The history of antiquity

"*^~~

1

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
AT LOS ANGELES

THE GIFT OF

MAY TREAT MORRISON

IN MEMORY OF

ALEXANDER F MORRISON

:<£

THE HISTORY OF ANTIQUITY.

THE

HISTORY OF ANTIQUITY.

PROFESSOR MAX DUNCKER,

BT

EVELYN ABBOTT, M.A.,

FELLOW AND TUTOR OF BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD.

VOL. II.

LONDON :
RICHARD BENTLEY & SON, NEW BURLINGTON STREET,

i in ©rbmarg 10 ftr Pajtsls %
1879.

CLAY AND TAYLOR, PB1NTEB8.

THE present volume has been translated from the
fifth edition of the original, and has had, throughout,

the benefit of Professor Duncker's revision.

E. A.

Oxford, Jan. 14, 1879.

434103

: :' :**:

CONTENTS.

BOOK III.
ASSYRIA. PHCENICIA. ISRAEL.

CHAPTER I.

PACK

THE STORY OP NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS 1

CHAPTER II.

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM ... ... 26

CHAPTER III.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS ... 49

CHAPTER IV.

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL

CHAPTER V.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL ... 109

vi CONTENTS.

CHAPTER VI.

PAGE

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH ... 128

CHAPTER VII.

THE RULE OF DAVID

150

CHAPTER VIII.

KING SOLOMON ... ... ••• ••• ••• ••• 1^9

CHAPTER IX.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS ... ... ... ••• 201

CHAPTER X.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL ... ... ... ... ... 227

CHAPTER XI.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS ... ... ... ... 262

CHAPTER XII.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS ... ... ... ... 294

CHAPTER XIII.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA ... ... ... ... ... 308

BOOK III.

ASSYRIA. PHOENICIA. ISRAEL.

A S SYRIA.

CHAPTER I.
THE STORY OF NDSTUS AND SEMIRAMIS.

ABOUT the middle course of the Tigris, where the moun-
tain wall of the Armenian plateau steeply descends to
the south, there is a broad stretch of hilly country.
To the west it is traversed by a few water- courses
only, which spring out of the mountains of Sindyar,
and unite with the Tigris ; from the east the affluents
are far more abundant. On the southern shore of the
lake of Urumiah the edge of the plateau of Iran abuts
on the Armenian table-land, and then, stretching to the
south-east, it bounds the river valley of the Tigris
toward the east. From its vast, successive ranges,
the Zagrus of the Greeks, flow the Lycus and Caprus
(the Greater and the Lesser Zab), the Adhim and the
Diala. The water, which these rivers convey to the
land between the Zagrus and the Tigris, together
with the elevation of the soil, softens the heat and
allows olive trees and vines to flourish in the cool air
on the hills, sesame and corn in the valleys between
groups of palms and fruit-trees. The backs of the
heights which rise to the east are covered by forests of
oaks and nut trees. Toward the south the ground

VOL. II B

••&*.•: . , : /A • . .* ASSYRIA.

gradually sinks — oil the west immediately under the
mountains of Sindyar, on the east below the Lesser
Zab — toward the course of the Adhim into level plains,
where the soil is little inferior in fertility to the land
of Babylonia. The land between the Tigris and the
Greater Zab is known to Strabo and Arrian as Aturia.1
The districts between the Greater and Lesser Zab are
called Arbelitis and Adiabene by western writers.2
The region bounded by the Lesser Zab and the Adhim
or the Diala is called Sittacene, and the land lying
on the mountains rising further toward the east is
Chalonitis. The latter we shall without doubt have to
regard as the Holwan 3 of later times.

According to the accounts of the Greeks, it was
in these districts that the first kingdom rose which
made conquests and extended its power beyond the
borders of its native country. In the old time — such
is the story — kings ruled in Asia, whose names were not
mentioned, as they had not performed any striking ex-
ploits. The first of whom any memorial is retained, and
who performed great deeds, was Ninus, the king of the
Assyrians. Warlike and ambitious by nature, he armed

1 Strabo, pp. 736, 737. Arrian, " Anab." 3, 7, 7. The same form of
the name, Athura, is given in the inscriptions of Darius.

3 Plin. "Hist. Nat." 6, 27 ; 5, 12 : Adiabene Assyria ante dicta.
Ptolemseus (6, 1) puts Adiabene and Arbelitis side by side. Diodorus,
18, 39. Arrian, Epit. 35 : n]v pif pkativ rHJv irorafiuv yjjv icat rtjv
'Apf3r)\lriv ivupt 'AfjKpifia^.

