the
analogy of the human family. But the Baalim were as multitudinous as their
worshippers and the high-places whereon they were adored; there was little
difficulty, therefore, in identifying the gods and "spirits" of Sumer with the
local Baals of the Semitic creed.

El-lil became Bel of Nippur, Asari or Merodach Bel of Babylon. But in taking
a Semitic form, the Sumerian divinities did not lose their old attributes. Bel
of Nippur remained the lord of the ghost-world, Bel-Merodach the god who "raises
the dead to life" and "does good to man." Moreover, in one important point the
Semite borrowed from the Sumerian. The goddess Istar retained her independent
position among the crowd of colourless female deities. Originally the "spirit"
of the evening-star, she had become a goddess, and in the Sumerian world the
goddess was the equal of the god. It is a proof of the influence of the Sumerian
element in the Babylonian population, that this conception of the goddess was
never forgotten in Babylonia; it was only when Babylonian culture was handed on
to the Semitic nations of the west that Istar became either the male Atthar of
southern Arabia and Moab, or the emasculated Ashtoreth of Canaan.

The official religion of Babylonia was thus the Baal-worship of the Semites
engrafted on the animism of [pg 248] the Sumerians. It was further modified by the
introduction of star-worship. How far this went back to a belief in the
"spirits" of the stars, or whether it had a Semitic origin, we do not know; but
it is significant that the cuneiform character which denotes "a god" is a
picture of a star, and that the Babylonians were from the first a nation of
star-gazers. In the astro-theology of a later date the gods of the pantheon were
identified with the chief stars of the firmament, but the system was purely
artificial, and must have been the invention of the priests.

The religion and deities of Babylonia were adopted by the Assyrians. But in
Assyria they were always somewhat of an exotic, and even the learned class
invoked Assur rather than the other gods. Assur was the personification of the
old capital of the country and of the nation itself, and though the scribes
found an etymology for the name in that of An-sar, the primæval god of Sumerian
cosmogony, the fact was always remembered. Assur was purely Semitic in his
attributes, and, like Yahveh of Israel or Chemosh of Moab, was wifeless and
childless. It is true that a learned scribe now and then found a wife for him
among the numerous divinities of the Babylonian cult, but the discovery was
never accepted, and Assur for the mass of his worshippers remained single and
alone. It was through trust in him that the Assyrian kings believed their
victories were gained, and it was to [pg 249] punish those who disbelieved in him that their
campaigns were undertaken.

In the worship of Assur, accordingly, a tendency to monotheism reveals
itself. The tendency was even more pronounced in a certain literary school of
thought in Babylonia. We have texts which resolve the deities of the popular
faith into forms of one god; sometimes this is Anu of Erech, sometimes it is
Merodach of Babylon.

Babylonian worship necessitated a large hierarchy of priests. At the head was
the high-priest, who in early times possessed temporal power and in many states
was the predecessor of the king. The king, in fact, inherited his priesthood
from him, and was consequently qualified to perform priestly functions. Under
the high-priest there were numerous classes of ministers of the gods, such as
the "anointers," whose duty it was to anoint the holy images with oil, the
ordinary "priests," the "seers," and the "prophets." The prophets enjoyed high
consideration; they even accompanied the army to the field, and decided whether
the campaign would result in victory or defeat. Quite apart from all these were
the astrologers, who did not belong to the priesthood at all. On the contrary,
they professed to be men of science, and the predictions of the future which
they read in the stars were founded on the records and observations of former
generations.
[pg
250]

A chief part of the duty of the priests consisted in offering sacrifice and
reciting the services. The sacrifices were of two kinds, as in the Jewish
ritual. The same animals and the same fruits of the earth were offered by both
Babylonians and Israelites, and in many cases the regulations relating to the
sacrifices were similar. The services were elaborate, and the rubrics attached
to the hymns and prayers which had to be recited are minute and complicated. The
hymns had been formed into a sort of Bible, which had in time acquired a divine
authority. So sacred were its words, that a single mispronunciation of them was
sufficient to impair the efficacy of the service. Rules for their pronunciation
were accordingly laid down, which were the more necessary as the hymns were in
Sumerian. The dead language of Sumer had become sacred, like Latin in the Middle
Ages, and each line of a hymn was provided with a translation in Semitic
Babylonian.

In appearance, a Babylonian temple was not very unlike those of Canaan or of
Solomon. The image of the god stood in the innermost shrine, the Holy of Holies,
where also was the mercy-seat, whereon it was believed, as upon a throne, the
deity was accustomed to descend at certain times of the year. In the little
temple of Balawât, near Nineveh, discovered by Mr. Hormuzd Rassam, the
mercy-seat was shaped like an ark, and contained two written tables of stone;
[pg 251] no statue of
the god, however, seems in this instance to have stood beside it. In front of it
was the altar, approached by steps.

In the court of the temple was a "sea" or "deep," like that which was made by
Solomon. An early hymn which describes the construction of one of them, states
that it was of bronze, and that it rested on the figures of twelve bronze oxen.
It was intended for the ablutions of the priests and the vessels of the
sanctuary, and was a representation of that primæval deep out of which it was
believed that the world originated.

One peculiarity the Babylonian temples possessed which was not shared by
those of the west. Each had its ziggurat or "tower," which served for the
observation of the stars, and in the topmost storey of which was the altar of
the god. It corresponded with the "high-place" of Canaan, where man imagined
himself nearest to the gods of heaven. But in the flat plain of Babylonia it was
needful that the high-place should be of artificial construction, and here
accordingly they built the towers whose summits "reached to" the sky.

The temples and their ministers were supported partly by endowments, partly
by voluntary gifts, sometimes called kurbanni, the Hebrew korban,
partly by obligatory contributions, the most important of which was the
esrâ or "tithe." Besides the fixed festivals, which were enumerated in
the calendar, [pg 252]
special days of thanksgiving or humiliation were appointed from time to time.
There was also a weekly Sabattu or "Sabbath," on the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st, and
28th days of the month, as well as on the 19th, the last day of the seventh week
from the beginning of the previous month. The Sabbath is described as "a day of
rest for the heart," and all work upon it was forbidden. The king was not
allowed to change his dress, to ride in his chariot, or even to take medicine,
while the prophet himself was forbidden to utter his prophecies.

The mass of the people looked forward to a dreary existence beyond the grave.
The shades of the dead flitted like bats in the darkness of the under-world,
hungry and cold, while the ghosts of the heroes of the past sat beside them on
their shadowy thrones, and Allat, the mistress of Hades, presided over the
warders of its seven gates. The Sumerians had called it "the land whence none
return," though in the theology of Eridu and Babylon Asari or Merodach was
already a god who, through the wisdom of his father Ea, "restored the dead to
life." But as the centuries passed, new and less gloomy ideas grew up in regard
to the future life. In a prayer for the Assyrian king the writer asks that he
may enjoy an endless existence hereafter in "the land of the silver sky," and
the realms of the gods of light had been peopled with the heroes of Babylonian
literature at an early date.
[pg 253]

The belief in Hades went back to those primitive ages when the Sumerians of
Eridu conceived of the earth as floating on the deep, which surrounded it as a
snake with its coils, while the sky covered it above like an extinguisher, and
was supported on the peak of "the mountain of the world," where the gods had
their abode. This primitive cosmological conception underwent changes in the
course of time, but the underlying idea of an abyss of waters out of which all
things were shaped remained to the end. The Chaldæan Epic of the Creation
declares that "in the beginning," "the chaos of the deep" had been the "mother"
of both heaven and earth, out of whom first came the primæval deities Lakhmu and
Lakhamu, and then An-sar and Ki-sar, the upper and lower firmament. Long ages
had to elapse before the Trinity of the later theology—Anu, Ea, and Bel—were
born of these, and all things made ready for the genesis of the present world.
Merodach, the champion of the gods of light and law, had first to do battle with
Tiamat, "the dragon" of "the deep," and her allies of darkness and disorder. He
had proved his powers by creating and annihilating by means of his "word" alone,
and the conflict which he waged ended in the destruction of the enemy. The body
of Tiamat was torn asunder and transformed into the heaven and earth, her
springs of water were placed under control, and the forces of anarchy and chaos
were banished [pg 254]
from the universe. Then followed the creation of the existing order of things.
The sun and moon and stars were fixed in their places, and laws given to them
which they should never transgress, plants and animals were created, and finally
man.

Babylonian literature went back to a remote date. The age of Sargon of Akkad
was already a highly literary one, and the library he founded at Akkad contained
works which continued to be re-edited down to the latest days of Babylonian
literature. Every great city had its library, which was open to every reader,
and where the books were carefully catalogued and arranged on shelves. Here too
were kept the public records, as well as title-deeds, law-cases, and other
documents belonging to private individuals. The office of librarian was held in
honour, and was not unfrequently occupied by one of the sons of the king. Every
branch of literature and science known at the time was represented. Theology was
naturally prominent, as well as works on omens and charms. The standard work on
astronomy and astrology, in seventy-two books, had been compiled for the library
of Sargon of Akkad; so too had the standard work on terrestrial omens. There was
also a standard work on medicine, in which medical prescriptions and spells were
mixed together. Philological treatises were numerous. There were dictionaries
and grammars for explaining the Sumerian language to Semitic pupils, interlinear
translations [pg 255]
of Sumerian texts, phrase-books, lists of synonyms, and commentaries on
difficult or obsolete words and passages, besides syllabaries, in which the
cuneiform characters were catalogued and explained. Mathematics were diligently
studied, and tables of squares and cubes have come to us from the library of
Larsa. Geography was represented by descriptions of the countries and cities
known to the Babylonians, natural history by lists of animals and birds, insects
and plants. The Assyrians were endowed with a keen sense of history, and had
invented a system of reckoning time by means of certain officers called
limmi, who gave their names to their years of office. The historical and
chronological works of the Assyrian libraries are therefore particularly
important. They have enabled us to restore the chronology of the royal period of
Israelitish history, and to supplement the Old Testament narrative with the
contemporaneous records of the Assyrian kings. The Babylonians were less
historically exact, perhaps because they had less of the Semitic element in
their blood; but they, too, carefully kept the annals of their kings, and took a
deep interest in the former history of their country.

Contract and other tablets relating to trade and business formed, however,
the larger part of the contents of most Babylonian libraries. They have revealed
to us the inner and social life of the people, so that the age of Khammurabi, or
even of Sargon, in Babylonia, [pg 256] is beginning to be as well known to us as the
age of Periklês in Greece. Along with the contract-tablets must be counted the
numerous legal documents and records of law-cases which have been preserved.
Babylonian law was, like English law, built upon precedents, and an elaborate
and carefully considered code had been formed at an early date.

Collections of letters, partly royal, partly private, were also to be found
in the libraries. The autograph letters of Khammurabi, the Amraphel of Genesis,
have come down to us, and we even have letters of his time from a lover to his
mistress, and from a tenant to his landlord, whom he begs to reduce his rent.
Boys went to school early, and learning the cuneiform syllabary was a task that
demanded no small amount of time and application, especially when it is
remembered that in the case of the Semitic Babylonian this involved also
acquiring a knowledge of the dead language of Sumer. One of the exercises of the
Sumerian schoolboy bids him "rise like the dawn, if he would excel in the school
of the scribes."

Purely literary texts were numerous, especially poems, though nothing
corresponding to the Egyptian novel has been met with. The epic of Gilgames,
composed by Sin-liqi-unnini, has already been referred to. Its twelve books
answered to the twelve signs of the Zodiac, and the eleventh accordingly
contains the episode of the Deluge. Gilgames was the son of a [pg 257] royal mother, whose
son was fated to slay his grandfather, and who was consequently confined in a
tower. But an eagle carried him to a place of safety, and when he grew up he
delivered Erech from its foes, and made it the seat of his kingdom. He slew the
tyrant Khumbaba in the forest of cedars, and by means of a stratagem tempted the
satyr Ea-bant to leave the woods and become his counsellor and friend. Istar
wooed him, but he scorned her offers, and taunted her with her misdeeds to the
hapless lovers who had been caught in her toils. In revenge the goddess
persuaded her father Anu to create a winged bull, which should work havoc in the
country of the Babylonians. But Gilgames destroyed the bull, an achievement,
however, for which he was punished by Heaven. Ea-bani died of the bite of a
gadfly, and his spirit mounted to the skies, while Gilgames himself was smitten
by a sore disease. To heal it he sailed beyond the mouth of the Euphrates and
the river of death, leaving behind him the deserts of Arabia and the
twin-mountain where men in the shape of huge scorpions guard the gateways of the
sun. At last he found Xisuthros, the hero of the Deluge, and learned from him
how he had escaped death. Cured of his malady, he returned homeward with a leaf
of the tree of life. But as he rested at a fountain by the way it was stolen by
a serpent, and man lost the gift of immortality.

In Babylonia, and to a lesser extent in Assyria, [pg 258] women were practically on a footing
of equality with the men. They could trade in their own names, could make wills,
could appear as witnesses or plaintiffs in court. We hear of a father
transferring his property to his daughter, reserving only the use of it during
his life. Polygamy was not common; indeed, we find it stipulated in one instance
that in the case of a second marriage on the part of the husband the dowry of
the first wife should be returned to her, and that she should be free to go
where she would. Of course these rules did not apply to concubines, who were
often purchased. Adoptions were frequent, and slaves could be adopted into the
family of a freeman.

The large number of slaves caused the wages of the free labourer to be low.
But the slaves were treated with humanity. From early times it was a law that if
a slave were hired to another, the hirer should pay a penalty to his master
whenever he was incapable of work, thus preventing "sweating" or overwork.
Similarly, injuries to a slave were punished by a fine. The slave could trade
and acquire property for himself, could receive wages for his work when hired to
another, could give evidence in a court of law, and might obtain his freedom
either by manumission, by purchase, by adoption, or by impressment into the
royal service.

Farms were usually held on a sort of métayer system, half the produce
going to the landlord as rent. Sometimes, however, the tenant received only a
third, a [pg 259]
fourth, or even a tenth part of the produce, two-thirds of the annual crop of
dates being also assigned to the owner of the land. The tenant had to keep the
farm-buildings in order, and to build any that were required. House-property
seems to have been even more valuable than farm-land. The deeds for the lease or
sale of it enter into the most minute particulars, and carefully define the
limits of the estate. The house was let for a term of years, the rent being paid
either twice or three times a year. At the expiration of the lease, the property
had to be returned in the state in which the tenant had found it, and any
infringement of the legal stipulations was punished with a heavy fine. Agents
were frequently employed in the sale or letting of estates.

The cities were busy centres of trade. Commercial intercourse was carried on
with all parts of the known world. Wheat was exported in large quantities, as
well as dates and date-wine. The staple of Babylonian industry, however, was the
manufacture of cloths and carpets. Vast flocks of sheep were kept on the western
bank of the Euphrates, and placed under the charge of Bedâwin from Arabia. Their
wool was made into curtains and rugs, and dyed or embroidered fabrics of various
kinds. Even Belshazzar, the heir-apparent of Nabonidos, did not disdain to be a
wool-merchant, and we find him lending twenty manehs, the proceeds of the sale
of some of it, and taking [pg
260] as security for the repayment of the debt certain house-property in
Babylon. It was "a goodly Babylonish garment," secreted by Achan from among the
spoil of Jericho, that brought destruction upon himself and his family.

Money-lending naturally occupied a prominent place in the transaction of
business. The ordinary rate of interest was 20 per cent, paid in monthly
instalments; in the time of Nebuchadrezzar, however, it tended to be lower, and
we find loans made at 13-1/2 per cent. The penalty was severe if the capital
were not repaid at the specified date. The payment was occasionally in kind, but
money was the usual medium of exchange. It consisted of rings or tongue-like
bars of gold, silver, and copper, representing manehs and shekels. The maneh was
divided into sixty shekels, and the standard used in later Babylonia had been
fixed by Dungi, king of Ur. One of the standard maneh-weights of stone, from the
mint of Nebuchadrezzar, is now in the British Museum. In the time of the Second
Babylonian empire stamped or coined money was introduced, as well as pieces of
five or more shekels. This was the period when the great banking firm of Egibi
flourished, which anticipated the Rothschilds in making loans to the State.

The Babylonian cemetery adjoined the cities of the living, and was laid out
in imitation of the latter. [pg 261] The tombs were built of crude bricks, and were
separated from one another by streets, through which flowed streams of "living
water." Gardens were planted by the side of some of the tombs, which resembled
the houses of the living, and in front of which offerings were made to the dead.
After a burial, brushwood was heaped round the walls of the tomb and set on
fire, partially cremating the body and the objects that were interred with it
within. Sanitary reasons made this partial cremation necessary, while want of
space in the populous plain of Babylonia caused the brick tombs to be built,
like the houses of the towns, one on the top of the other.

Babylonia and Assyria were both administered by a bureaucracy, but whereas in
Assyria the bureaucracy was military, in Babylonia it was theocratic. The
high-priest was the equal and the director of the king, and the king himself was
a priest, and the adopted child of Bel. In Assyria, on the contrary, the
arbitrary power of the monarch was practically unchecked. Under him was the
Turtannu or Tartan, the commander-in-chief, who commanded the army in the
absence of the king. The Rab-saki, Rab-shakeh, or vizier, who ranked a little
below him, was the head of the civil officials; besides him we hear of the
Rab-sa-resi or Rabsaris, "the chief of the princes," the Rab-mugi or Rab-Mag,
"the court physician," and an endless number of other officers. [pg 262] The governors of
provinces were selected from among the higher aristocracy, who alone had the
privilege of sharing with the king the office of limmu, or eponymous
archon after whom the year was named. Most of these officers seem to have been
confined to Assyria; we do not hear of them in the southern kingdom of
Babylonia. There, however, from an early period royal judges had been appointed,
who went on circuit and sat under a president. Sometimes as many as four or six
of them sat on a case, and subscribed their names to the verdict.

The main attention of the Assyrian government was devoted to the army, which
was kept in the highest possible state of efficiency. It was recruited from the
free peasantry of the country—a fact which, while it explains the excellence of
the Assyrian veterans, also shows why it was that the empire fell as soon as
constant wars had exhausted the native population. Improvements were made in it
from time to time; thus, cavalry came to supersede the use of chariots, and the
weapons and armour of the troops were changed and improved. Engineers and
sappers accompanied it, cutting down the forests and making roads as it marched,
and the commissariat was carefully attended to. The royal tent was arranged like
a house, and one of its rooms was fitted up as a kitchen, where the food was
prepared as in the palace of Nineveh. In Babylonia it was the fleet [pg 263] rather than the
army which was the object of concern, though under Nebuchadrezzar and his
successors the army also became an important engine of war. But, unlike the
Assyrians, the Babylonians had been from the first a water-faring people, and
the ship of war floated on the Euphrates by the side of the merchant vessel and
the state barge of the king.

Such then were the kingdoms of Babylonia and Assyria. Each exercised an
influence on the Israelites and their neighbours, though in a different way and
with different results. The influence of Assyria was ephemeral. It represented
the meteor-like rise of a great military power, which crushed all opposition,
and introduced among mankind the new idea of a centralised world-empire. It
destroyed the northern kingdom of Samaria, and made Palestine once more what it
had been in pre-Mosaic days, the battle-ground between the nations of the Nile
and the Tigris. On the inner life of western Asia it left no impression.

The influence of Babylonia, on the other hand, was that of a venerable and a
widely reaching culture. The Canaan of the patriarchs and the Canaanitish
conquest was a Canaan whose civilisation was derived from the Euphrates, and
this civilisation the Israelites themselves inherited. Abraham was a Babylonian,
and the Mosaic Law is not Egyptian but Babylonian in character, wherever it
ceases to be specifically Israelite. The influence of Babylonia, moreover,
continued [pg 264] to
the last. It was the Babylonish Exile which changed the whole nature of the
Jewish people, which gave it new aims and ideals, and prepared it for the coming
of the Messiah. The Babylonian influence which had been working in the West for
four thousand years received, as it were, a fresh impulse, and affected the
religion and life of Judah in a new and special manner. Nor has the influence of
Babylonian culture vanished even yet. Apart from the religious beliefs we have
received from Israel, there is much in European civilisation which can be traced
back to the old inhabitants of Chaldæa. It came through Canaanitish hands;
perhaps, too, through the hands of the Etruscans. At all events, the system of
augury which Rome borrowed from Etruria had a Babylonian origin, and the
prototype of the strange liver-shaped instrument by means of which the Etruscan
soothsayer divined, has been found among the relics of a Babylonian
library.
[pg 267]

CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

Our task is finished. We have passed under review some of the facts which
have been won by modern discovery from the monuments of the nations who helped
to create the history of Israel. That history no longer stands alone like a
solitary peak rising from the plain. Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria have yielded
up their dead; Canaan and even Arabia are now beginning to do likewise. The
Oriental world of the past is slowly developing before our eyes; centuries which
were deemed pre-historic but a few years ago have now become familiar to us, and
we can study the very letters written by the contemporaries and predecessors of
Abraham, and read the same books as those that were read by them. A new light
has been poured upon the Old Testament; its story has been supplemented and
explained; its statements tested and proved.

The Israelites were but one out of many branches of the same family. Their
history is entwined around that of their brethren, their characteristics were
shared by others of the same race. The Canaan they occupied was itself inhabited
by more than one people, and after [pg 268] the first few years of invasion, its influence
became strong upon them. In race, indeed, the Jew was by no means pure; at the
outset a mixture of Israelite and Edomite, he was further mingled with Moabite
and Philistine elements. The first king of Judah as a separate kingdom had an
Ammonite mother, and bore an Ammonite name, while the portraits which surmount
the names of Shishak's conquests in southern Palestine show that the old Amorite
population was still predominant there. It was religion and history that made
the Jew, not purity of race.

That Egypt must have exercised an influence upon Israel has long been known.
The Israelites were born as a nation in the land of Goshen, and the Exodus from
Egypt is the starting-point of their national history. But it is only since the
decipherment of the Egyptian inscriptions that it has been possible to determine
how far this influence extended, and to what extent it prevailed. And the result
is to show that it was negative rather than positive; that the regulations of
the Mosaic Code were directed to preventing the people from returning to Egypt
and its idolatries by suppressing all reference to Egyptian beliefs and customs,
and silently contradicting its ideas and practices. Even the doctrine of the
future life, and the resurrection of the body, which plays so prominent a part
in Egyptian religion, is carefully avoided, and the Ten Commandments have little
in common with the ethical code of Egypt.
[pg 269]

But while the influence of Egypt has thus been shown to be negative rather
than positive, the influence of Babylonia has proved to be overwhelming. Perhaps
this is one of the greatest surprises of modern research, though it might have
been expected had we remembered that Abraham was a native of Babylonia, and that
Israelites and Semitic Babylonians belonged to the same race. We have seen that
the early culture of western Asia was wholly Babylonian, and that Babylonian
influence continued undiminished there down to the days of the Exodus. The very
mode of writing and the language of literature were Babylonian; the whole method
of thought had been modelled after a Babylonian pattern for unnumbered
generations. Israel in Goshen was no more exempt from these influences than were
the patriarchs in Canaan.

Babylonian influence is deeply imprinted on the Mosaic laws. The institution
of the Sabbath went back to the Sumerian days of Chaldæa; the name itself was of
Babylonian origin. The great festivals of Israel find their counterparts on the
banks of the Euphrates. Even the year of Jubilee was a Babylonian institution,
and Gudea, the priest-king of Lagas, tells us that when he kept it the slave
became "for seven days the equal of his master." It was only the form and
application of the old institutions that were changed in the Levitical
legislation. They were adapted to the needs of Israel, and associated with the
events of its [pg 270]
history. But in themselves they were all of Babylonian descent.

There is yet one more lesson to be learnt from the revelations of the
monuments. They have made it clear that civilisation in the East is immensely
old. As far back as we can go we find there all the elements of culture; man has
already invented a system of writing, and has made some progress in art. It is
true that by the side of all this civilisation there were still races living in
the lowest barbarism of the Stone Age, just as there were Tasmanians who
employed stone weapons of palaeolithic shape less than sixty years ago; but
between the civilised man of the Babylonian plain and the barbarians around him
there existed the same gulf that exists to-day between the European and the
savage. The history of the ancient East contains no record of the development of
culture out of savagery. It tells us, indeed, of degeneracy and decay, but it
knows of no period when civilisation began. So far as archaeology can teach us,
the builders of the Babylonian cities, the inventors of the cuneiform
characters, had behind them no barbarous past.
[pg 272]

APPENDICES

I

EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGY

Egypt was originally divided into several independent principalities.
Eventually these became the kingdoms of Northern (or Lower), and Southern (or
Upper) Egypt. Among the kings of Northern Egypt were (1) Pu, (2) Ska, (3) Katfu
(?), (4) Tau, (5) Thesh, (6) Nenau (?), and (7) Mekhâ; among the kings of
Southern Egypt was Besh.

The two kingdoms were united by Men or Meni (Menes), king of This, who builds
Memphis and founds the First dynasty of the united monarchy.
[pg 273]

DYNASTY I.
(THINITE).

1. Meni.
2. Teta I.
3. Atotha.
4. Ata.
5. Husapti.
6.
Mer-ba-pa, 73 years.
7. Samsu, 72 years.
8. Qabhu, 83 years.

DYNASTY II.
(THINITE).

1. Buzau or Bai-neter, 95 years.
2. Kakau.
3. Ba-neter-en, 95
years.
4. Uznas, 70 years.
5. Send, 74 years.
6. Per-ab-sen or Ka-Ra
(?).
7. Nefer-ka-Ra, 70 years.

DYNASTY III.
(MEMPHITE).

1. Nefer-ka-Sokar (2) 8 years, 4 months, 2 days.
2. Hu-zefa, 25 (?) years,
8 months, 4 days.
3. Babai.
4. Zazai, 37 years, 2 months, 1 day.
5.
Neb-ka-Ra, 19 years.
6. Zoser, 19 years, 2 months.
7. Zoser-teta, 6
years.
8. Sezes.
9. Nefer-ka-Ra I., 6 years.
10. Huni, 24
years.
[pg 274]

DYNASTY IV.
(MEMPHITES).

1. Snefru, 24 years.
2. Sharu.
3. Khufu (Cheops), 23 years.
4.
Ra-dad-f, 8 years.
6. Khâ-f-Ha (Chephren).
6. Men-kau-Ra
(Mykerinos).
7. Shepseskaf.

DYNASTY V.
(ELEPHANTINES).

1. User-ka-f, 28 years.
2. Sahu-Ra, 4 years.
3. Kaka, 2 years.
4.
Nefer-ar-ka-Ra I., 7 years.
5. Shepses-ka-Ra, 12 years.
6.
Khâ-nefer-Ra.
7. Ra-n-user An, 25 years.
8. Men-ka-Hor, 8 years.
9.
Dad-ka-Ra Assa, 28 years.
10. Unas, 30 years.
11. Akau-Hor, 7 years.

DYNASTY VI.
(ELEPHANTINES).

1. Teta III.
2. User-ka-Ra.
3. Meri-Ra Pepi I., 20 years.
4.
Mer-en-Ra Miht-em-saf I., 14 years.
5. Nefer-ka-Ra II. Pepi II., 94
years.
6. Mer-en-Ra Miht-em-saf II., 1 year, 1 month.
7. Neit-aker
(Nitôkris), a queen.

DYNASTIES VII. AND VIII.
(MEMPHITES).

1. Nefer-ka, 2 years, 1 month, 1 day.
2. Neferus, 4 years, 2 months, 1
day.
3. Ab-en-Ra I., 2 years, 1 month, 1 day.
4. ... 1 year, 8 days.
5.
Ab-en-Ra II.
6. Hanti.
7. Pest-sat-en-Sopd.
8. Pait-Kheps.
9.
Serhlinib.
...
Dad-nefer-Ra
Dudumes.
...
Neter-ka-Ra.
Men-ka-Ra.
Nefer-ka-Ra III.
Nefer-ka-Ra
IV. Nebi.
Dad-ka-Ea Shema.
Nefer-ka-Ra V.
Khondu.
Mer-en-Hor.
Snefer-ka I.
Ka-n-Ra.
Nefer-ka-Ra VI.
Terel.
Nefer-ka-Hor.
Nefer-ka-Ra VII. Pepi-seneb.
Snefer-ka II.
Annu.
[User]-kau-Ra.
Nefer-kau-Ra.
Nefer-kau-Hor.
Nefer-ar-ka-Ra
II.

DYNASTY IX.
(HERAKLEOPOLITES).

1. Khiti or Khruti I.
Mer-ab-Ra
...
Mâa-ab-Ra.
Khâ-user-Ra.
Âa-hotep-Ra.
Skhâ-n-Ra.
Aah-mes
(?)-Ra.
Se-n (?)-mu-Ra.

DYNASTY X.
(HERAKLEOPOLITES).

Mer-ka-Ea.
...
Ra-hotep-ab Amu-si-Hor-nez-hirtef.
...
Nefer-ka-Ra
VIII.
Khiti II.
Se-heru-herri.
[Ameni?]

According to Lauth, the Turin Papyrus gives 19 kings to the Tenth dynasty,
and 185 years.
[pg
275]

DYNASTY XI. (THEBAN).

1. Antef I. Seshes-Hor-ap-mâa-Ra Antuf-Âa, prince of Thebes.
2. Neb-hotep
Mentu-hotep I.
3. Uah-ankh [Ter(?)-] seshes-ap-mâa-Ra Antef-Âa II., his
son.
4. Seshes-herher-mâa-Ra-Antef III., his brother.
5. Neter-nefer
Neb-taui-Ra Mentu-hotep II.
6. Nub-kheper-Ra Antauf, more than 50
years.
7. Neb-khru-Ra Mentu-hotep III., more than 46 years.
8. A'a'h, a
queen.
9. Antef V., her son.
10. S-ânkh-ka-Ra I.

According to Lauth, the Turin Papyrus makes the sum of the Eleventh dynasty
243 years, Neb-khru-Ra reigning 51 years.

DYNASTY XII. (THEBAN).

1. Amon-em-hat I. S-hotep-ab-Ra, alone 20 years.
With Usertesen I., 10
years.
2. Usertesen I. Kheper-ka-Ra, alone 32 years.
With Amon-em-hat II.,
3 years.
3. Amon-em-hat II. Nub-kau-Ra, alone 29 years.
With Usertesen
II., 6 years.
4. Usertesen II. Khâ-kheper-Ra, 19 years.
5. Usertesen III.
Khâ-kau-Ra, 38 years.
6. Amon-em-hat III. Mâat-en-Ra, 43 years.
7.
Amon-em-hat IV. Mâa-khru-Ra, 9 years, 3 months, 27 days.
8. Sebek-nefru-Ra,
a, queen, 3 years, 10 months, 24 days.

The Turin Papyrus makes the sum of the Twelfth dynasty 213 years, 1 month, 17
days.

DYNASTIES XIII. (THEBAN)
AND XIV. (XOITE).