3 Polyb. 5, 5-4. The border line between the original country of
Assyria and Elam cannot be ascertained with certainty. According
to Herodotus (5, 52) Susa lay 42 parasangs, »'. e. about 150 miles, to
the south of the northern border of Susiana. Hence we may perhaps
take the Diala as the border between the later Assyria and Elam. The
use of the name Assyria for Mesopotamia and Babylonia, as well as
Assyria proper, in Herodotus (e. g. 1, 178) and other Greeks, — the name
Syria, which is only an abbreviation of Assyria (Herod. 7, 63), — arises
from the period of the supremacy of Assyria in the epoch 750 — 650
B.C. Cf. Strabo, pp. 736, 737, and Noldeke, ASSYPI02, Hermes, 1871
(5), 443 ff.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 3

tlie most vigorous of his young men, and accustomed
them by long and various exercises to all the toils and
dangers of war. After collecting a splendid army, he
combined with Ariseus, the prince of the Arabs, and
marched with numerous troops against the neighbouring
Babylonians. The city of Babylon was not built at
that time, but there were other magnificent cities in the
land. The Babylonians were an unwarlike people, and
he subdued them with little trouble, took their king

o

prisoner, slew him with his children, and imposed a
yearly tribute on the Babylonians. Then with a still
greater force he invaded Armenia and destroyed
several cities. Barzanes, the king of Armenia, per-
ceived that he was not in a position to resist. He
repaired with costly presents to Ninus and undertook
to be his vassal. With great magnanimity Ninus per-
mitted him to retain the throne of Armenia ; but he was
to provide a contingent in war and contribute to the
support of the army. Strengthened by these means,
Ninus turned his course to Media. Pharnus, king of
Media, came out to meet him with a strong force, but he
was nevertheless defeated, and crucified with his wife
and seven children, and Ninus placed one of his own
trusty men as viceroy over Media. These successes
raised in Ninus the desire to subjugate all Asia as far
as the Nile and the Tanais. He conquered, as Ctesias
narrates, Egypt, Phoenicia, Coele Syria, Cilicia, Lycia
and Caria, Lydia, Mysia, Phrygia, Bithynia, and
Cappadocia, and reduced the nations on the Pontus as
far as the Tanais. Then he made himself master of the
land of the Cadusians and Tapyrians, of the Hyrcanians,
Drangians, Derbiccians, Carmanians, Chorasmians,
Barcians, and Parthians. Beside these, he overcame
Persia, and Susiana, and Caspiana, and many other
small nations. But in spite of many efforts he failed to

B2

4 ASSYRIA.

obtain any success against the Bactrians, because the
entrance to their land was difficult and the number of
their men of war was great. So he deferred the war
against the Bactrians to another opportunity, and led
his army back, after subjugating in 17 years all the
nations of Asia, with the exception of the Indians
and Bactrians. The king of the Arabians he dismissed
to his home with costly presents and splendid booty ;
he began himself to build a city which should not
only be greater than any other then in existence, but
should be such that no city in the future could ever
surpass it. This city he founded on the bank of the
Tigris,1 in the form of an oblong, and surrounded it with
strong fortifications. The two longer sides measured
150 stades each, the two shorter sides 90 stades each,
so that the whole circuit was 480 stades. The walls
reached a height of 100 feet, and were so thick that
there was room in the gangway for three chariots to
pass each other. These walls were surmounted by 1500
towers, each of the height of 200 feet. As to the
inhabitants of the city, the greater number and those
of the most importance were Assyrians, but from the
other nations also any who chose could fix his dwelling
here, and Ninus allotted to the settlers large portions
of the surrounding territory, and called the city Ninus,
after his own name.

When the city was built Ninus resolved to march
against the Bactrians. He knew the number and

J The Euphrates, which Diodorus mentions 2, 3 and also 2, 27, is
not to be put down to a mistake of Ctesias, since Nicolaus (Frag. 9,
ed. Miiller) describes Nineveh as situated on the Tigris in a passage
undoubtedly borrowed from Ctesias. The error belongs, as Carl
Jacoby ("Ehein. Museum," 30, 575 ff.) has proved, to the 1 istorians
of the time of Alexander and the earliest Diadochi, who had in their
thoughts the city of Mabog (Hierapolis), on the Euphrates, which was
also called Nineveh. The mistake has passed from Clitarchu < to the
narrative of Diodorus.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMJS. 6

bravery of the Bactrians, and how difficult their land
was to approach, and therefore he collected the armies
of all the subject nations, to the number of 1,700,000
foot soldiers, 210,000 cavalry, and towards 10,600
chariots of war. The narrowness of the passes which
protect the entrance to Bactria compelled Ninus to
divide his army. Oxyartes, who at that time was king
of the Bactrians, ha.d collected the whole male popula-
tion of his country, about 400,000 men, and met the
enemy at the passes. One part of the Assyrian army
he allowed to enter • unmolested ; when a sufficient
number seemed to have reached the plains he attacked
them and drove them back to the nearest mountains ;
about 100,000 Assyrians were slain. But when the
whole force had penetrated into the land, the Bactrians
were overcome by superior numbers and scattered each
to his own city. The rest of the cities were captured
by Ninus with little trouble, but Bactra, the chief
city, where the palace of the king lay, he could not
reduce, for it was large and well-provisioned, and the
fortress was very strong.

When the siege became protracted, Onnes, the first
among the counsellors of the king and viceroy of
Syria, who accompanied the king on this campaign,
sent for his wife Semiramis to the camp. Once
when he was inspecting the flocks of the king in
Syria, he had seen at the dwelling of Simmas, the
keeper of these flocks, a beautiful maiden, and he was
so overcome with love for her that he sought and
obtained her as a wife from Simmas. She was the
foster-child of Simmas. In a rocky place in the
desert his shepherds had found the maiden about a
year old, fed by doves with milk and cheese ; as
Simmas was childless he had taken the foundling as
his child, and given her the name of Semiramis

(5 ASSYRIA.