According to the Turin Papyrus:

1. Sebek-hotep I. Sekhem-khu-taui-Ra,
son of Sebek-nefru-Ra,
1 year, 3
months, 24 days.
2. Sekhem-ka-Ra, 6 years.
3. Ra Amon-em-hat V.
4.
S-hotep-ab-Ra II.
5. Aufni, 2 years.
G. S-ânkh-ab-Ra Ameni
Antuf
Amon-em-hat VI., 1 year.
7. S-men-ka-Ra.
8. S-hotep-ab-Ra
III.
9. S-ânkh-ka-Ra II.
10, 11. Names lost.
12. Nezem-ab-Ra.
13. Ra
Sebek-hotep II.
14. Ren-seneb.
15. Autu-ab-Ra I. Hor.
16.
Sezef-ka-Ra.
17. Sekhem-khu-taui-Ra II.
Sebek-hotep III.
18.
User-en-Ra.
19. S-menkh-ka-Ra Mer-menfiu.
20. ... ka-Ra.
21.
S-user-set-Ra.
22. Sokhem-uaz-taui-Ka Sebek-hotep IV.
23. Khâ-seshesh-Ra
Nefer-hotep,
son of Ra-ânkh-f.
24. Si-Hathor-Ra.
25. Khâ-nefer-Ra
Sebek-hotop V.
26. [Khâ-ka-Ra].
27. [Khâ-ânkh-Ra Sebek-hotep VI.]
28.
Khâ-hotep-Ra Sebek-hotep
VII., 4 years, 8 months, 29 days.
29. Uab-Ra
Âa-ab, 10 years, 8 months, 29 days.
30. Mer-nefer-Ea Ai, 23 (or 13) years, 8
months, 18 days.
31. Mer-hotep-Ra Ana, 2 years, 2 months, 9 days.
32.
S-ânkh-en-s-uaztu-Ra, 3 years, 2 months.
33. Mer-sekhem-Ra Andu, 3 years, 1
month.
[pg 276] 34.
S-uaz-ka-Ra Ur, 5 years, ... months, 8 days.
35. Anemen ... Ra.
36-46.
Names lost.
47. Mer-kheper-Ra.
48. Mer-kau-Ra Sebek-hotep VIII.
49-53.
Names lost.
54. ... mes-Ra.
55. ... mât-Ra Aba.
56. Nefer-uben-Ra
I.
57. ... ka-Ra.
58. S-uaz-en-Ra.
59-60. Names lost.
61.
Nehasi-Ra.
62. Khâ-khru-Ra.
63. Neb-f-autu-Ra, 2 years, 5 months, 15
days.
64. S-heb-Ra, 3 years.
65. Mor-zefa-Ra, 3 years.
66. S-uaz-ka-Ra,
1 year.
67. Neb-zofa-Ra, 1 year.
68. Uben-Ra I.
69-70. Names
lost.
71. [Neb-] zefa-Ra II., 4 years.
72. [Nefer-] uben-Ea II.
73.
Autu-ab-Ra II.
74. Her-ab-Ra.
75. Neb-sen-Ra.
76-79. Names lost.
80.
S-kheper-en-Ra.
81. Dad-khru-Ra.
82. S-ânkh-ka-Ra III.
83.
Nefer-tum-Ra.
84. Sekhem-...-Ra.
85. Ka-...-Ra.
86. Nefer-ab-Ra.
87.
A...ka-Ra.
88. Khâ-...-Ra, 2 years.
89. Nez-ka-...-Ra.
90.
S-men-...-Ra.
91-111. Names lost.
112. Sekhem-...-Ra.
113.
Sekhem-...-Ra.
114. Sekhem-us...-Ra.
115. Sesen-...-Ra.
116.
Neb-ati-uzu-Ra.
117. Neb-aten-uzu-Ra.
118. S-men-ka-Ra.
119.
S-user-...-Ra.
120. Khâ-sekhem-[hent]-Ra.

About thirty-seven more names are illegible.

DYNASTIES XV., XVI. AND
XVII. (HYKSOS).

According to Josephus, quoted from Mauetho:—

1. Salatis, 13 years.
2. Beon or Bnôn, 44 years.
3. Apakhnas or
Pakhnan, 36 years, 7 months.
4. Apôphis, 61 years.
5. Iannas or Annas, 50
years, 1 month.
6. Assis, 49 years, 2 months.
...
Ya'qob-hal
(Jacob-el).
...
Khian (Iannas) S-user-Set-en-Ra.
...
Apopi I.
Aa-user-Ra (reigned more than 33 years).
...
Apopi III. Ra-âa-kenen.

A dynasty of Theban princes was contemporary with the Seventeenth Hyksos
dynasty, the last four of whom were independent:

Skenen-Ra Taa I. (revolted against Apopi III.).
Skenen-Ra Taa II.
Aa.
Skenen-Ra Taa III. Ken.
Uaz-kheper-Ra Ka-mes and wife Aah-hotep.

DYNASTY XVIII. (THEBAN).

1. Neb-pehuti-Ra Aahmes I. (Amosis), more than 20 years.
2. Ser-ka-Ra
Amon-hotep I., his son (Amenophis I,), 20 years, 7 months.
3. Aa-kheper-ka-Ra
Dehuti Dehuti-mes I., his son, and queen
Amen-sit.
4. Aa-kheper-en-Ra
Dehuti-mes II., his son (more than 9
years), and wife (and sister) Hatshepsu
II. Mâ-ka-Ra (daughter of Hatshepsu I.).
5. Khnum-Amon Hatshepsu II.
Mâ-ka-Ra, more than 16 years.
[pg 277] 6. Ra-men-kheper Dehuti-mes
(Thothmes) III.,
her half-brother,
57 years, 11
months, 1 day (B.C. 1503,
March 20, to
1449 February
14, according to Dr. Mahler's
astronomical
determination).
7. Aa-khepru-Ra Amon-hotep II., his son, more than 5
years.
8. Men-khepru-Ra Dehuti-mes IV., his son, more than 7 years.
9.
Neb-mâ-Ra Amon-hotep III., his son (more than 35 years),
and wife
Teie.
10. Neter-khepru-Ra Amon-hotep IV. Khu-n-Aten, his
son, more than 17
years.
11. Ankh-khepru-Ra and wife Meri-Aten.
12. Tut-ânkh-Amon
Khepru-neb-Ra and wife Ankh-nes-Amon.
13.
Aten-Ra-nefer-nefru—mer-Aten.
14. Ai Kheper-khepru-ar-mâ-Ra, more than 4
years.
15. Hor-em-hib (Armais) Mi-Amon Ser-khepru-ka, more than 3 years.

DYNASTY XIX. (THEBAN).

1. Men-pehuti-Ra Ramessu I.
(Ramesses), more than 2 years.
2. Men-mâ-Ra
Seti I. (Sethos)
Mer-en-Ptah I., more than 27 years.
3. User-mâ-Ra
(Osymandyas)
Sotep-en-Ra Ramessu II.
(Ramses) Mi-Amon (the
Sesostris of
the Greeks), B.C.
1348-1281 (according to Dr.
Mahler).
4. Mer-en-Ptah
II. (Ammenephthes)
Hotep-hi-ma Ba-n-Ra Mi-Amon.
5. User-khepru-Ra Seti II.
Mer-en-Ptah III.
6. Amon-messu Hik-An Mer-kha-Ra Sotep-en-Ra.
7. Khu-n-Ra
Sotop-en-Ra Mer-en-Ptah IV. Si-Ptah and wife Ta-user.

DYNASTY XX. (THEBAN).

1. Set-nekht Merer Mi-Amon (recovered the kingdom from the
Canaanite
Arisu).
2. Ramessu III. Hik-an, more than 32 years.
3.
Ramessu IV. Hik-Mâ Mi-Amon, more than 11 years.
4. Ramessu V.
User-mâ-s-kheper-en-Ra Mi-Amon, more than 4 years.
5. Ramessu VI. Neb-mâ-Ra
Mi-Amon Amon-hir-kho-pesh-ef (called Meri-Tum
in northern Egypt).
6.
Ramessu VII. At-Amon User-mâ-Ra Mi-Amon.
7. Ramessu VIII. Set-hir-kho-pesh-ef
Mi-Amon User-mâ-Ra Khu-n-Amon.
8. Ramessu IX. Si-Ptah S-khâ-n-Ra Mi-Amon, 19
years.
9. Ramessu X. Nefer-ka-Ra Mi-Amon Sotep-en-Ra, more than 10
years.
10. Ramessu XI. Amon-hir-kho-pesh-ef Kheper-mâ-Ra Sotep-en-Ra.
11.
Ramessu XII. Men-mâ-Ra Mi-Amon Sotep-en-Ptah Khâ-m-uas, more than
27
years.

DYNASTY XXI. (TANITE).

1. Nes-Bindidi (Smendes) Mi-Amon.
2. P-seb-khâ-n I. (Psusennes I.) Mi-Amon
Aa-kheper-Ra Sotep-en-Amon.
3. [Nefer-ka-Ra] (Nephelkheres).
4.
Amon-em-apt (Amenophthis).
5. ... (Osokhor).
6. Pinezem (?)
(Psinakhes).
7. Hor-P-seb-khâ-n II. (Psusennes II.).

Contemporary with the Twenty-first dynasty was an [pg 278] illegitimate dynasty of high-priests
at Thebes:—

(1.) Hir-Hor Si-Amon.
(2.) Piankhi.
(3.) Pinezem I.
(4.) Pinezem II.
with title of "king."
(5.) Men-kheper-Ra and wife Isis-em-kheb.
(6.)
Pinezem III.

DYNASTY XXII.

(BUBASTITE).

1. Shashanq I. (Shishak) Mi-Amon Hez-kheper-Ra Sotep-en-Ra, son of
Nemart,
captain of the Libyan mercenaries, more than 21 years.
2. Usarkon I. Mi-Amon
Sek-hem-kheper-Ra.
3. Takelet I. Mi-Amon Si-Isis User-mâ-Ra Sotep-en-Amon,
more than 23
years.
4. Usarkon II. Mi-Amon Si-Bast User-mâ-Ra, more than
23 years.
5. Shashanq II. Mi-Amon Sek-hem-kheper-Ra.
6. Takelet II.
Mi-Amon Si-Isis Hez-kheper-Ra, more than 15 years.
7. Shashanq III. Mi-Amon
Si-Bast User-mâ-Ra, 52 years.
8. Pimai Mi-Amon User-mâ-Ra
Sotep-en-Amon.
9. Shashanq IV. Aa-kheper-Ra, more than 37 years.

DYNASTY XXIII.

1. S-hir-ab-Ra Petu-si-Bast.
2. Usarkon III. Mi-Amon Aa-kheper-Ra
Sotep-en-Amon.
3. P-si-Mut User-Ra Sotep-en-Ptah.

Interregnum.

Egypt is divided between several princes, including Tef-nekht, father of
Bak-en-ran-ef. It is overrun by Piankhi the Ethiopian, while Usarkon III. reigns
at Bubastis. The son and successor of Piankhi was Mi-Amon-Nut.

DYNASTY XXIV. (SAITE).

Bak-en-ran-ef (Bokkhoris) Uah-ka-Ra, more than 16 years.

DYNASTY XXV.

(ETHIOPIAN).

1. Shabaka (Sabako) Nefer-ka-Ra, son of Kashet, 12 years.
2. Shabatoka
(Sebikhos) Dad-ka-Ra.
3. Taharka (Tirhakah) Nefer-Tum-khu-Ra, 26 years.

Interregnum.

Egypt is conquered by the Assyrian king Esar-haddon, and divided into 20
satrapies, B.C. 672-660. Taharka and his successor Urdamanu (Rud-Amon), or
Tan-damanu (Tuant-Amon), make vain attempts to recover it. Finally, Psamtik, son
of Niku (Necho), satrap of Sais, shakes off the foreign yoke.

DYNASTY XXVI. (SAITE).

B.C.

1. Psamtik I. (Psammeti-khos) Uah-ab-Ra

664

2. Nekau (Necho) Nem-ab-Ra

610

3. Psamtik II. Nefer-ab-Ra

594

4. Uah-ab-Ra (Apries or Hophra) Haa-ab-Ra

589

5. Aahmes II. (Amasis) Si-Nit Khnum-ab-Ra

570

6. Psamtik III. Ankh-ka-n-Ra

526

DYNASTY XXVII. (PERSIAN)

B.C.

1. Kambathet (Cambyses), Sam-taui Mestu-Ra

525

2. Ntariush (Darius I.) Settu-Ra

521

3. Khabbash Senen Tanen Sotep-en-Ptah, native prince

485

4. Khsherish (Xerxes)

484

5. Artakhsharsha (Artaxerxes)

465

6. Ntariush (Darius II.) Mi-Amon-Ra

424

[pg 279]

DYNASTY XXVIII. (SAITE).

B.C.

Amon-art-t-rut (Amyrtæus), more than 6 years

415

DYNASTY XXIX.

(MENDESIAN).

1. Nef-âa-rut I. Ba-n-Ra Mi-neteru, more than 4 years.
2. Hakori
Khnum-mâ-Râ Sotep-en-Ptah, 13 years.
3. P-si-Mut User-Ptah-sotep-en-Ra, 1
year.
4. Hor-neb-kha, 1 year.
5. Nef-âa-rut II., 1 year.

DYNASTY XXX.

(SEBENNYTE).

1. Nekht-Hor-hib Ra-snezem-ab Sotep-en-Anhur, son of Nef-âa-rut I.,
19
years.
2. Zihu (Teos), 1 year.
3. Nekht-neb-ef (Nektanebo)
Kheper-ka-Ra, 18 years.

Egypt reconquered by the Persians, B.C. 349.
[pg 280]

II

BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY

En-sag-saganna, king of Kengi.

Lugal-zaggisi, king of Erech, founds an empire in western Asia cir. B.C. 5000
(?).

KINGS OF LAGAS,
cir. B.C. 4000.

Ur-duggina.
Lugal-suggur, vassal of Me-sa, king of
Kis.
Gursar.
Nini-khaldu, his son.
Ur-Nina, his son.
Akur-gal, his
son.
E-annatum, his son.
En-annadu I., his brother,
high-priest.
Entemena, his nephew, high-priest.
En-annadu II.,
high-priest.

Lugal-usum-gal, vassal of Sargon of Akkad.

KINGS OF KIS.

Me-sa.
Enne-Ugun.
Alusarsid.
Lugal-khassi.

DYNASTY OF AGADE (AKKAD).

Sargon or Sargani-sar-ali, B.C. 3800.
Naram-Sin, his son, B.C.
3750.
Bingani-sar-ali, his son.
Queen Ellat-Gula (?).

FIRST DYNASTY OF UR.

Lugal-kigub-nidudu.
Lugal-kisal-si, his son.

SECOND DYNASTY OF UR.

Ur-Bau, cir. B.C. 2700; his step-son, Nammakhani, high-priest of
Lagas.
Dungi I., his son; Gudea and his son, Ur-Nin-girsu, vassal
high-priests
of Lagas.

DYNASTY OF ERECH.

Sin-gamil.
Sin-gasid.

DYNASTY OF ISIN.

Isbi-girra.
Libit-Istar.
Pur-Sin
I.
Ur-Ninip.
Isme-Dagan.
En-annatum, his son, vassal of Gungunum of
Ur.

THIRD DYNASTY OF UR.

Gungunum. Dungi II. (reigns at least 41 years).
Pur-Sin II. (reigns at
least 12 years).
[pg
281] Gimil-Sin (reigns at least 9 years).
Inê-Sin (probably followed
by Sumu-abi).

FIRST DYNASTY OF BABYLON, B.C. 2478.

Sumu-abi or Samu-abi, 14 (or 15) years.12
Sumu-la-ilu,
his son, 36 (or 35) years.
Zabium or Zabu, his son, 14 years.
Abil-Sin,
his son, 18 years.
Sin-muballidh, his son, 20 (or 30) years.

Babylonia conquered by the Elamites; Kudur-Laghghamar (Chedor-laomer) king of
Elam is suzerain, while Eri-Aku (Arioch) governs southern Babylonia and makes
Larsa his capital.

Khammurabi or Ammurapi, the Amraphel of Genesis, 43 (or 55) years
(B.C.
2376-2333).
He defeats the Elamites, restores Sin-idinnam to Larsa,
and reunites
Babylonia.
Samsu-iluna, his son, 38 (or 35) years.
Abesukh
(Abishua) or Ebisum, 25 years.
Ammi-ditana, his son, 25 years.
Ammi-zadok,
his son, 21 years.
Samsu-ditana, his son, 31 years.

DYNASTY OF SISKU, B.C. 2174.

Anman, 60 years.
Ki-annibi, 56 years.
Damki-ilisu, 26
years.
Iskipal, 15 years.
Sussi, 24 years.
Gulkisar, 55
years.
Kirgal-daramas, 50 years.
Â-dara-kalamma, 28
years.
E-kur-ul-anna, 26 years.
Melamma-kurkurra, 8 years.
Ea-ga ... 20
years.

THE DYNASTY OF THE KASSITES, B.C. 1806.13

Gandis, 16 years.
Agum-si, 22 years.
Agu-yasi, 22 years.
Ussi, his
son, 9 years.
Adumetas.
Tazzigurumas.
Agum-kak-rime, his son.

Eight unknown kings.
Kara-indas.
Kadasman-Bel (corresponded
with the
Egyptian king Amenophis III.)
Kuri-galzu I.
Burna-huryas, his
son.
Kuri-galzu II., his son.14
Kara-khardas.
Kadasman-kharbe
I., his son.
[pg
282]

The throne usurped by Nazi-bugas.
Kuri-galzu III., son of
Kadas-man-kharbe, 35 (?) years.
Nazi-Maruttas, his son, 26 years, B.C.
1378.
Kadasman-Turgu, his son, 17 years.
Kadasman-buryas, 14
years.
Kudur-Bel, 6 years.
Sagarkti-buryas, his son, 13 years (800 years
before Nabonidos).
Bibeyasu, 8 years.
Bel-sum-iddin, 1-1/2
year.
Kadasman-kharbe II., 1-1/2 year.
Rimmon-sum-uzur, 30 years
(including
the 7 years during
which the Assyrian king Tig-lath-Bir
held
Babylon).
Meli-sipak, 15 years.
Merodach-baladan I., his son, 13
years.
Zamama-sum-iddin, 1 year.
Bel-sum-iddin, 3 years.

THE DYNASTY OF ISIN, B.C. 1229.
Merodach- ... 18 years.
Four unknown
kings.
Nebuchadrezzar I.
Bel-nadin-pal.
Merodach-nadin-akhi, 22
years.15
Merodach-
... 1-1/2 year.

The throne usurped by Rimmon-baladan.
Merodach-sapik-zer-mati, 12
years.
Nabu-nadin, 8 years.

THE DYNASTY OF THE SEA-COAST, B.C. 1096.
Simbar-sipak, 18
years.
Ea-mukin-zeri, 5 months.
Kassu-nadin-akhi, 3 years.

THE DYNASTY OF BIT-BAZI, B.C. 1075.

Ê-Ulmas-sakin-sumi, 17 years.
Bir-kudur-uzur I., 3
years.
Silanim-Sukamuna, 3 months.

THE DYNASTY OF ELAM, B.C. 1055.

An ..., an Elamite, 6 years.

THE SECOND DYNASTY OF BABYLON, B.C. 1049.

Nebo-kin abli, 36 years.
Bir-kudur-uzur II. (?), 8 months, 12
days.
Probably four names missing.

B.C.

Samas-mudammik

cir. 920

Nebo-sum-iskun

cir. 900

Nebo-baladan

cir. 880

Merodach-nadin-sumi.

cir. 860

Merodach-baladhsu-ikbi

cir. 830

Bau-akhi-iddin

cir. 810

Probably two names missing.

B.C.

Nebo-sum-iskun, son of Dakuri

cir. 760

Nabonassar, 14 years

747

Nebo-nadin-sumi, his son, 2 years

733

Nebo-sum-yukin, his son, 1 month, 12 days

731

THE DYNASTY OF SAPÊ.

B.C.

Yukin-zera or Khinziros, 3 years

730

Pulu (Pul or Poros), called

Tiglath-pileser III. in Assyria, 2 years

727

Ululâ, called Shalmaneser IV. in Assyria

725

Merodach-baladan II the Chaldæan from the Sea-coast

721

Sargon of Assyria

709

Sennacherib, his son

705

Merodach-zakir-sumi, 1 month

702

Merodach-baladan III., 6 months

702

Bel-ebus of Babylon

702

Assur-nadin-sumi, son of Sennacherib

700

Nergal-yusezib

694

Musezib-Merodach

693

Sennacherib a second time

689

Esar-haddon, his son

681

Samas-sum-yukin (Saos-du-khinos), his son

668

Kandalanu (Kineladanos)

648

Nabopolassar

626

Nabu-kudurri-uzur (Nebuchadrezzar II.), his son

605

Amil-Marduk (Evil-Merodach), his son

662

Nergal-sarra-uzur (Nergal-sharezer)

560

Labasi-Marduk (Laborosoar-chod), his son, 3 months.

556

Nabu-nahid (Nabonidos)

556

Cyrus conquers Babylon

538

Cambyses, his son

529

Gomates (Gaumata) the Magian usurps the throne, 7 months

521

Nebuchadrezzar III., native king

521

Darius (Dârayavaush), son of Hystaspes

520

Nebuchadrezzar IV., rebel king

514

Darius restored

513

Xerxes I. (Khshayârshâ), his son

485

Samas-erba, rebel king

480

Xerxes restored

479

Artaxerxes I. (Artakhshatra) Longimanus, his son

465

Xerxes II., his son, 2 months

425

Sogdianos, his half-brother, 7 months

425

Darius II. Nothos, his brother

424

Artaxerxes II. Mnêmon, his son

405

Okhos (Uvasu), son of Artaxerxes

362

Arses, his son

339

Darius III. Kodomannos

336

Conquered by Alexander the Great

330

[pg 283]

Footnote
12: (return)

The first date is that of a chronological tablet compiled in the reign of
Ammi-zadok; the second that of the Dynastic Tablet compiled probably in the
reign of Nabonidos. In the latter the reigns of illegitimate kings,
Pungun-ilu, Immerum, and Eri-Aku, seem to be included in those of the
legitimate rulers of the dynasty. Immerum, the son of Lilium, was a
contemporary of Sumu-la-ilu, and perhaps, like Nur-Rimmon and Sin-idinnam in
the time of Sin-muballidh and Khammurabi, was vassal king of Larsa in southern
Babylonia.

Footnote
13: (return)

The date is probably from 15 to 20 years too high.

Footnote
14: (return)

The position of this Kuri-galzu is not certain. One of the Kuri-galzus
calls himself "son of Burna-buryas," but since Nabonidos states that a
Burna-buryas reigned 700 years after Khammurabi, it is possible that among the
eight (or in this ease nine) unknown Kassite kings there was a Burna-buryas
I., B.C. 1640, whose son was Kuri-galzu I.

Footnote
15: (return)

As Sennacherib makes Merodach-nadin-akhi defeat the Assyrians in B.C. 1107,
while the Dynastic Tablet places the death of the Babylonian king in B.C.
1118, there must be a chronological error in the latter.

[pg 284]

III

ASSYRIAN CHRONOLOGY

Sargon asserts that he was preceded by 330 Assyrian kings, among the earlier
of them being Adasi and his son Bel-bani.

HIGH-PRIESTS OF ASSUR.

B.C.

Isme-Dagon

1850

Samsi-Rimmon I., his son

1820

. . . . . .

Igur-kapkapu

(?)

Samsi-Rimmon II., his son

(?)

. . . . . .

Khallu

(?)

Irisum, his son

(?)

KINGS OF ASSYRIA.

B.C.

Bel-kapkapu, "the founder

of the monarchy."

. . . . . .

Assur-suma-esir

(?)

Bir-tuklat-Assur, his son,

(contemporary of the

Babylonian king Kharbe-sipak).

. . . . . .

Erba-Rimmon

(?)

Assur-nadin-akhe I., his son

(?)

. . . . . .

Assur-bil-nisi-su

cir. 1450

Buzur-Assur

1440

Assur-nadin-akhe II.

1420

Assur-yuballidh, his son

cir 1400

Bel-nirari, his son

1380

Pudilu (Pedael), his son

1360

Rimmon-nirari I., his son

1340

Shalmaneser I., his son (the builder of Calah)

1320

Tiglath-Bir I., his son

1300

Conquers Babylon and reigns there 7 years

1290

Assur-nazir-pal I., his son, 6 years

1280

Tiglath-Asaur-Bel

1275

Assur-narara

1260

Nebo-dan, his son

1250

Bel-kudurri-uzur

1225

Bir-pileser

1215

Assur-dan I., his son16

1185

Mutaggil-Nebo, his son

1160

Assur-ris-isi, his son17

1140

Tiglath-pileser I., his son

1120

Assur-bil-kala, his son

1090

Samsi-Rimmon I., his brother

1070

Assur-nazir-pal II., his son

1050

Assur-irbi

(?)

Tiglath-pileser II

950

Assur-dan II., his son

930

Rimmon-nirari II., his son

911

Tiglath-Bir II., his son

889

Assur-nazir-pal III. his son

883

Shalmaneser II., his son

858

Assur-dain-pal (Sardana-pallos), rebel king

825

Samsi-Rimmon II., his brother

823

Rimmon-nirari II., his son

810

Shalmaneser III.

781

Assur-dân III.

771

Assur-nirari

753

Pulu (Pul), usurper, takes

the name of Tiglath-pileser III.

745

Conquers Babylon

729

Ululâ, usurper, takes the name of Shalmaneser IV.

727

Sargon, usurper

722

Sennacherib (Sin-akhe-erba), his son

705

Esar-haddon (Assur-akh-iddin), his son

681

Assur-bani-pal, his son

668

Assur-etil-ilani-yukinni, his son

(?)

Sin-sarra-iskun (Sarakos)

(?)

Destruction of Nineveh

606

[pg 285]

Footnote
16: (return)

A contemporary of the Babylonian king Zamama-sum-iddin. If this is the last
king but one of the Kassite dynasty, and not rather one of the unknown kings
of the dynasty of Isin, the date of Assurdan I. will have to be pushed about
40 years further back.

Footnote
17: (return)

A contemporary of the Babylonian king Nebuchadrezzar I.

[pg 286]

IV

HEBREW CHRONOLOGY AS CORRECTED BY THE ASSYRIAN MONUMENTS

B.C.

The Israelitish Exodus out of Egypt in the fifth year

of Meneptah, son of Ramses II.

1276

Campaign of Ramses III. in southern Palestine

cir. 1230

Chushan-rishathaim of Aram-Naharaim or Mitanni conquers Canaan

cir. 1225

Saul elected King of Israel

cir. 1020

Accession of David

cir. 1000

Accession of Solomon

cir. 960

Accession of Rehoboam, division of the kingdom

cir. 930

Invasion of Palestine by Shishak I. of Egypt

927

JUDAH.

Rehoboam (17 years)

cir. 932

Abijah

915

Asa

912

Jehoshapbat

871

Jeboram

846

Ahaziah or Jehoahaz

842

Athaliah

842

Joash

837

Amaziah

797

Uzziah or Azariah

768

Jotham

736

Ahaz

734

Becomes tributary to Tig-lath-pileser

734

Damascus taken by the Assyrians

732

Hezekiah

727

Invasion of Judah by Sennacherib

701

Manasseh

697

Amon

642

Josiah

640

Jehoahaz

608

Jehoiakim

608

Jehoiachin

597

Zedekiah

597

Jerusalem destroyed by Nebuchadrezzar

586

ISRAEL.

Jeroboam (22 years)

932

Nadab

910

Baasha

908

Elah

884

Zimri, for 7 days

882

Omri

882

Ahab

874

Ahab and his allies defeated by the Assyrians at Qarqar

853

Ahaziah

852

Revolt of Mesha of Moab

851

Joram

850

Jehu

842

He pays tribute to Assyria

841

Jehoanaz

814

Jehoash

798

Jeroboam II.

783

Zeohariah

742

Shallum

741

Menahem

741

Pays tribute to Tiglath-pileser

738

Pekahiah

737

Pekah

736

Hoshea

733 or 729

Samaria taken by the Assyrians

722

[pg 287]

V

THE LETTERS OF EBEB-TOB (OR EBED KHEBA), VASSAL KING OF JERUSALEM, TO
AMENOPHIS IV., KING OF EGYPT

I. "To the king my lord thus speaks Ehed-Tob thy servant: At the feet of the
king my lord seven times seven I prostrate myself. What have I done against the
king my lord? They have slandered me before the king my lord, saying: Ebed-Tob
has revolted from the king his lord. Behold, neither my father nor my mother
have exalted me in this place; the arm of the Mighty King has made me enter the
house of my father. Why should I have committed a sin against the king my lord?
By the life of the king, I say to the Commissioner of the king my lord: Why dost
thou love the Khabiri (Confederates) and hate the (loyal) governors? And yet
continually are they slandering me before the king my lord, because I say that
the provinces of the king my lord are being destroyed. Continually are they
slandering me to the king my lord. But let the king my lord consider, since the
king my lord has established the garrisons which have taken the fortresses ...
may the king send help to his country. [May he send troops] to his country! The
cities of the king my lord are lost which Elimelech is destroying, even all the
country of the king; so let the king my lord send help to his country. I say: I
will go down to the king my lord, and shall I not see the tears of the king my
lord? but the enemy are strong against me, and I have not been able to go down
to the king my [pg
288] lord. So let the king incline towards my face and despatch a
garrison to me, and I will go down and see the tears of the king my lord. Since
by the life of the king, when the Commissioner departed, I say: The provinces of
the king are being destroyed, (yet) thou dost not listen to me. All the
governors are destroyed, no governor remains to the king my lord. May the king
turn his face to the men and send the troops of the king my lord. No provinces
remain unto the king; the Khabiri have wasted all the provinces of the king. If
troops come this year, the provinces of the king my lord will be preserved; but
if no troops come, the provinces of the king my lord will be destroyed.—To the
Secretary of the king my lord, Ebed-Tob thy servant: make a clear report of my
words to the king my lord that all the provinces of the king my lord are being
destroyed."

II. "To the king my lord, my Sun-god, thus speaks Ebed-Tob thy servant: At
the feet of the king my lord seven times seven I prostrate myself. Behold, the
king my lord has established his name at the rising of the sun and the setting
of the sun. They have uttered slanders against me. Behold, I am not a governor,
a dependent of the king my lord. Behold, I am the king's friend, and I pay
tribute to the king, even I. Neither my father nor my mother, but the arm of the
Mighty King has established me in the house of my father. [When the governor of
the king my lord] came to me, I gave him 13 prisoners (?) and 10 slaves. Sûta
(Seti) the Commissioner of the king came to me; I gave 21 slavewomen and 20 male
prisoners into the hands of Sûta as a present for the king my lord. May the king
give counsel to his country! The country of the king is being destroyed, all of
it. Hostilities are being carried on against me. Behold, the mountains of Seir
(see Josh, xv. 10) as far as Gath-Carmel have united against all the other
governors and are at war with myself. If one looks, shall not one see the tears
of the king my lord because war [pg 289] has been made upon me? While there were ships
in the midst of the sea the arm of the Mighty King possessed Naharaim and
Babylonia, but now the Khabiri possess the cities of the king (of Egypt). Not a
single governor remains (among them) to the king my lord; all are destroyed.
Behold, Turbazu has been slain in the gate of the city of Zilû (Zelah), and the
king does nothing. Behold, Zimrida of Lachish has been thrown to the ground by
(his) servants and murdered. Yaptikh-Addu (Jephthah-Hadad) has been slain in the
gate of the city of Zilû, and the king does nothing.... Let the king [my lord]
send help [to his country], let the king turn his face [to his servants]. Let
him despatch troops to the country [of Jerusalem]. [Behold], if no troops come
this year, all the provinces of the king my lord will be utterly destroyed. They
do not tell to the face of the king my lord that the country of the king my lord
is destroyed and all the governors are destroyed. If no troops come this year,
let the king send a Commissioner, and let him come to me with allies, and we
will die with the king our lord.—To the Secretary of the king my lord, Ebed-Tob
thy servant: At thy feet [I prostrate myself]. Make a clear report of these my
words to the king my lord that thy faithful servant am I."

III. "To the king my lord thus speaks Ebed-Tob thy servant: at the feet of my
lord the king seven times seven I prostrate myself. Behold, has not Malchiel
revolted to the sons of Labai and the sons of Arzai to demand the country of the
king for themselves? As for the governor who does this deed, why does not the
king question him? Behold, Malchiel and Tagi (the father-in-law of Malchiel) are
they who have done this, since they have taken the city of Rubutê (Rabbah, Josh.
xv. 60).... There is no royal garrison. May the king live for ever! Verily Pûru
(Pa-Hor) has gone down to him; he has left me and is in the city of Gaza. But
let the king remember him and send fifty men as a garrison to defend the
country. All the [pg
290] country of the king has revolted. Send Yikhbil-Khamu, and let him
consider the country of the king. To the Secretary of the king, Ebed-Tob thy
servant: make a clear report of my words to the king: 'Abundant good fortune be
unto thee! I am thy servant.'"