Onnes took her to the city of Ninus. She bore
him two sons, Hyapates and Hydaspes, and as she
had everything "which beauty requires, she made her
husband her slave; he did nothing without her ad-
vice, and everything succeeded admirably. She also
possessed intelligence and daring, and every other gift
likely to advance her. When requested by Onnes to
come to the camp, she seized the opportunity to dis-
play her power. She put on such clothing that it
could not be ascertained whether she was a man or a
woman, and this succeeded so well that at a later time
the Medes, and after them the Persians also, wore the
robe of Semiramis. When she arrived in the camp
she perceived that the attack was directed only against
the parts of the city lying in the plain, not against the
high part and the strong fortifications of the citadel,
and she also perceived that this direction of the attack
induced the Bactrians to be careless in watching the
citadel. She collected all those in the army who were
accustomed to climbing, and with this troop she
ascended the citadel from a deep ravine, captured a part
of it, and gave the signal to the army which was
assaulting the walls in the plain. The Bactrians lost
their courage wrhen they saw their citadel occupied,
and the city was taken. Ninus admired the courage
of the woman, honoured her with costly presents, and
was soon enchained by her beauty; but his attempts to
persuade Onnes to give up Semiramis to him were in
vain ; in vain he offered to recompense him by the
gift of his own daughter Sosana in marriage. At
length Ninus threatened to put out his eyes if he did
not obey his commands. The terror of this threat
and the violence of his own love drove Onnes out of
his mind. He hung himself. Thus Semiramis came
to the throne of Assyria. "When Ninus had taken

THE STOHY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 7

possession of the great treasures of gold and silver
which were in Baetra, and had arranged everything
there, he led his army back. At Ninus Semiramis
bore him a son, Ninyas, and at his death, when he
had reigned 52 years, Ninus bequeathed to her the
sovereign power. She buried his corpse in the royal
palace, and caused a huge mound to be raised over the
grave, 6000 feet in the circuit and 5400 feet high,
which towered over the city of Ninus like a lofty
citadel, and could be seen far through the plain in
which Ninus lay.

As Semiramis was ambitious, and desired to surpass
the fame of Ninus, she built the great city of Babylon,
with mighty walls and towers, the two royal citadels,
the bridge over the Euphrates, and the temple of
Belus, and caused a great lake to be excavated to draw
oif the water of the Euphrates. Other cities also she
founded on the Euphrates and the Tigris, and caused
depots to be made for those who brought merchandise
from Media, Paraetacene, and the bordering countries.
After completing these works she marched with a great
army to Media and planted the garden near Mount
Bagistanon. The steep and lofty face of this moun-
tain, more than 10,000 feet in height, she caused to be
smoothed, and on it was cut her picture surrounded
by 100 guards ; and an inscription was engraved in
Syrian letters, saying that Semiramis had caused the
pack-saddles of her beasts of burden to be piled on
each other, and on these had ascended to the summit
of the mountain. Afterwards she made another large
garden near the city of Chauon, in Media,1 and on a
rock in the middle of it she erected rich and costly
buildings, from which she surveyed the blooming

1 Stoph. Byzant. Xavuv, x"''Pa T
H & Z{«ui£ tvTivQtv i£i\avv(t K. r. X.

8 ASSYRIA.

garden and the army encamped in the plain. Here
she remained for a long time, and gave herself up to
every kind of pleasure. She was unwilling to contract
another .marriage from fear of losing the sovereign
power, but she lived with any of her warriors who
were distinguished for their beauty. All who had
enjoyed her favours she secretly put to death. After
this retirement she turned her course to Egbatana,
caused a path to be cut through the rocks of Mount
Zagrus, and a short and convenient road to be made
across them, in order to leave behind an imperishable
memorial of her reign. In Egbatana she erected a
splendid palace, and in order to provide the city with
water she caused a tunnel to be made through the lofty
mountain Orontes at its base, which conveyed the
water of a lake lying on the other side of the heights
into the city. After this she marched through Persia
and all the countries of Asia which were subject to
her, and caused the mountains to be cut through and
straight and level roads to be built everywhere, while
in the plains she at one place raised great mounds over
her dead generals, and in another built cities on hills ;
and wherever the army was encamped eminences were
raised for her tent so that she might overlook the whole.
Of these works many are still remaining in Asia and
bear the name of Semiramis. Then she subjugated
Egypt,1 a great part of Libya, and nearly the whole of
Ethiopia, and finally returned to Bactra.

A long period of peace ensued, till she resolved to
subjugate the Indians on hearing that they were the
most numerous of all nations, and possessed the largest
and most beautiful country in the world. For two
years preparations were made throughout her whole