IV. "To the king my lord thus speaks Ebed-Tob thy servant: at the feet of the
king my lord seven times seven I prostrate myself. [Behold the deed] which
Malchiel and Suardatum have done against the country of the king my lord, hiring
(?) the forces of the cities of Gezer, of Gath, and of Keilah, and occupying the
country of the city of Rubutê (Rabbah). The country of the king has gone over to
the Khabiri. And now at this moment the city of the mountain of Jerusalem
(Uru-salim), whose name is Bit-Bir (the temple of the god Bir), the city of the
king, is separated from the locality of the men of Keilah. Let the king listen
to Ebed-Tob thy servant, and let him despatch troops that I may restore the
country of the king to the king. But if no troops arrive, the country of the
king is gone over to the Khabiri. This is the deed of Suardatum and Malchiel.
But may the king send help to his country."

V. The commencement is lost.—"And now as to the city of Jerusalem, if
this country belongs to the king, why is it that Gaza is made the seat of the
garrison for the king? Behold, the country of the city of Gath-Carmel has fallen
away to Tagi and the men of Gath. He is in Bit-Sâni, and we have effected that
they should give Labai and the country of the Bedâwin (Suta) to the Khabiri.
Malchiel has sent to Tagi and takes his sons as servants. He has granted all
their requests to the men of Keilah, and we have delivered the city of
Jerusalem. The garrison whom thou sentest by the hand of Khapi (Apis), the son
of Miyaria (Meri-Ra) Hadad-el has taken and has established in his house in
Gaza."

VI. "To the king my lord thus speaks Ebed-Tob thy servant: at the feet of the
king my lord seven times seven I [pg 291] prostrate myself. [Let the king listen to] the
words [of his servant which] have been conveyed to [him].... Let the king know
that all the provinces have united in hostility against me, and let the king
send help to his country. Behold, the country of the cities of Gezer, of Askalon
and of Lachish have given them food, oil, and whatever they wanted; so let the
king send help to the troops and despatch troops against the men who have
committed sin against the king my lord. If troops come this year, then there
will remain both provinces and governors to the king my lord; but if no troops
arrive, there will remain no provinces or governors to the king my lord. Behold,
this country of the city of Jerusalem neither my father nor my mother has given
to me; the arm of the Mighty King gave it to me, even to me. Behold, this is the
deed of Malchiel and the deed of the sons of Labai, who have given the country
of the king to the Khabiri. Behold, O king my lord, be just towards me as
regards the Babylonians; let the king ask the Commissioners whether they have
acted violently (?). But they have taken upon themselves a very grievous sin.
They have taken their goods and ... let the king ask (them); they had abundance
of food, abundance of oil and abundance of clothes, until Pauru the Commissioner
of the king came up to the country of the city of Jerusalem, and Adai revolted,
together with the garrison and the dependents upon the king. Let the king know
that (Pauru) said to me: Adai has revolted from me, do not leave the city. This
[year] send me a garrison and a royal Commissioner. Let thy favour be towards
me. I have sent to the king my lord 5000 prisoners and ... tribute-bearers. The
caravans of the king have been robbed in the field of Ajalon. Let the king my
lord know that I am not able to send a caravan to the king my lord according to
thy instructions. Behold, the king has established his name in the country of
Jerusalem for ever, and he cannot forsake the territory of the city of
Jerusalem.—To the Secretary of the king my lord, Ebed-Tob [pg 292] thy servant. At thy feet I fall: I
am thy servant. Make a clear report of my words to the king my lord, that I am
the vassal of the king. Abundance of good fortune to thee!—And thou hast
performed deeds I cannot enumerate against the men of the land of Cush. ... bana
is not slain. There are Babylonians in my house. Let the king my lord ask in
regard to them..."

LETTER OF SUWARDATUM TO AMENOPHIS IV.

"To the king my lord, my gods, my Sun-god, thus speaks Suwardata thy servant,
the dust of thy feet: at the feet of the king my lord, my gods, my Sun-god,
seven times seven I prostrate myself. The king my lord directed me to make war
in the city of Keilah; I made war; it is (now) at peace with me; my city is
restored to me. Why does Ebed-Tob send to the men of Keilah, saying: 'Take
silver and march after me'? And the king my lord knows that Ebed-Tob has taken
my city out of my hand. Again let the king my lord inquire whether I have taken
a man, or an ox, or an ass from him or his jurisdiction. Again Labai is the
conspirator who had taken our cities, and now Labai has taken Ebed-Tob, and they
have taken our cities. And the king knows. To his servant let him grant power,
for I did not know they had done anything until the king had sent an account of
it to his servant."

LETTER FROM LABAI TO AMENOPHIS IV.

"To the king my lord and my Sun-god thus (speaks) Labai thy servant and the
dust of thy feet: at the feet of the king my lord and my Sun-god, seven times
seven I prostrate myself. I have heard the words which the king has sent to me,
and here am I, and the king apportions his [pg 293] country unto me. Behold, I am a faithful
servant of the king, and I have not sinned, and I have not offended, and I do
not withhold my tribute, and I do not refuse the requests of the Commissioner
that is set over me. Behold, they have slandered me, and the king my lord will
not be hard on my offence. Again it is an offence in me that I have entered the
city of Gezer and ordered the city to assemble, saying, 'The king has taken my
property and the property of Malchiel.' How could I know what Malchiel has done
against me? Again the king has written to Bin-Sumya; he does not know that
Bin-Sumya has marched along with the Bedâwin, and lo, I have delivered him into
the hand of Adda-dan. Again, if the king sends for my wife, how shall I withhold
her; and if the king writes to myself, 'Plunge an iron sword in thy heart and
die,' how shall I not perform the commandment of the king?" [pg 294]

IV

THE MOABITE STONE

(See page
112)

1. I am Mesha the son of Chemosh-melech, king of Moab, the Dibonite.

2. My father reigned over Moab thirty years, and I reigned

3. after my father. I made this monument to (the god) Chemosh at Korkhah, as
a monument

4. of salvation, for he saved me from all invaders, and let me see my desire
upon all my enemies. Omri

5. was king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab many days, for Chemosh was angry
with his

6. land. His son followed him, and he also said: I will oppress Moab. In my
days [Chemosh] said:

7. I will see my desire on him and his house, and Israel shall surely perish
for ever. Omri took the land of

8. Medeba (Numb. xxi. 30), and [Israel] dwelt in it during his days and half
the days of his son, altogether forty years. But there dwelt in it

9. Chemosh in my days. I built Baal-Meon (Josh. xiii. 17) and made therein
the reservoirs; I built

10. Kirjathain (Numb, xxxii. 37). The men of Gad dwelt in the land of Ataroth
(Numb, xxxii. 3) from of old, and the king of Israel built there

11. (the town) of Ataroth; but I made war against the town and took it. And I
slew all the [people]

12. of the town, for the pleasure of Chemosh and Moab. I [pg 295] took from thence
the Ariel (champion) of (the god) Doda and tore

13. him before Chemosh in Kerioth (Jer. xlviii. 24). And I placed therein the
men of Sharon and the men

14. of Me-khereth. And Chemosh said unto me: Go, seize Nebo upon Israel;
and

15. I went in the night and fought against it from the break of dawn till
noon; and I took

16. it, and slew all (therein), 7000 men, [boys], women, [girls],

17. and female slaves, and devoted them to Ashtor-Chemosh. And I took from it
the Ariels of Yahveh, and tore them before Chemosh. And the king of Israel had
built

18. Jahaz (Isa. xv. 4), and dwelt in it, whilst he waged war against me,
(but) Chemosh drove him out before me. And

19. I brought from Moab 200 men, all chiefs, and carried them to Jahaz, which
I took

20. to add to it Dibon. I built Korkhah, the wall of the forests and the
wall

21. of the citadel: I built its gates and I built its towers. And

22. I built the temple of Moloch, and I made sluices of the water-ditches in
the middle

23. of the town. And there was no cistern in the middle of the town of
Korkhah, and I said to all the people: Make for

24. yourselves every man a cistern in his house. And I dug the canals for
Korkhah by means of the prisoners

25. of Israel. I built Aroer and I made the road in [the province of] the
Arnon. [And]

26. I built Beth-Bamoth, for it was destroyed. I built Bezer (Deut. iv. 43),
for [it was] in ruins.

27. [And all the chiefs] of Dibou were fifty, for all Dibon was subject (to
me); and I placed [pg
296]

28. 100 [chiefs] in the towns which I added to the land. I built

29. Beth-Medeba (Numb. xxi. 30), and Beth-diblathain (Jer. xlviii. 22), and
Beth-baal-meon, and transported thereto the ...

30. [and the shepherds] of the flocks of the land. And at Horonaim (Isa. xv.
5) there dwelt...

31. ... And Chemosh said unto me: Go down, make war upon Horonaim. I went
down [and made war]

32. [and took the city]; and Chemosh dwelt in it in my days. I went up from
thence ...

33. ... And I ... [pg
297]

VII

THE TREATY BETWEEN RAMSES II. AND THE HITTITES (Brugsch's
Translation)

(See page
79)

In the year 21, in the month of Tybi, on the 21st day of the month, in the
reign of King Ramessu Mi-Amun, the dispenser of life eternally and for ever, the
worshipper of the divinities Amun-Ra (of Thebes), Hor-em-khu (of Heliopolis),
Ptah (of Memphis), Mut the lady of the Asher Lake (at Karnak), and Khonsu the
peace-loving, there took place a public sitting on the throne of Horus among the
living, resembling his father, Hor-em-khu in eternity, in eternity,
evermore.

On that day the king was in the city of Ramses, presenting his
peace-offerings to his father Amun-Ra and to the gods Hor-em-khu-Tum, the lord
of Heliopolis (On), and to Amun of Ramessu Mi-Amun, to Ptah of Ramessu Mi-Amun,
and to Sutekh, the strong, the son of Nut the goddess of heaven, that they might
grant to him many thirty years' jubilee feasts, and innumerable happy years, and
the subjection of all peoples under his feet for ever.

Then came forward the ambassador of the king and the governor [of his house,
by name ..., and presented the ambassadors] of the great king of the Hittites,
Khata-sir, who were sent to Pharaoh to propose friendship with the king Ramessu
Mi-Amun, the dispenser of life, eternally and for ever, just as his father, the
Sun-god [dispenses it] each day. [pg 298]

This is the copy of the contents of the silver tablet which the great king of
the Hittites, Khata-sir, had caused to be made, and which was presented to the
Pharaoh by the hand of his ambassador Tar-tisubu and his ambassador Rames, to
propose friendship to the king Ramessu Mi-Amun, the bull among the princes, who
places his boundary-marks where it pleases him in all lands.

The treaty which had been proposed by the great king of the Hittites,
Khata-sir, the powerful, the son of Mar-sir, the great king of the Hittites, the
powerful, the grandson of Sapalili, the great king of the Hittites, the
powerful, on the silver tablet, to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt,
the powerful—this was a good treaty for friendship and concord, which assured
peace [and established concord] for a longer period than was previously the case
for a long time. For it was the agreement of the great prince of Egypt in common
with the great king of the Hittites that the god should not allow enmity to
exist between them, on the basis of a treaty.

To wit, in the times of Mutal, the great king of the Hittites, my brother, he
was at war with [Meneptah Seti I.] the great prince of Egypt.

But now, from this very day forward, Khata-sir, the great king of the
Hittites, shall look upon this treaty so that the agreement may remain which the
Sun-god Ra has made, which the god Sutekh has made, for the people of Egypt and
for the people of the Hittites, that there should be no enmity between them for
evermore.

And these are the contents:—

Khata-sir, the great king of the Hittites, is in covenant with Ramessu
Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, from this very day forward, that there may
subsist a good friendship and a good understanding between them for
evermore.

He shall be my ally; he shall be my friend. I will be his ally; I will be his
friend, for ever.

To wit: in the time of Mutal, the great king of the Hittites, [pg 299] his brother
Khata-sir, after his murder, placed himself on the throne of his father as the
great king of the Hittites I strove for friendship with Ramessu Mi-Amun, the
great prince of Egypt, and it is [my wish] that the friendship and the concord
may be better than the friendship and the concord which before existed, and
which was broken.

I declare: I, the great king of the Hittites, will hold together with
[Ramessu Mi-Amun] the great prince of Egypt, in good friendship and good
concord. The sons of the sons of the great king of the Hittites will hold
together and be friends with the sons of the sons of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great
prince of Egypt.

In virtue of our treaty for concord, and in virtue of our agreement [for
friendship, let the people] of Egypt [be bound in friendship] with the people of
the Hittites. Let a like friendship and a like concord subsist in such measure
for ever.

Never let enmity rise between them. Never let the great king of the Hittites
invade the land of Egypt, if anything has been plundered from it (i.e. the land
of the Hittites). Never let Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, overstep
the boundary [of the land of the Hittites], if anything shall have been
plundered from [the land of Egypt].

The just treaty which existed in the times of Sapalili, the great king of the
Hittites, likewise the just treaty which existed in the times of Mutal, the
great king of the Hittites, my brother, that will I keep.

Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, declares that he will keep it.
[We have come to an understanding about it] with one another at the same time
from this day forward, and we will fulfil it, and will act in a righteous
manner.

If another shall come as an enemy to the lands of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great
prince of Egypt, then let him send an embassy to the great king of the Hittites
to this effect: "Come and make me stronger than him." Then shall the [pg 300] great king of the
Hittites [assemble his warriors], and the king of the Hittites [shall come] and
smite his enemies. But if it should not be the wish of the great king of the
Hittites to march out in person, then he shall send his warriors and his
chariots that they may smite his enemies. Otherwise [he would incur] the wrath
of Ramessu Mi-Amun [the great prince of Egypt. And if Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great
prince of Egypt, should banish for a crime] subjects from his country, and they
should commit further crime against him, then shall the king of the Hittites
come forward to kill them. The great king of the Hittites shall act in common
with [the great prince of Egypt].

[If another should come as an enemy to the lands of the great king of the
Hittites, then shall he send an embassy to the great prince of Egypt with the
request that] he would come in great power to kill his enemies; and if it be the
intention of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, (himself) to come, he
shall [smite the enemies of the great king of the Hittites. If it is not the
intention of the great prince of Egypt to march out in person, then he shall
send his warriors and his two-] horse chariots, while he sends back the answer
to the people of the Hittites.

If any subjects of the great king of the Hittites have offended him, then
Ramessu Mi-Amun [the great prince of Egypt, shall not receive them in his land,
but shall advance to kill them] ... the oath with the wish to say, I will go ...
until ... Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, living for ever ... that
he may be given for them (?) to the lord, and that Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great
prince of Egypt, may speak according to his agreement for evermore ...

[If servants shall flee away] out of the territories of Ramessu Mi-Amun [the
great prince of Egypt, to betake themselves to] the great king of the Hittites,
the great king of the Hittites shall not receive them, but the great king of the
Hittites shall give them up to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt [that
they may be punished]. [pg
301]

If servants of Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, leave his country
and betake themselves to the land of the Hittites, to make themselves servants
of another, they shall not remain in the land of the Hittites [but shall be
given up] to Ramessu Mi-Amuu, the great prince of Egypt.

If, on the other hand, there should flee away [servants of the great king of
the Hittites, in order to betake themselves to] Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great
prince of Egypt [in order to stay in Egypt], then those who have come from the
land of the Hittites in order to betake themselves to Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great
prince of Egypt, shall not be [received] by Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of
Egypt, (but) the great prince of Egypt, Ramessu Mi-Amun, [shall deliver them up
to the great king of the Hittites].

[And if there shall leave the land of the Hittites persons] of skilled mind,
so that they come to the land of Egypt to make themselves servants of another,
then Ramessu Mi-Amun shall not allow them to settle, he shall deliver them up to
the great king of the Hittites.

When this [treaty] shall be known [by the inhabitants of the land of Egypt
and of the land of the Hittites, then shall they not offend against it, for all
that stands written upon] the silver tablet, these are words which will have
been approved by the company of the gods, among the male deities and among the
female deities, among those namely of the land of the Hittites, and by the
company of the gods, among the male deities and among the female deities, among
those namely of the land of Egypt. They are witnesses for me [to the validity]
of these words.

This is the catalogue of the gods of the land of the Hittites:—

[Sutekh of the city of] Tump (Tennib). Sutekh of the land of the Hittites.
Sutekh of the city of Arnema. Sutekh of the city of Zaranda, [pg 302] Sutekh of the
city of Pairaka. Sutekh of the city of Khisasap. Sutekh of the city of Sarsu.
Sutekh of the city of Aleppo. Sutekh of the city of ... [Sutekh of the city of
...] Sutekh of the city of Sarpina. Astartha of the land of the Hittites. The
god of the land of Zaiath-Khirri. The god of the land of Ka ... The god of the
land of Kher ... The goddess of the city of Akh ... [The goddess of the city
of ... ] and of the land of A ... ua. The goddess of the land of Zaina. The
god of the land of ... nath ... er.

[I have invoked these male and these] female [deities of the land of the
Hittites; these are the gods] of the land, as [witnesses to] my oath. [With them
have been associated the male and the female deities] of the mountains and of
the rivers of the land of the Hittites, the gods of the land of Kazawadana
(Cappadocia), Amun, Ra, Sutekh, and the male and female deities of the land of
Egypt, of the earth, of the sea, of the winds, and of the storms.

With regard to the commandment which the silver tablet contains for the
people of the Hittites and for the people of Egypt, he who shall not observe it
shall be given over [to the vengeance] of the company of the gods of the
Hittites, and shall be given over [to the vengeance of the] company of the gods
of Egypt, [he] and his house and his servants.

But he who shall observe these commandments which the silver tablet contains,
whether he be of the people of the Hittites or [of the people of the Egyptians],
because he has not neglected them, the company of the gods of the land of the
Hittites, and the company of the gods of the land of Egypt shall secure his
reward and preserve life [for him] and [pg 303] his servants, and those who are with him and
with his servants.

If there flee away [one] of the inhabitants [from the land of Egypt], or two,
or three, and they betake themselves to the great king of the Hittites, the
great king of the Hittites shall take them and send them back to Ramessu
Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt.

Now with regard to the inhabitant of the land of Egypt who is delivered up to
Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great prince of Egypt, his fault shall not be avenged upon
him, his house shall not be taken away, nor his wife nor his children. He shall
not be put to death, neither shall he be mutilated in his eyes, nor in his ears,
nor in his mouth, nor on the soles of his feet, so that thus no crime shall be
brought forward against him.

In the same way shall it be done if inhabitants of the land of the Hittites
take to flight, be it one alone or two or three, to betake themselves to Ramessu
Mi-Amun, the great king of Egypt; Ramessu Mi-Amun, the great king of Egypt,
shall cause them to be seized, and they shall be delivered up to the great
prince of the Hittites.

With regard to him who is delivered up, his crime shall not be brought
forward against him. His house shall not be destroyed, nor his wife, nor his
children; he shall not be put to death, he shall not be mutilated in his eyes,
nor in his ears, nor on his mouth, nor on the soles of his feet, nor shall any
accusation be brought forward against him.

That which is in the middle of this silver tablet and on its front side is a
likeness of the god Sutekh embracing the great prince of the Hittites,
surrounded by an inscription to this effect: "The seal of the god Sutekh the
sovereign of heaven," and "The seal of the writing made by Khata-sir, the great
and powerful prince of the Hittites, the son of Mar-sir, the great and powerful
prince of the Hittites." That which is in the middle of the frame is the seal of
Sutekh the sovereign of heaven. [pg 304] That which is on the other side (of the tablet)
is the likeness of the god of the Hittites embracing the great princess of the
Hittites, surrounded by an inscription to the following effect: "The seal of the
Sun-god of the city of Iranna, the lord of the earth," and "The seal of
Puu-khipa, the great princess of the land of the Hittites, the daughter of the
land of Qazawadana, the [servant of the goddess Iskhara of] Iranna, the regent
of the earth; the servant of the goddess." That which is in the middle of the
frame is the seal of the Sun-god of Iranna, the lord of all the earth. [pg 305]

VIII

THE TRAVELS OF A MOHAR

A SATIRICAL ACCOUNT OF A TOURIST'S MISADVENTURES IN CANAAN, WRITTEN IN THE
TIME OF RAMSES II., THE PHARAOH OF THE OPPRESSION

(See page
189)

I will portray for thee the likeness of a Mohar; I will let thee know what he
does. Thou hast not gone to the land of the Hittites, nor hast thou beheld the
land of Aupa. The appearance of Khatuma thou knowest not. Likewise the land of
Igadai, what is it like? The Zar (Plain) of Sesostris and the city of Aleppo are
on none of its sides. How is its ford? Thou hast not taken thy road to Kadesh
(on the Orontes) and Tubikhi (the Tibhath of 1 Chr. xviii. 8), neither hast thou
gone to the Shasu (Bedâwin) with numerous foreign soldiers, neither hast thou
trodden the way to the Magharat (the caves of the Magoras near Beyrout), where
the heaven is dark in the daytime. The place is planted with maple trees, oaks,
and acacias, which reach up to heaven, full of beasts, bears and lions, and
surrounded by Shasu in all directions. Thou hast not gone up to the mountain of
Shaua (in the northern Lebanon), neither hast thou trodden it; there thy hands
hold fast to the [rein] of thy chariot; a jerk has shaken thy horses in drawing
it. I pray thee, let us go to the city of Beeroth (cisterns). Thou must hasten
to its ascent, after thou hast passed over its ford in front of it.

Do thou explain the attraction to be a Mohar! Thy [pg 306] chariot lies there [before] thee;
thy [strength] has fallen lame; thou treadest the backward path at eventide. All
thy limbs are ground small. Thy [bones] are broken to pieces. Sweet is [sleep].
Thou awakest. There has been a time for a thief in this unfortunate night. Thou
wast alone, in the belief that the brother could not come to the brother. Some
grooms entered into the stable; the horse kicks out; the thief goes back in the
night; thy clothes are stolen. Thy groom wakes up in the night; he sees what has
happened to him; he takes what is left, he goes to the evil-doers, he mixes
himself up with the tribes of the Shasu. He acts as if he were an Amu (Asiatic).
The enemies come, they [feel about] for the robber. He is discovered, and is
immovable from terror. Thou awakest, thou findest no trace of them, for they
have carried off thy property.

Become (again) a Mohar, who is fully accoutred. Let thy ear be full of that
which I relate to thee besides.

The town 'Hidden'—such is the meaning of its name Gebal—what is its state?
Its goddess (we will speak of) at another time. Thou hast not visited it. Be
good enough to look out for Beyrout, Sidon, and Sarepta. Where are the fords of
the land of Nazana? The land of Usu (Palætyrus), what is its state? They speak
of another city in the sea, Tyre the haven is her name. Drinking water is
brought to her in boats. She is richer in fish than in sand. I will tell thee of
something else. Dangerous is it to enter into Zorah. Thou wilt say it is burning
with a very painful sting (?) Mohar, come! Go forward on the way to the land of
Pa-Kâkina. Where is the road to Achshaph? Towards no city. Pray look at the
mountain of User. How is its crest? Where is the mountain of Shechem? Who can
surmount it? Mohar, whither must you take a journey to the city of Hazor? How is
its ford? Let me (choose) the road to Hamath, Dagara, (and) Dagar-el. Here is
the road where all Mohars meet. Be good enough to spy out its road, cast a look
on Yâ ... When one goes to the land of [pg 307] Adamim, to what is one opposite? Do not draw
back, but instruct us! Guide us that we may know, thou leader!

I will name to thee other cities besides these. Thou hast not gone to the
land of Takhis, Kafir-Malona, Tamnah, Kadesh, Dapul, Azai, Har-Nammata, nor hast
thou beheld Kirjath-eneb near Beth-Sopher (Kirjath-Sepher or Debir); nor dost
thou know Adullam (and) Zidiputha, nor dost thou know any better the name of
Khalza in the land of Aupa, the bull on its frontiers (?). Here is the place
where all the mighty warriors are seen. Be good enough to look and see how Qina
is situated, and tell me about Rehob. Describe Beth-sha-el (Bethel) along with
Tarqa-el. The ford of the land of the Jordan, how is it crossed? Teach me to
know the passage in order to enter into the city of Megiddo which lies in front
of it. Verily thou art a Mohar, well skilled in the work of the strong hand.
Pray, is there found a Mohar like thee, to place at the head of the army, or a
seigneur who can beat thee in shooting?

Drive along the edge of the precipice, on the slippery height, over a depth
of 2000 cubits, full of rocks and boulders. Thou takest thy way back in a
zigzag, thou bearest thy bow, thou takest the iron in thy left hand. Thou
lettest the old men see, if their eyes are good, how, worn-out with fatigue,
thou supportest thyself with thy hand. Il est perdu, le chameau, le Mohar! Eh
bien!18
Make to thyself a name among the Mohars and the knights of the land of Egypt.
Let thy name be like that of Qazirnai the lord of Aser, because he discovered
lions in the interior of the balsam-forest of Baka at the narrow passes, which
are rendered dangerous by the Shasu who lie in ambush among the trees. (The
lions) measured fourteen cubits by five cubits. Their noses reached to the soles
of their feet. Of a grim appearance, without softness, they cared not for [pg 308] caresses. Thou art
alone, no stronger one is with thee, no armée is behind thee, no Ariel
(see 2 Sam. xxiii. 20, Isa. xxix. 1) who prepares the way for thee, and gives
thee counsel on the road before thee. Thou knowest not the road. The hair on thy
head stands on end; it bristles up. Thy soul is given into thy hands. Thy path
is full of rocks and boulders, there is no way out near; it is overgrown with
creepers and wolf's-foot. Abysses are on one side of thee, the mountain and the
wall of rock on the other. Thou drivest in against it. The chariot jumps on
which thou art. Thou art troubled to hold up thy horses. If it falls into the
abyss, the pole drags thee down too. Thy ceintures are pulled away. They
fall down. Thou shacklest the horse, because the pole is broken on the path of
the narrow pass. Not knowing how to tie it up, thou understandest not how it is
to be repaired. The essieu is left on the spot, as the load is too heavy
for the horses. Thy courage has evaporated. Thou beginnest to run. The heaven is
cloudless. Thou art thirsty; the enemy is behind thee; a trembling seizes thee;
a twig of thorny acacia worries thee; thou thrustest it aside; the horse is
scratched, till at length thou findest rest.

Explain thou thy attraction to be a Mohar!

Thou comest into Joppa. Thou findest the date-palm in full bloom in its time.
Thou openest wide the aperture of thy mouth in order to eat. Thou findest that
the maid who keeps the garden is fair. She does whatever thou wantest of her....
Thou art recognised, thou art brought to trial, and owest thy preservation to
being a Mohar. Thy girdle of the finest stuff, thou payest it as the price of a
bad rag. Thou sleepest every evening with a rug of fur over thee. Thou sleepest
a deep sleep, for thou art weary. A thief takes thy bow and thy sword from thy
side; thy quiver and thy armour are broken to pieces in the darkness; thy pair
of horses run away. The groom takes his course over a slippery path that rises
in front of him. He breaks thy chariot in pieces; he follows thy foot-tracks.
[He finds] thy equipments, [pg 309] which had fallen on the ground, and had sunk
into the sand, leaving only an empty space.

Prayer does not avail thee; even when thy mouth says: "Give food in addition
to water that I may reach my goal in safety," they are deaf and will not hear.
They say not yes to thy words. The iron-workers enter into the smithy; they
rummage in the workshops of the carpenters; the handi-craftsmen and soldiers are
at hand; they do whatever thou requirest. They put together thy chariot: they
put aside the parts of it that have been made useless; thy spokes are
façonné quite new; thy wheels are put on, they put the courroies
on the axles and on the hinder part; they splice thy yoke, they put on the box
of thy chariot; the [workmen] in iron forge the ...; they put the ring that is
wanting on thy whip, they replace the lunières upon it.

Thou goest quickly onward to fight on the battlefield, to do the deeds of a
strong hand and of firm courage.

Before I wrote I sought me out a Mohar who knows his power, who leads the
jeunesse, a chief in the armée [who goes forward] even to the end
of the world.

Answer me not, "That is good, this is bad;" repeat not to me thy opinion.
Come, I will tell thee all which lies before thee at the end of thy journey.

I begin for thee with the palace of Sesostris (Ramses II.). Thou hast not set
foot in it by force. Thou hast not eaten the fish in the brook of .... Thou hast
not washed thyself in it. With thy permission I will remind thee of Huzana (near
El-Arish); where is its fortress? Come, I pray thee, to the palace of the land
of Uzi, of Sesostris Osymandyas in his victories, to Saz-el together with
Absaqbu. I will inform thee of the land of Ainin (the Two Springs), the customs
of which thou knowest not. The land of the lake of Nakhai and the land of
Rehoburtha (Rehoboth, Gen. xxvi. 22) thou hast not seen since thou wast born, O
Mohar. Rapih (the modern boundary between Egypt and Turkey) is widely extended.
What is its wall like? It extends for a mile in the direction of Gaza.

Footnote
18: (return)

By the use of French words and expressions Brugsch endeavours to represent
the Canaanitish terms which the Egyptian writer has affectedly introduced into
his work.

[pg
310]

IX

THE NEGATIVE CONFESSION OF THE EGYPTIANS

(Sir P. Le Page Renouf's Translation)

(See page
186)

The 125th chapter of the Book of the Dead contains the confession which the
soul of the dead man was required to make before Osiris and the forty-two divine
judges of the dead, before he could be justified and admitted to the Paradise of
Aalu:—

Said on arriving at the Hall of Righteousness, that N (the soul of the dead
man) may be loosed from all the sins which he hath committed, and that he may
look upon the divine countenances.

He saith:—Hail to thee, mighty God, lord of Righteousness!

I am come to thee, O my Lord! I have brought myself that I may look upon thy
glory. I know thee, and I know the name of the forty-two gods who make their
appearance with thee in the Hall of Righteousness; devouring those who harbour
mischief and swallowing their blood, upon the day of the searching examination
in the presence of Un-neferu (Osiris).

Verily "Thou of the Pair of Eyes, Lord of Righteousness," is thy name.

Here am I; I am come to thee; I bring to thee Right and have put a stop to
Wrong.

I am not a doer of wrong to men.

I am not one who slayeth his kindred.

I am not one who telleth lies instead of truth. [pg 311]

I am not conscious of treason.

I am not a doer of mischief.

I do not exact as the first-fruits of each day more work than should be done
for me.

My name cometh not to the Bark of the god who is at the Helm.

I am not a transgressor against the God.

I am not a tale-bearer.

I am not a detractor.

I am not a doer of that which the gods abhor.

I hurt no servant with his master.

I cause no famine.

I cause not weeping.

I am not a murderer.

I give not orders for murder.

I cause not suffering to men.

I reduce not the offering in the temples.

I lessen not the cakes of the gods.

I rob not the dead of their funereal food.

I am not an adulterer.

I am undefiled in the sanctuary of the god of my domain.

I neither increase nor diminish the measures of grain.

I am not one who shorteneth the palm's length.

I am not one who cutteth short the field's measurement.

I put not pressure upon the beam of the balance.

I snatch not the milk from the mouth of infants.

I drive not the cattle from their pastures.

I net not the birds of the manors of the gods.

I catch not the fish of their ponds.

I stop not the water at its appointed time.

I divide not an arm of the water in its course.

I extinguish not the lamp during its appointed time.

I do not defraud the Divine Circle of their sacrificial joints.

I drive not away the cattle of the sacred estate.

I stop not a god when he cometh forth.

I am pure, I am pure, I am pure, I am pure! [pg 312]

X

LETTERS OF KHAMMURABI OR AMMURAPI (THE AMRAPHEL OP GEN. xiv. 1) TO
SIN-IDINNAM, KING OF LARSA (THE ELLASAR OF GENESIS)

I. "To Sin-idinnam thus says Khammurabi: The goddesses of the land of
Emudbalum restored your courage to you on the day of the defeat of
Kudur-Laghghamar (Chedor-laomer). Because they have supported you among the army
of thy hand, turn back the army and let them restore the goddesses to their own
seats."

II. "To Sin-idinnam thus says Khummarabi: When you have seen this letter you
will understand in regard to Amil-Samas and Nur-Nintu, the sons of Gisdubba,
that if they are in Larsa or in the territory of Larsa you will order them to be
sent away, and that one of your servants on whom you can depend shall take them
and bring them to Babylon."

III. "To Sin-idinnam thus says Khammurabi: As to the officials who have
resisted you in the accomplishment of their work, do not impose upon them any
additional task, but oblige them to do what they ought to have performed, and
then remove them from the influence of him who has brought them."