1 Diod. i, 56.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 9

kingdom ; in the third year she collected in Bactria
3,000,000 foot soldiers, 500,000 horsemen, and 100,000
chariots. Beside these, 100,000 camels were covered
with the sewn skins of black oxen, and each was
mounted by one warrior ; these animals were intended
to pass for elephants with the Indians. For crossing
the Indus 2000 ships were built, then taken to pieces
again, and the various parts packed on camels.
Stabrobates, the king of the Indians, awaited the
Assyrians on the bank of the Indus. He also had
prepared for the war with all his power, and gathered
together even a larger force from the whole of India.
When Semiramis approached he sent messengers to
meet her with the complaint that she was making war
upon him though he had done her no wrong ; and in
his letter he reproached her licentious life, and calling
the gods to witness, threatened to crucify her if vic-
torious. Semiramis read the letter, laughed, and said
that the Indians would find out her virtue by her
actions. The fleet of the Indians lay ready for battle
on the Indus. Semiramis caused her ships to be put
together, manned them with her bravest warriors, and,
after a long and stubborn contest, the victory fell to
her share. A thousand ships of the Indians were sunk
and many prisoners taken. Then she also took the
islands and cities on the river, and out of these she
collected more than 100,000 prisoners. But the king
of the Indians, pretending flight, led his army back
from the Indus; in reality he wished to induce the
enemy to cross the Indus. As matters succeeded
according to her wishes, Semiramis caused a large and
broad bridge to be thrown skilfully over the Indus,
and on this her whole army passed over. Leaving
60,000 men to protect the bridge, she pursued the
Indians with the rest of her army, and sent on in front

10 ASSYRIA.

the camels clothed as elephants. At first the Indians
did not understand whence Semiramis could have
procured so many elephants and were alarmed. But
the deception could not last. Soldiers of Semiramis,
who were found careless on the watch, deserted to the
enemy to escape punishment, and betrayed the secret.
Stabrobates proclaimed it at once to his whole army,
caused a halt to be made, and offered battle to the
Assyrians. When the armies approached each other
the kino: of the Indians ordered his horsemen and

o

chariots to make the attack. Semiramis sent against
them her pretended elephants. When the cavalry of
the Indians came up their horses started back at the
strange smell, part of them dislodged their riders,
others refused to obey the rein. Taking advantage of
this moment, Semiramis, herself on horseback, pressed
forward with a chosen band of men upon the Indians,
and turned them to flight. Stabrobates was still
unshaken; he led out his elephants, and behind them
his infantry. Himself on the right wing, mounted on the
best elephant, he chanced to come opposite Semiramis.
He made a resolute attack upon the queen, and was
followed by the rest of the elephants. The soldiers of
Semiramis resisted only a short time. The elephants
caused an immense slaughter ; the Assyrians left their
ranks, they fled, and the king pressed forward against
Semiramis ; his arrow wounded her arm, and as she
turned away his javelin struck her on the back. She
hastened away, while her people were crushed and
trodden down by their own numbers ; and at last, as
the Indians pressed upon them, were forced from the
bridge into the river. As soon as Semiramis saw the
greater part of her army on the nearer bank, she caused
the cables to be cut which held the bridge ; the force
of the stream tore the beams asunder, and many

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 11

Assyrians who were on the bridge were plunged in the
river. The other Assyrians were now in safety, the
wounds of Semiramis were not dangerous, and the
king of the Indians was warned by signs from heaven
and their interpretation by the seers not to cross the
river. After exchanging prisoners Semiramis returned
to Bactra. She had lost two-thirds of her army.

Some time afterwards she was attacked by a con-
spiracy, which her own son Ninyas set on foot against
her by means of an eunuch. Then she remembered a
prophecy given to her in the temple of Zeus Ammon
during the campaign in Libya; that when her son
Ninyas conspired against her she would disappear from
the sight of men, and the honours of an immortal would
be paid to her by some nations of Asia. Hence she
cherished no resentment against Ninyas, but, on the
contrary, transferred to him the kingdom, ordered her
viceroys to obey him, and soon after put herself to death,
as though, according to the oracle, she had raised herself
to the gods. Some relate that she was changed into a
dove, and flew out of the palace with a flock of doves.
Hence it is that the Assyrians regard Semiramis as an
immortal, and the dove as divine. She was 62 years
old, and had reigned 42 years.

The preceding narrative, which is from Diodorus, is
borrowed in essentials from the Persian history of
Ctesias, who lived for some time at the Persian Court
in the first two decades of the reign of Artaxerxes
Mnemon (405 — 361 B.C.). On the end of Semiramis
the account of Ctesias contained more details than the
account of Diodorus. This is made clear by some
fragments from Ctesias preserved by other writers.
In Nicolaus of Damascus we are told that after the
Indian war Semiramis marched through the land
of the Medes. Here she visited a very lofty and

12 ASSYRIA.

precipitous mountain, which could only be ascended on
one side. On this she at once caused an abode to be
built from which to survey her army.

While encamped here, Satibaras the eunuch told
the sons of Onnes, Hyapates and Hydaspes, that
Ninyas would put them to death if he ascended the
throne ; they must anticipate him by removing their
mother and Ninyas out of the way, and possessing
themselves of the sovereign power. Moreover, it was
to their great dishonour to be spectators of the licen-
tiousness of their mother, who, even at her years, daily
desired every youth that came in her way. The
matter, he said, was easy of accomplishment ; when he
summoned them to the queen (he was entrusted with
this business) they could come to the summit of the
mountain and throw their mother down from it.
But it happened that behind the altar, near which they
held this conversation, a Mede was lying, who over-
heard them. He wrote down everything on a skin
and sent it to Semiramis. When she had read it she
caused the sons of Onnes to be summoned, and gave
strict orders that they should come in arms. Delighted
that the deity favoured the undertaking, Satibaras
fetched the young men. When they appeared Semi-
ramis bade the eunuch step aside, and then she spoke to
them : " You worthless sons of an honest and brave
father have allowed yourselves to be persuaded by a
worthless slave to throw down from this height your
mother, who holds her empire from the gods, in order
to obtain glory among men, and to rule after the murder
of your mother and your brother Ninyas. Then she
spoke to the Assyrians." l Here the fragment of Nicolaus
breaks off. From the fragments of Cephalion we may
gather that the sons of Onnes were put to death by