Sin-idinnam seems to have been the legitimate prince of Larsa, who had been
expelled from his dominions by the Elamite invader Eri-Aku or Arioch, and had
taken refuge at the court of Khammurabi in Babylon. After the overthrow of the
Elamites, Sin-idinnam was restored by Khammurabi to his ancestral principality.
[pg 313]

XI

THE BABYLONIAN ACCOUNT OF THE DELUGE

1. Sisuthros spake thus unto him, even to Gilgames:

2. 'Let me reveal unto thee, O Gilgames, the tale of my preservation,

3. and the oracle of the gods let me declare unto thee.

4. The city of Surippak, which, as thou knowest, is built [on the bank] of
the Euphrates,

5. this city was (already) old when the gods within it

6. set their hearts to cause a flood, even the great gods

7. [as many as] exist: Anu the father of them,

8. the warrior Bel their prince,

9. Bir their throne-bearer, En-nugi (Hades) their chief.

10. Ea the lord of wisdom conferred with them, and

11. repeated their words to the reed-bed: 'Reed-bed, O reed-bed! Frame, O
frame!

12. Hear, O reed-bed, and understand, O frame!

13. O man of Surippak, son of Ubara-Tutu,

14. frame the house, build a ship: leave what thou canst; seek life!

15. Resign (thy) goods, and cause thy soul to live,

16. and bring all the seed of life into the midst of the ship.

17. As for the ship which thou shalt build,

18. ... cubits shall be in measurement its length;

19. and ... cubits the extent of its breadth and its height.

20. Into the deep [then] launch it.'

21. I understood and spake to Ea my lord: [pg 314]

22. 'As for the building of the ship, O my lord, which thou hast ordered
thus,

23. I will observe and accomplish it.

24. [But what] shall I answer the city, the people and the old men?'

25. [Ea opened his mouth and] says, he speaks to his servant, even to me:

26. ['If they question thee] thou shalt say unto them:

27. Since (?) Bel is estranged from me and

28. I will not dwell in your city, I will not lay my head [in] the land of
Bel;

29. but I will descend into the deep; with [Ea] my lord will I dwell.

30. (Bel) will rain fertility on you,

31. [flocks] of birds, shoals of fish.'

Lines 32 to 42 are lost.

43. On the fifth day I laid the plan of it (i.e. the ship);

44. in its hull (?) its walls were 10 gar (120 cubits?) high;

45. 10 gar were the size of its upper part.'

Another version of the account of the Deluge, of which a fragment has been
preserved, puts a wholly different speech into the mouth of Ea, and gives the
hero of the story the name of Adra-Khasis. This fragment is as follows:—

'I will judge him above and below,

[But] shut [not thou thy door]

[until] the time that I shall tell thee of.

[Then] enter the ship, and close the door of the vessel.

[Bring into] it thy corn, thy goods, [thy] property,

thy [wife], thy slaves, thy handmaids, and the sons of [thy]

people,

the [cattle] of the field, the beasts of the field, as many as

I appoint ...

I will tell thee of (the time), and the door [of thy ship]

shall preserve them.'

Adra-Khasis opened his mouth and says,
[pg 315]

he speaks to Ea [his] lord:

'[O my lord,] none has ever made a ship [on this wise]

that it should sail over the land.' ...

Here the fragment is broken off. The other version proceeds thus:—

46. 'I fashioned its side, and closed it in;

47. I built six storeys (?), I divided it into seven parts;

48. its interior I divided into nine parts.

49. I cut worked (?) timber within it.

50. I looked upon the rudder and added what was lacking.

51. I poured 6 sars of pitch over the outside;

52. [I poured] 3 sars of bitumen over the inside;

53. 3 sars of oil did the men carry who brought it ...

54. I gave a sar of oil for the workmen to eat;

55. 2 sars of oil the sailors stored away.

56. For the [workmen?] I slaughtered oxen;

57. I killed [sheep?] daily.

58. Beer, wine, oil and grapes

59. [I distributed among] the people like the waters of a river, and

60. [I kept] a festival like the festival of the new year.

61. ... I dipped my hand [in] oil:

62. [I said to] Samas (the Sun-god): 'The storeys (?) of the ship are
complete;

63. the ... is strong, and

64. the oars (?) I introduced above and below.'

65. [Those who should be saved?] went two-thirds of them.

66. With all I had I filled it; with all the silver I possessed I filled
it;

67. with all the gold I possessed I filled it;

68. with all that I possessed of the seed of life of all kinds I filled
it.

69. I brought into the ship all my slaves and my handmaids,

70. the cattle of the field, the beasts of the field, the sons of my people,
all of them did I bring into it. [pg 316]

71. The Sun-god appointed the time and

72. utters the oracle: 'In the night will I cause the heavens to rain
destruction;

73. enter the ship, and close thy door.'

74. That time drew near whereof he uttered the oracle:

75. 'On this night will I cause the heavens to rain destruction.'

76. I watched with dread the dawning of the day;

77. I feared to behold the day.

78. I entered into the ship and closed my door.

79. When I had closed the ship, to Buzur-sadi-rabi the sailor

80. I entrusted the palace with all its goods.

81. Mu-seri-ina-namari (the waters of the morning at dawn)

82. arose from the horizon of heaven, a black cloud;

83. the storm-god Rimmon thundered in its midst, and

84. Nebo and Merodach the king marched in front;

85. the throne-bearers marched over mountain and plain;

86. the mighty god of death lets loose the whirlwind;

87. Bir marches causing the storm (?) to descend;

88. the spirits of the underworld lifted up (their) torches,

89. with the lightning of them they set on fire the world;

90. the violence of the storm-god reached to heaven;

91. all that was light was turned to [darkness].

92. In the earth like ... [men] perished (?)

Two lines are lost here.

95. Brother beheld not his brother, men knew not one another. In the
heaven

96. the gods feared the deluge, and

97. hastened to ascend to the heaven of Anu.

98. The gods cowered like a dog who lies in a kennel.

99. Istar cried like a woman in travail,

100. the great goddess spoke with a loud voice:

101. 'The former generation is turned to clay.

102. The evil which I prophesied in the presence of the gods,

103. when I prophesied evil in the presence of the gods,

104. I prophesied the storm for the destruction of my people. [pg 317]

105. What I have home, where is it?

106. Like the spawn of the fish it fills the deep.'

107. The gods wept with her because of the spirits of the underworld;

108. the gods sat dejected in weeping,

109. their lips were covered ...

110. Six days and nights

111. rages the wind; the flood and the storm devastate.

112. The seventh day when it arrived the flood ceased, the storm

113. which had fought like an army

114. rested, the sea subsided, and the tempest of the deluge was ended.

115. I beheld the deep and uttered a cry,

116. for the whole of mankind was turned to clay;

117. like the trunks of trees did the bodies float.

118. I opened the window and the light fell upon my face;

119. I stooped, and sat down weeping;

120. over my face ran my tears.

121. I beheld a shore beyond the sea;

122. twelve times distant rose a land.

123. On the mountain of Nizir the ship grounded;

124. the mountain of the country of Nizir held the ship and allowed it not to
float.

125. One day and a second day did the mountain of Nizir hold it.

126. A third day and a fourth day did the mountain of Nizir hold it.

127. A fifth day and a sixth day did the mountain of Nizir hold it.

128. When the seventh day came I sent forth a dove and let it go.

129. The dove went and returned; a resting-place it found not and it turned
back.

130. I sent forth a swallow and let it go; the swallow went and returned;
[pg 318]

131. a resting-place it found not and it turned back.

132. I sent forth a raven and let it go;

133. the raven went and saw the going down of the waters, and

134. it approached, it waded, it croaked and did not turn back.

135. Then I sent forth (everything) to the four points of the compass; I
offered sacrifices;

136. I built an altar on the summit of the mountain.

137. I set libation-vases seven by seven;

138. beneath them I piled up reeds, cedar-wood and herbs.

139. The gods smelt the savour, the gods smelt the sweet savour;

140. the gods gathered like flies over the sacrificer.

141. Already at the moment of her coming, the great goddess

142. lifted up the mighty bow which Anu had made according to his wish
(?).

143. 'These gods,' (she said), 'by my necklace, never will I forget!

144. Those days, I will think of them and never will forget them.

145. Let the gods come to my altar;

146. (but) let not Bel come to my altar,

147. since he did not take counsel but caused a flood and counted my men for
judgment.'

148. Already at the moment of his coming, Bel

149. saw the ship and stood still;

150. he was filled with wrath at the gods, the spirits of heaven,
(saying):

151. 'Let no living soul come forth, let no man survive in the judgment!'

152. Bir opened his mouth and says, he speaks to the warrior Bel:

153. 'Who except Ea can devise a speech?

154. for Ea understands all kinds of wisdom.' [pg 319]

155. Ea opened his mouth and speaks, he says to the warrior Bel:

156. 'Thou art the seer of the gods, O warrior!

157. Why, O why didst thou not take counsel, but didst cause a deluge?

158. (Let) the sinner bear his own sin, (let) the evil-doer bear his own
evil-doing.

159. Grant (?) that he be not cut off, be merciful that he be not
[destroyed].

160. Instead of causing a deluge, let lions come and minish mankind;

161. instead of causing a deluge, let hyænas come and minish mankind;

162. instead of causing a deluge, let there be a famine and let it [devour]
the land;

163. instead of causing a deluge, let the plague-god come and minish
mankind!

164. I did not reveal (to men) the oracle of the great gods,

165. but sent a dream to Adra-khasis and he heard the oracle of the
gods.'

166. Then Bel again took counsel and ascended into the ship.

167. He took my hand and caused me, even me, to ascend,

168. he took up my wife (also, and) caused her to bow at my side;

169. he turned to us and stood between us; he blessed us (saying):

170. 'Hitherto Sisuthros has been mortal, but

171. henceforth Sisuthros and his wife shall be like unto the gods, even unto
us, and

172. Sisuthros shall dwell afar at the mouth of the rivers,'

173. Then he took us afar, at the mouth of the rivers he made us dwell. [pg 320]

XII

THE BABYLONIAN EPIC OF THE CREATION

TABLET I.

When the heaven above was not yet named

or the earth beneath had recorded a name,

the primæval (ristû) deep was their generator,

Mummu-Tiamat (the chaos of the sea) was the mother of

them all.

Their waters were embosomed together, and

the corn-field was unharvested, the reed-bed was ungrown.

When the gods had not yet appeared, any one of them,

by no name were they recorded, no destiny [was fixed].

Then the great gods were created,

Lakhmu and Lakhamu issued forth [the first],

until they grew up [when]

Ansar and Kisar (the upper and lower firmaments) were

created.

Long were the days, extended [was the time, till]

the gods [Anu, Bel, and Ea were born],

Ansar [and Kisar gave them birth].

The deep [opened] its mouth [and said,]

to [Tiamat], the glorious, [it spake]:

While their path ...

I will overthrow their path ...

Let lamentations arise, let complaining [be made]

[When] Tiamat [undertakes] this [work]

[pg 321]

Their way shall be difficult ...

[Then] the god Mummu answered [his] father the deep:

Their way [shall be overthrown],

the light shall be darkened, let [it be] as the night!

The deep [heard] him and [his] countenance was lightened;

evil planned they against the gods.

Tiamat, the mother of the gods, lifted up herself against

them,

gathering her forces, madly raging.

The gods united themselves together with her,

until (all) that had been created marched at her side.

Banning the day they followed Tiamat,

wrathful, devising mischief, untiring (?) day and night,

prepared for the conflict, fiercely raging,

they gathered themselves together and began the battle.

The mother of the deep (?) (Khubur), the creatress of them all,

added victorious weapons, creating monstrous serpents,

with sharp fangs, unsparing in their attack.

With poison for blood she filled their bodies.

Horrible adders she clothed with terror,

she decked them with fear, and raised high their ...

'May their appearance ...

Make huge their bodies that none may withstand their

breast!'

She created the adder, the horrible serpent, the Lakhamu,

the great monster, the raging dog, the scorpion-man,

the dog-days, the fish-man and the (Zodiacal) ram,

who carry weapons that spare not, who fear not the battle,

insolent of heart, unconquerable by the enemy.

Moreover that she might create (?) eleven such-like monsters,

among the gods, her sons, whom she had summoned together,

she raised up Kingu, and magnified him among them:

'To march before the host, be that thy duty!
[pg 322]

Order the weapons to be uplifted and the onset of battle!'

That he might be the first in the conflict, the leader in

victory,

she took his hand and set him on a throne:

'I have uttered the spell for thee; exalt thyself among the

gods,

assume dominion over all the gods!

Highly shalt thou be exalted, thou that art alone my

husband;

thy name shall be magnified over [all the world]!'

Then she gave to him the tablets of destiny, and laid them

on his breast:

'Let thy command be obeyed, let the word of thy mouth be

established!'

When Kingu had exalted himself, and made himself like

Anu (the god of heaven),

she determined for the gods her sons their destiny:

'The opening of your mouth shall quench the fire;

The exalted of Kidmuri (i.e. Kingu) shall dissolve its
flame.'

TABLET II.

(Begins with a speech of Ansar to Merodach.)

"Tiamat our mother has risen up against us,

gathering her forces, madly raging.

The gods have united themselves together with her,

until (all) that has been created marches at her side.

Banning the day they have followed Tiamat,

wrathful, devising mischief, untiring (?) day and night,

prepared for the conflict, fiercely raging,

they have gathered themselves together and begun the battle.

The mother of the deep (?), the creatress of them all,

has added victorious weapons, creating monstrous serpents,

with sharp fangs, unsparing in their attack.
[pg 323]

With poison for blood she has filled their bodies.

Horrible adders she has clothed with terror,

she has decked them with fear, and raised high their ...

'May their appearance ...

may their bodies be huge so that none may withstand their

breast!'

She has created the adder, the horrible serpent, the Lakh-amu,

the great monster, the raging dog, the scorpion-man,

the dog-days, the fish-man (Aquarius), and the (Zodiacal)

ram,

who carry weapons that spare not, who fear not the battle,

insolent of heart, unconquerable by the enemy.

Moreover that she may create (?) eleven such-like monsters,

among the gods, her sons, whom she has summoned together,

she has raised up Kingu and magnified him among them.

'To march before the host,' (she has said,) 'be that thy

duty!

Order the weapons to be uplifted and the onset of battle!'

That he may be the first in the conflict, the leader in victory,

she has taken his hand and seated him on a throne:

'I have uttered the spell for thee; exalt thyself among the

gods,

assume dominion over all the gods!

Highly shalt thou be exalted, thou that art alone my

husband;

thy name shall be magnified over [all the world]!'

Thereupon she has given him the tablets of destiny and laid

them on his breast:

'Let thy command be obeyed, let the word of thy mouth be

established!'

When Kingu had exalted himself, and made himself as Anu,

she determined for the gods her sons their destiny:

'The opening of your mouth shall quench the fire;

the exalted of Kidmuri shall dissolve its flame!'
[pg 324]

[When Merodach heard this, his heart] was grievously troubled,

he ... ... and his lips he bit;

.....his heart grew angry

......his cry.

......[he determined on] battle.

[Then spake he to] his father (Ea): 'Be not troubled;

......thou shalt become the lord of the deep.

......with Tiamat will I contend.'

Merodach [heard] the words of his father,

in the fulness (?) of his heart he said to his father:

'O lord of the gods, offspring (?) of the great gods,

if indeed I am your avenger,

Tiamat to overpower and you to rescue,

make ready an assembly, prepare a banquet(?).

Enter joyfully into Ubsugina (the seat of oracles) all together.

With my mouth like you will I give the oracle.

What I create shall never be changed,

the word of my lip shall never go back or be unfulfilled!'

TABLET III.

Thereupon Ansar opened his mouth,

to [Gâgâ] his [messenger] he uttered the word:

'O angel [Gâgâ] who rejoicest my heart,

[to Lakhmu and Lakh]amu will I send thee;

[the command of my heart] thou shalt gladly hear(?):

'Ansar, your son, has sent me,

the wish of his heart he has caused me to know.

Tiamat our mother has risen up against us,

gathering her forces, madly raging.

The gods, all of them, have united themselves unto her,

all whom she has created march at her side.

Banning the day they have followed Tiamat,
[pg 325]

wrathful, devising mischief, untiring (?) day and night,

prepared for the conflict, fiercely raging,

they have gathered themselves together and begin the fray.

The mother of the deep (?), the creatress of them all,

has given them victorious weapons, creating monstrous serpents

with sharp fangs, unsparing in the onset.

With poison for blood she has filled their bodies.

Horrible adders she has clothed with terror,

she has decked them with fear, and raised high their ...

'May their appearance ...

May their bodies grow huge so that none may stand before them!'

She has created the adder, the horrible serpent, the Lakhamu,

the great monster, the raging dog, the scorpion-man,

the dog-days, the fish-man and the ram,

who carry weapons that spare not, who fear not the conflict,

insolent of heart, unconquerable by the enemy.

Moreover that she may have eleven such monsters,

among the gods, her sons, whom she has summoned together,

she has raised up Kingu and magnified him among them:

'To march before the host, be that thy duty!

Order the weapons to be uplifted and the onset of battle!'

That he may be first in the conflict, the leader in victory,

she has taken his hand and set him on a throne:

'I have uttered the spell for thee, exalt thyself among the gods,

assume dominion over all the gods!

Highly shalt thou be exalted, thou that art alone my husband;

thy name shall be magnified over [all the world]!'

Then she gave him the tablets of destiny, and laid them on his
breast:
[pg 326]

'Let thy command be obeyed; let the word of thy mouth be established!'

When Kingu had exalted himself and made himself as Anu

she determined for the gods her sons their destiny:

'The opening of your mouth shall quench the fire,

the exalted of Kidmuri shall dissolve its flame.'

I sent forth Anu, but he would not meet her;

Ea was terrified and turned back.

Then I bade Merodach, the counsellor of the gods, your son;

to attack Tiamat his heart urged him.

He opened his mouth and spake unto me:

'If I am indeed your avenger,

Tiamat to overpower, you to rescue,

make ready an assembly, prepare a banquet (?).

Enter joyfully into Ubsugina, all together.

With my mouth, like you, will I then pronounce an oracle,

what I create shall never be changed;

the word of my lip shall never go back or be unfulfilled.'

Hasten therefore and determine at once for him his destiny

that he may go forth and meet your mighty foe!'

Lakhmu and Lakhamu heard this and lamented,

the gods of heaven, all of them, bitterly grieved:

'Foolish are they who thus desire battle (?);

nor can we understand the [design] of Tiamat.'

Then they came together and marched ...

the great gods, all of them, who determine [destinies].

They came before (?) Ansar, they filled [his abode],

they crowded one on the other in the gathering ...

they sat down to the feast, [they devoured] the food;

they eat bread, they drank [wine],

with sweet honey wine they filled themselves,

they drank beer, and delighted their soul (?)
[pg 327]

....they ascended into their [seats],

to determine the destiny of Merodach their avenger.

TABLET IV.

Then they set him on a princely throne;

before his fathers he seated himself as ruler.

'Yea, thou art glorious among the great gods,

thy destiny has no rival, thy name (?) is Anu;

from this day forward unchanged be thy command,

high and low entreat thy hand!

Let the word of thy mouth be established, thy judgment never be violated,

let none among the gods overpass thy bounds!

as an adornment has (thy hand) founded the shrine of the gods,

may the place of their gathering (?) become thy home.

O Merodach, thou art he that avenges us,

we give unto thee the sovereignty over the multitudes of the universe.

Thou givest counsel, let thy word be exalted;

may thy weapons be victorious, may thine enemies tremble!

O lord, be gracious to the soul of him who putteth his trust in thee,

but pour out the soul of the god who has hold of evil.'

Then place they in their midst a robe;

they spake to Merodach their first-born:

'May thy destiny, O lord, excel that of the gods;

command destruction and creation, and so it shall be done.

Set thy mouth that it may destroy the robe;

bid it return and the robe shall be restored!'

He spake and with his mouth destroyed the robe;

he spake to it again, and the robe was re-created.

When the gods his fathers beheld (the power) of the word of his
mouth,
[pg 328]

they rejoiced, they saluted Merodach the king,

they bestowed upon him the sceptre, the throne and reign,

they gave him a weapon unrivalled, consuming the hostile:

'Go,' (they said,) 'and cut off the life of Tiamat,

let the winds carry her blood to secret places.'

(Thus) the gods, his fathers, determined for Bel his destiny,

they showed his path, and they bade him listen and take the road.

He made ready the bow and used it as his weapon;

he made the club swing, he fixed its seat;

then he lifted up the weapon which he caused his right hand to hold;

the bow and the quiver he hung at his side.

He set the lightning before him,

with glancing flame he filled its body.

He made also a net to enclose the dragon Tiamat.

He seized the four winds that they might not issue out of it,

the south wind, the north wind, the east wind (and) the west wind;

he made them enter the net, the gift of his father Anu.

He created the evil wind, the hostile wind, the storm, the tempest,

the four winds, the seven winds, the whirlwind, the unending wind:

he caused the winds he had created to issue forth, seven in all,

confounding the dragon Tiamat, as they swept after him.

Then Bel lifted up the Deluge, his mighty weapon:

he rode in a chariot incomparable, (and) terrible.

He stood firm, and harnessed four horses to its side,

[steeds] that spare not, spirited and swift,

[with sharp] teeth, that carry poison,

which know how to sweep away [the opponent].

[On the right] ... mighty in battle,
[pg 329]

on the left they open ...

......before thee.

[Bring to the feast] the gods, all of them,

[let them sit down and] satisfy themselves with food,

[let them eat bread], let them drink wine,

[let them ascend to their seats?] and determine the future.

[Go now,] Gâgâ, approach before them,

deliver unto them [the message I entrust to] thee:

'Ansar, your son, has sent me,

the wish of his heart he has caused me to know.

Tiamat, our mother, has risen up against us,

gathering her forces, madly raging.

The gods, all of them, have united themselves unto her,

even those who created you march at her side.

Banning the day they have followed Tiamat,

wrathful, devising mischief, untiring(?) day and night,

prepared for the conflict, fiercely raging,

they have gathered themselves together and begin the battle.

The mother of the deep(?), the creatress of them all,

has given them victorious weapons, creating monstrous serpents,

with sharp fangs, unsparing in their attack.

With poison for blood she has filled their bodies.

Horrible adders she has clothed with terror,

she has decked them with fear, and raised high their....

'May their appearance,' (she has said)....

'Let their bodies grow huge so that none may stand before them!'

She has created the adder, the horrible serpent, the Lakh-amu,

the great monster, the raging dog, the scorpion-man,

the dog-days, the fish-man and the ram,

who carry weapons that spare not, who fear not the fight,

insolent of heart, unconquerable by the enemy.

Moreover that she may have eleven such monsters,
[pg 330]

among the gods, her sons, whom she has summoned together,

she has raised up Kingu and magnified him among them.

'To march before the host, be that thy duty!

Order the weapons to be uplifted and the onset of battle!'

That he may be the first in the conflict, the leader in victory,

she has taken his hand and set him on a throne:

'I have uttered the spell for thee,' (she has said); 'exalt thyself among the
gods,

assume dominion over all the gods!

Highly shalt thou be exalted, thou that art alone my husband;

thy name shall be magnified over [all the world]!'

Thereupon she has given him the tablets of destiny, and laid them on his
breast:

'Let thy command be obeyed, let the word of thy mouth be established!'

When Kingu had exalted himself and made himself like Anu

she fixed for the gods, her sons, their destiny

'The opening of your mouth shall quench the fire;

the exalted of Kidmuri shall dissolve its flame.'

I sent forth Anu, but he would not meet her;

Ea was terrified and turned back.

Then I sent forth Merodach, the counsellor of the gods, your son;

to attack Tiamat his heart urged him.

He opened his mouth and said unto me:

'If I indeed am your avenger,

Tiamat to overpower and you to rescue,

make ready an assembly, prepare a banquet (?).

Enter joyfully into Ubsugina all together.

With my mouth like you will I pronounce the oracle.

What I create shall never be changed,

the word of my lip shall never go back or be unfulfilled!'
[pg 331]

Hasten therefore and determine for him at once his destiny,

that he may go forward and meet your powerful foe!'

Then went Gâgâ and completed his journey

unto Lakhmu and Lakhamu the gods, his fathers,

he prostrated himself and kissed the ground at their feet,

he bowed himself and stood up and spake unto them:

... clothed with fear;

with lustre and terror he covered his head.

He directed also his way, he made his path descend,

to the place where Tiamat [stood] he turned his countenance;

with his lip he kept back ...

his finger holds the....

On that day they extolled him, the gods extolled him,

the gods, his fathers, extolled him, the gods extolled him.

Then Bel drew near, eager for the struggle with Tiamat,

looking for victory over Kingu her husband.

When she beheld him, her resolution was destroyed,

her understanding was overthrown, her plans confounded.

And the gods, his helpers, who marched beside him

beheld (how Merodach) the prince amazes their eyes.

He laid judgment on Tiamat, yet she turned not her neck;

with her hostile lips she uttered defiance:

'Let the gods, O Bel, enter on battle behind thee,

[behold,] they are gathered together to where thou art.'

Bel [launched] the Deluge, his mighty weapon;

against Tiamat, who had raised herself (?), thus he sent it.

'Thou wert mighty [below,' he cries,] 'exalted above,

yet thy heart [has urged thee] to begin the strife,

[to lead the gods from] their fathers to [thy side];

[thou hast gathered them around thee] and raisest thyself [against us],

[thou hast made] Kingu thy husband

[and hast bestowed on] him divine power.

... thou hast devised evil,
[pg 332]

[against the] gods, my fathers, hast thou directed thy enmity.

[May] thy host be fettered, thy weapons be restrained!

Stand up, and I and thou will fight together.'

When Tiamat heard this,

she uttered her former spells, she repeated her command.

Tiamat also cried out vehemently with a loud voice.

From her roots she rocked herself completely.

She uttered an incantation, she cast a spell,

and the gods of battle demand for themselves their arms.

Then Tiamat attacked Merodach the counsellor of the gods;

in combat they joined; they engaged in battle.

Then Bel opened his net and enclosed her;

the evil wind that seizes behind he sent before him.

Tiamat opened her mouth to swallow it;

he made the evil wind to enter so that she could not close her lips.

The violence of the winds tortured her stomach, and

her heart was prostrated, and her mouth was torn open.

He swung the club; he shattered her stomach;

he cut out her entrails; he divided her heart;

he overpowered her and ended her life;

he threw down her corpse; he stood upon it.

When Tiamat who marched before them was conquered,

he dispersed her forces, her host was overthrown,

and the gods her allies who marched beside her

trembled and feared and turned their backs.

They fled away to save their lives;

they clung to one another, fleeing helplessly.

He followed them and broke their arms;

he flung his net and they are caught in the snare.

Then filled they the world with their lamentations;

they bear their sin and are shut up in prison,

and the elevenfold creatures are troubled with fear.

The host of spirits (?) who marched beside them (?)
[pg 333]

he throws into fetters and [binds] their hands,

and [tramples] their opposition under him.

And the god Kingu who [had been made leader over] them,

he bound him also and did to him as to the [other] gods.

And he took from him the tablets of destiny [that were on] his breast;

he sealed them with his pen and hung them from his own breast.

From the time he had bound and overmastered his foes

he led the illustrious foe captive like an ox,

bringing to full completion the victory of Ansar over his antagonists.

The warrior Merodach (thus) performed the purpose of Ea.

Over the gods in bondage he strengthened his watch, and

he turned backwards Tiamat whom he had overpowered.

Then Bel trampled on the body of Tiamat;

with his club that spares not he smote her skull,

he broke it and caused her blood to flow;

the north wind bore it away to secret places.

Then his fathers beheld, they rejoiced and were glad;

they bade peace-offerings to be brought to him.

And Bel rested; his body he fed;

he strengthened his mind (?), he formed a clever plan,

and he stripped her like a fish of her skin in two halves;

one half he took and with it overshadowed the heavens;

he stretched out the skin, he appointed watchers

bidding them that her waters should not issue forth;

he lit up the sky, the sanctuary rejoiced,

and he set it over against the deep, the seat of Ea.

Then Bel measured the form of the deep;

as a palace like unto it he made E-Sarra (the upper firmament).

The palace of the upper firmament, which he created as heaven,

he caused Anu, Bel and Ea to inhabit as their
stronghold.

[pg 334]

TABLET V.

He made the stations of the great gods;

he fixed the stars, even the twin-stars, to correspond with them;

he ordained the year, appointing the signs of the Zodiac over it;

for each of the twelve months he fixed three stars,

from the day when the year issues forth to its close.

He established the station of Jupiter that they might know their bounds,

that they might not err, that they might not go astray in any way.

He established the station of Bel and Ea along with himself.

He opened also the gates on either side,

the bolts he strengthened on the left hand and on the right,

and in their midst he set the zenith.

He illuminated the Moon-god that he might watch over the night,

and ordained him for a guardian of the night that the time might be
known,

(saying): 'Month by month, without break, make full thine orb;

at the beginning of the month, when the night begins,

shine with thy horns that the heaven may know.

On the seventh day, halve thy disk;

stand upright on the Sabbath with the [first] half.

At the going down of the sun [rise] on the horizon;

stand opposite it [on the fourteenth day] in full splendour (?).

[On the 15th] draw near to the path of the sun;

[on the 21st] stand upright against it for the second time."

[pg 335]

TABLET VI. (?)

The gods in their assembly created [the beasts],

they made perfect the mighty [monsters];

they caused the living creatures of the [field] to come forth,

the cattle of the field, the wild beasts of the field, and the creeping
things of the [field];

[they fixed their habitations] for the living creatures [of the field]

[and] adorned [the dwelling-places] of the cattle and creeping things of the
city;

[they created] the multitude of creeping things, all the offspring [of the
earth]!

[pg
336]

XIII

A SUMERIAN ACCOUNT OF THE CREATION FROM THE CITY OF ERIDU

The glorious temple, the temple of the gods, in the holy place (of Eridu) had
not yet been made;

no reed had been brought forth, no tree had been created;

no brick had been made, no roof had been formed;

no house had been built, no city had been constructed;

no city had been made, no dwelling-place prepared.

Nippur had not been built, E-kur (the temple of Nippur) had not been
constructed.

Erech had not been built, E-Ana (the temple of Erech) had not been
constructed.

The deep had not been created, Eridu had not been constructed.

The glorious temple, the temple of the gods, its seat had not been made.

All lands were sea.

When within the sea there arose a movement,

on that day Eridu was built, E-Sagila was constructed,

E-Sagila where the god Lugal-du-azaga dwells within the deep.

Babylon was built, E-Sagila was completed.

The gods and the spirits of the earth were created all together.

The holy city (Eridu), the seat of the joy of their hearts, they proclaimed
supreme.

Merodach bound together a reed-bed on the waters;
[pg 337]

dust he made, and he poured it out on the reed-bed.

That the gods might dwell in a seat of the joy of their hearts,

he formed mankind.

The goddess Aruru created the seed of mankind along with him.

He made the beasts of the field and the living creatures of the desert

He made the Tigris and Euphrates and set them in their place;

he declared their names to be good.

The ussu-plant, the dittu-plant of the marshland, the reed and
the forest he created.

He created the verdure of the plain,

the lands, the marshes, and the greensward also,

oxen, and calves, the wild ox and its young, the sheep and the lamb,

meadows and forests also.

The he-goat and the gazelle brought forth (?) to him.

Then Merodach heaped up an embankment at the edge of the sea;

... as it had not before been made,

... he caused it to exist.

[Bricks] he made in their place,

... roofs he constructed;

[houses he built], cities he constructed;

[cities he made], dwelling-places he prepared;

[Nippur he built], E-kur he constructed;

[Erech he built], E-Ana he constructed.

End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Early Israel and the Surrounding
Nations, by Archibald Sayce

*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EARLY ISRAEL ***

***** This file should be named 12976-h.htm or 12976-h.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.net/1/2/9/7/12976/

Produced by Jonathan Ingram, David King, and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team

Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.

Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.

*** START: FULL LICENSE ***

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
http://gutenberg.net/license).

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.net),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that

- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."

- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.

- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.

- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email-masked]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at http://pglaf.org

For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email-masked]

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit http://pglaf.org

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
donations. To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.

Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:

http://www.gutenberg.net

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.