1 Frag. 7, ed. Miiller.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 13

Semiramis. Yet Cephalion gave a different account of
the death of Semiramis from Ctesias ; according to him
Ninyas slew her.1 In Ctesias, as is clear from the
account of Diodorus and other remains of Ctesias,
nothing was spoken of beyond the conspiracy which
Ninyas prepared against her.2

After the death of Semiramis, so Diodorus con-
tinues his narrative, Ninyas ruled in peace, for he
by no means emulated his mother's military ambition
and delight in danger. He remained always in the
palace, was seen by no one but his concubines and
eunuchs, took upon himself no care or trouble,
thought only of pleasure and pastime, considered it the
object of sovereign power to give himself up undis-
turbed to all sorts of enjoyment. His seclusion served
to hide his excesses in obscurity ; he seemed like an in-
visible God, whom no one ventured to offend even in
word. In order to preserve his kingdom he put leaders
over the army, viceroys, judges, and magistrates over
every nation, and arranged everything as seemed most
useful to himself. To keep his subjects in fear he
caused each nation to provide a certain number of
soldiers every year, and these were quartered together
in a camp outside the city, and placed under the
command of men most devoted to himself. At the
end of the year they were dismissed and replaced by
others to the same number. Hence his subjects always
saw a great force in the camp ready to punish dis-
obedience or defection. In the same way his descend-
ants also reigned for 30 generations, till the empire
passed to the Medes.3 Slightly differing from this
account, Nicolaus tells us that Sardanapalus — to whom
in the order of succession the kingdom of Ninus and

1 Frag. 1, 2, ed. M Her; cf. Justin. 1, 1.

2 Anonym, tract. " De Mulier." c. 1. 3 Diod. 2, 21.

U ASSYRIA.

Semiramis finally descended — neither carried arms
nor went out to the hunting-field, like the kings in
old times, but always remained in his palace. Yet
even in his time the old arrangements were kept and
the satraps of the subject nations gathered with the
fixed contingent at the gate of the king.1

From what source is the narrative of Ninus and
Semiramis derived? what title to credibility can be
allowed it ? Herodotus states that the dominion of
the Assyrians in Asia was the oldest ; their supremacy
was followed by that of the Medes, and the supremacy
of the Medes was followed by the kingdom of the
Achsemenids. Herodotus too is acquainted with the
name of Semiramis ; he represents her as ruling over
Babylon, and building wonderful dykes in the level
land, which the river had previously turned into a
lake.2 Strabo tells of the citadels, cities, mountain-
roads, aqueducts, bridges, and canals which Semiramis
constructed through all Asia, and to Semiramis Lucian
traces back the old temples of Syria.3 We may assume
in explanation that the tradition of Hither Asia has
ascribed to the first king and queen of Assyria the con-
struction of the ancient road over the Zagrus, of old
dykes and aqueducts in the land of the Euphrates and
Tigris, the building, not of Nineveh only, but also of
Babylon, the erection of the great monuments of for-
gotten kings of Babylon, — as a fact, Assyrian kings
built in Babylon also in the seventh century. "VVe may
find it conceivable that this tradition has gathered
together and carried back to the time of the founda-
tion all that memory retained of the acts of Assyrian
rulers, the campaigns of conquest of a long series of war-
like and mighty sovereigns, the sum total of the exploits

1 Nicol. Frag. 8, ed. Miiller. 2 1, 184.

3 Strabo, pp. 80, 529, 737 ; Lucian, " de Syria dea," c. 14.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 15

to which Assyria owed her supremacy. Yet against
such an origin of this narrative doubts arise not easy
to be removed. It is true that when this tradition
explains the mode of life and the clothing; of the kings

•i. O O

of Asia, and the clothing of the Medes and Persians,
from the example of Semiramis, who wore in the camp
a robe, half male and half female (p. 6) ; when this
tradition derives the inaccessibility of the kings of Asia
and their seclusion in the palace from the fact that
Ninyas wished to hide his excesses, and appear to his
subjects as a higher being, — traits of this kind can be
set aside as additions of the Greeks. To the Babylon-
ians and Assyrians, the Medes and Persians, the life
and clothing of their rulers could not appear con-
temptible or remarkable, nor their own clothing half
effeminate, though the Greeks might very well search
for an explanation of customs so different from their
own, and find them in the example and command of
Semiramis, and the example of Ninyas. And if in
Herodotus the empire of the Assyrians over Asia
appears as a hegemony of confederates,1 this idea is
obviously borrowed from Greek models. The opposite
statement of the division of the Assyrian kingdom into
satrapies, the yearly change of the contingents of
troops, comes from Ctesias, who transferred the arrange-
ments of the Persian kingdom, with which he was
acquainted, to their predecessors, the kingdom of the
Assyrians, or found this transference made in his
authorities, Persian or Mede, and copied it.

Yet, after making as much allowance as we can for
the amalgamating influence of native tradition, after
going as far as we can in setting apart what may be
due to the Greeks, how could such an accurate

1 Herod. 1, 102.

1G ASSYRIA.

narrative, so well acquainted with every detail of the
siege of Bactra, and the battle on the Indus, have
been preserved for many centuries in the tradition of
Hither Asia, retained even after the overthrow of
Assyria, and down to the date when curious Greeks, 200
years after the fall of Nineveh, reached the Euphrates
and Tigris "? We possess a positive proof that about this
time, in the very place to which this tradition must have
clung most tenaciously, within the circuit of the old
Assyrian country, no remembrance of that mighty past
was in existence. When, in the year 401 B.C., Xenophon
with his 10,000 marched past the ruins of the ancient
cities of the Assyrian kingdom, the ruius of Asshur,
Chalah, and Nineveh, before Ctesias wrote, he was
merely told that these were cities of the Medes which
could not be taken ; into one of them the queen of
the Medes had fled before the Persian king, and the
Persians, with the help of heaven, took and destroyed
it when they gained the dominion over Media.1 From
the Assyrians, therefore, Herodotus and Ctesias could
not have obtained the information given in their
statements about Ninus and Semiramis, nor could their
knowledge have come from the Babylonians. The
tradition of Babylonia would never have attributed
the mighty buildings of that city and land to the queen
of another nation, to which Babylon had succumbed.
Hence the account of the Greeks about Assyria and her
rulers could only come from the Medes and Persians.
But our narrative ascribes to Semiramis even the
great buildings of the Median rulers, the erection of
the royal citadel of Egbatana, the residence of the
Median kings ; the parks and rock sculptures of Media,
even the rock figure on Mount Bagistanon (p. 7). This

1 Xenoph. "Anab." 3, 4, 6—10.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 17

sculpture in the valley of the Choaspes on the rock- wall
of Bagistan (Behistun) is in existence. The wall is
not 10,000 but only 1500 feet high. It is not Semira-
mis who is pourtrayed in those sculptures, but Darius,
the king of Persia, and before him are the leaders
of the rebellious provinces. It was the proudest
monument of, victory in all the history of Persia.
Would a Persian have shown this to a Greek as a
monument of Semiramis ? It would rather be a Mede,
who would wish to hide from the Greeks that Media
was among the provinces a second time conquered
and brought to subjection.

The difficulty of ascertaining the sources of our
narrative is still further increased in no inconsiderable
degree by the fact that the books of Ctesias are lost,
and that Diodorus has not drawn immediately from
them, but from a reproduction of Ctesias' account of
Assyria. Yet the express references to the statements of
Ctesias which Diodorus found in his authority, as well
as fragments relating to the subject which have been
elsewhere preserved, allow us to fix with tolerable
accuracy what belongs to Ctesias in this narrative,
and what Clitarchus, the renewer of his work, whom
Diodorus had before him, has added.1 It is Ctesias who

1 Diodorus tells us himself (2, 7) that in writing the first 30 chapters
of his second book he had before him the book of Clitarchus on
Alexander. Carl Jacoby (loc, cit.) — by a comparison with the state-
ments in point in Curtius, who transcribed Clitarchus, and by the proof
that certain passages in the narrative of Diodorus which relate to
Bactria and India are in agreement with passages in the seventeenth
book, in which Diodorus undoubtedly follows Clitarchus ; that certain
observations in the description of Babylon in Diodorus can only
belong to Alexander and his nearest successors ; that certain prepara-
tions of Semiramis for the Indian campaign agree with certain
preparations of Alexander for his Indian campaign, and certain
incidents in Alexander's battle against Porus with certain incidents
in the battle of Semiramis against Stabrobates; and finally by
showing that the situation of the ancient Nineveh was unknown to
VOL. ir. C

18 ASSYRIA.

enumerates the nations which Ninus subdued (p. 3).
With him Semiramis was the daughter of a Syrian
and Derceto, who throws herself into the lake of Ascalon,
and is then worshipped as a goddess there.1 To Ctesias
belongs the nourishment of the child Semiramis by
the doves of the goddess, her rise from the shepherd's
hut to the throne of Assyria. He represents her as
raising the mountain or the tomb of Ninus ; he ascribes

o •

to her the building of Babylon, its mighty walls and
royal citadels, the aqueducts, and the great temple of
Bel. He represented her as marching to the Indus 2
and afterwards towards Media ; as making gardens
there and building the road over the Zagrus. He
' represented her as raising the mounds over the graves

the historians of the time of Alexander, who "were on the other hand
acquainted •with a Nineveh on the Euphrates (Hierapolis, Mabog ;
Plin. "Hist. Nat." 5, 23; Ammian. Marcell. 14, 8, 7)— has made it at
least very probable that Diodorus had Ctesias before him in the
revision of Clitarchus. We may allow that Olitarchus brought the
Bactrian Oxyartes into the narrative, unless we ought to read Exaortes
in Diodorus ; but that the name of the king in Ctesias was Zoroaster
is in my opinion very doubtful. The sources of Ctesias were stories
related by Persians or Medes from the epic of West Iran. That this
should put Zoroaster at the time of Ninus, and make him king of
the Bactrians, in order to allow him to be overthrown by the Assyrians,
is very improbable. Whether Ctesias ascribed to Semira:ms the building
of Egbatana is also very doubtful ; that he mentioned her stay in
Media, and ascribed to her the building of the road over the Zagrua
and the planting of gardens, follows from the quotation of Stephanus
given above. Ctesias has not ascribed to her the hanging gardens at
Babylon. Diodorus makes them the work of a later Syrian king, whom
Ctesias would certainly have called king of Assyria. Ctesias too can
hardly have ascribed to her the obelisk at Babylon (Diod. 2, 11) ; so
at least the addition of Diodorus, "that it belonged to the seven
wonders," seems to me to prove.

1 " Catasterism." c. 38; Hygin. " Astronom." 2, 41. In Diodorus
Aphrodite, enraged by a maiden, Derceto, imbues her with a fierce
passion for a youth. In shame she slays the youth, exposes the child,
throws herself into the lake of Ascalon, and is changed into a fish.
For this reason the image of the goddess Derceto at Ascalon has tho
face of a woman and the body of a fish (2, 4).

2 Diod. 2, 17, init.

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 19

of her lovers ; 1 he told of her sensuality, of the designs
of her sons by the first marriage, and the plot of
Ninyas ; he recounted her end, which was as marvel-
lous as her birth and her youth : she flew out of the
palace up to heaven with a flock of doves. If the
conquest of Egypt by Semiramis also belongs to Ctesias,2
the march through Libya, and the oracle given to her
in the oasis of Ammon, together with the version of
her death, which rests on this oracle (she caused her-
self to disappear, i. e. put herself to death, in order to
share in divine honours), belong to Clitarchus.

If, therefore, we may regard it as an established fact
that our narrative has not arisen out of Assyrian or Baby-
lonian tradition, that the views and additions of Greek
origin introduced into it leave the centre untouched ;
if we have succeeded in discovering, to a tolerably
satisfactory degree, the outlines of the narrative of
Ctesias, the main question still remains to be
answered : from what sources is this narrative to be
derived ? In the first attempt to criticise this account
we find ourselves astonished by the certainty of the
statements, the minute and, in part, extremely vivid
descriptions of persons and incidents. Not only the
great prince who founded the power of Assyria, and
the queen whose beauty and courage enchanted him,
are known to Ctesias in their words and actions.
He can mention by name the man who nurtured
Semiramis as a girl, and her first husband. He
knows the names of the princes of the Arabs, Medes,
Bactrians, and Indians with whom Ninus and Semi-
ramis had to do. The number of the forces set in
motion against Bactria and India are given accurately
according to the weapon used. The arrangements
of the battle beyond the Indus, the progress of the

1 Georg. Syncell. p. 119, ed. Bonn. 2 Diod. 1, 56.

02

20 ASSYRIA.

fight, the wounds carried away by Semiramis, the
exchange of prisoners, are related with the fidelity
of an eye-witness. Weight is obviously laid on the
fact that after Semiramis had conquered and tra-
versed Egypt and Ethiopia, after her unbroken success,
the last great campaign against the Indians fails
because she attacked them without receiving any pre-
vious injury. The message which Stabrobates sends
to her, the letter which he writes, the reproaches he
makes upon her life, the minute details which Ctesias
gives of the relation of Onnes to Semiramis, of the
conspiracy of the sons by this marriage, who felt
themselves dishonoured by the conduct of their now
aged mother, of the letter of the Mede, whose fidelity
discovered the plot to her, of the speeches which
Semiramis made on this occasion, carry us back to a
description at once vivid and picturesque. If we take
these pictures together with the account of Ctesias
about the decline of the Assyrian kingdom, in which
also very characteristic details appear, if we consider the
style and the whole tone of these accounts of the begin-
ning and the end of the Assyrian kingdom, we cannot
avoid the conclusion that Ctesias has either invented
the whole narrative or followed a poetic source.

The first inference is untenable, because the whole
narrative bears the colour and stamp of the East in
such distinctness that Ctesias cannot have invented it,
and, on the other hand, it contains so much poetry
that if Ctesias were the author of these descriptions
we should have to credit him with high poetic gifts.
We are, therefore, driven to adopt the second inference
— that a poetic source lies at the base of his account.
If, as was proved above, neither Assyrian nor Baby-
lonian traditions can be taken into consideration,
Assyrian and Babylonian poems are by the same

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SBMIEAMIS. 21

reasoning put out of the question. On the other hand,
we find in Ctesias' history of the Medes episodes of at
least equal poetic power with his narrative of Ninus
and Semiramis. Plutarch tells us that the great deeds
of Semiramis were praised in songs.1 It is certain that
they could not be the songs of Assyria, which had long
since passed away, but we find, on the other hand,
that there were minstrels at the court of the Medes,
who sang to the kings at the banquet ; it is, moreover,
a Mede who warns Semiramis against Hyapates and
Hydaspes ; and the other names in the narrative of
Ctesias bear the stamp of the Iranian language.
Further, we find, not only in the fragments of Ctesias
which have come down to us, but also in the narratives
of Herodotus and other Greeks concerning the fortunes
of the Medes and Persians down to the great war of
Xerxes against the Hellenes, remains and traces of
poems which can only have been sung amongst the
Medes and Persians. We have, therefore, good grounds
for assuming that it was Medo-Persian poems which
could tell the story of Ninus and Semiramis, and that
this part of the Medo-Persian poems was the source
from which Ctesias drew. It was the contents of these
poems recounted to him by Persians or Medes which he
no doubt followed in this case, as in his further nar-
ratives of Parsondes and Sparethra, of the rebellion and
struggle of Cyrus against Astyages, just as Herodotus
before him drew from such poems his account of the
rebellion of the Magi, the death of Cambyses, and the
conspiracy of the seven Persians.

After severe struggles the princes and people of
the Medes succeeded in casting down the Assyrian
empire from the supremacy it had long maintained ;
they conquered arid destroyed their old and supposed

1 " De Iside," c. 24.

22 ASSYRIA.

impregnable metropolis. If the tribes of the Medes
had previously been forced to bow before the Assy-
rians, they took ample vengeance for the degrad-
ation. Hence the Median minstrels had a most
excellent reason to celebrate this crowning achievement
of their nation ; it afforded them a most agreeable
subject. If, in the earlier and later struggles of the
Medes against Assyria, the bravery of individual heroes
was often celebrated in song, these songs might by
degrees coalesce into a connected whole, the close of
which was the overthrow of the Assyrian empire.
The Median poems which dealt with this most attract-
ive material must have commenced with the rise of
the Assyrian kingdom; they had the more reason for
explaining and suggesting motives for this mighty
movement, as it was incumbent on them to make
intelligible the wreck of the resistance of their own
nation to the onset of the Assyrians, and the previous
subjection of Media. In these poems no doubt they
described the cruelty of the conqueror, who crucified
their king, with his wife and seven children (p. 3).
The more brilliant, the more overpowering the might
of Assyria, as they described it, owing to eminent
sovereigns in the earliest times, the wider the extent
of the empire, the more easily explained and tolerable
became the subjection of the Medes, the greater the
glory to have finally conquered. This final retribution
formed the close ; the striking contrast of the former
exaltation and subsequent utter overthrow, brought
about by Median power and bravery, formed the centre
of these poems.

The prince of the Assyrians whose success is unfail-
ing till he finds himself checked in Bactria, the woman
of unknown origin found in the desert, fostered by
herdsmen, and raised from the lowest to the most

THE STORY OF NINUS AND SEMIRAMIS. 23

elevated position,1 who in bravery surpasses the oravest,
who outdoes the deeds of Ninus, whose charms allure
to destruction every one who approaches her, who
makes all whom she favours her slaves in order to
slay them, who without regard to her years makes
every youth her lover, and is, nevertheless, finally
exalted to the gods — are these forms due to the mere
imagination of Medo-Persian minstrels, or what ma-
terial lay at the base of these lively pictures ?

The metropolis of the Assyrians was known to the
Greeks as Ninus; in the inscriptions of the Assyrian
kings it is called Ninua. From this the name of Ninus,
the founder of the empire, as well as Ninyas, is obviously
taken. In Herodotus a and the chronographers Ninus
is the son of Belus, i. e. of Bel, the sky-god already
known to us (I. 265). The monuments of Assyria show
us that the Assyrians worshipped a female deity, which
was at once the war-goddess and goddess of sexual
love — Istar-Bilit. Istar was not merely the goddess of
battles — bringing death and destruction, though also
conferring victory ; she was at the same time the
goddess of sensual love. We have already learned to
know her double nature. In turn she sends life,
pleasure, and death. If Istar of Arbela was the goddess
of battle, Istar of Nineveh was the goddess of love
(I. 270). As the goddess of love, doves were sacred to
her. In the temples of Syria there were statues of this
goddess with a golden1 dove on the head ; she was
even invoked there under the name of Semiramis, a
word which may mean High name, Name of the
Height.3

Thus the Medo-Persian minstrels have changed the

i Diod. 2, 4, «n#. 2 Herod. 1, 7.

3 Lucian, " De Syria dea," c. 33, 14, 38. The name Semiramoth is
found 1 Chronicles xv. 18, 20 ; xvi. 5 ; 2, xyii. 8.

24 ASSYRIA.

form and legend of a goddess who was worshipped in
Assyria, whose rites were vigorously cultivated in
Syria, into a heroine, the founder of the Assyrian
empire; just as in the Greek and German epos
divine beings have undergone a similar change. This
heroine is the daughter of a maiden who slays the
youth whom she has made happy with her love, who
gave her her daughter, i. e. she is the daughter of the
goddess herself. Like her mother, the goddess, the
daughter, Semiramis, inspires men with irresistible
love, and thus makes them her slaves. At the same
time, as a war-goddess, she surpasses all men in
martial courage, and brings death to all who have sur-
rendered to her. The origin of the goddess thus
transformed into a heroine is unknown and super-
natural ; her characteristics are marvellous powers of
victory and charms of love. The neighbourhood of
Ascalon, where we found the oldest and most famous
temples of the Syrian goddess of love (I. 360), was the
scene of the origin of the miraculous child. The doves
of the Syrian goddess nourish and protect her in the
desert. She grows up in Syria, where the worship of
the goddess of sexual love was widely spread.
Whether Simmas, her foster-father, has arisen out of
Samas, the sun-god of the Semites, and Onnes, the
first husband of Semiramis, out of Anu, the god of
Babel and Asshur, cannot indeed be decided. But in
her relation to Onnes, whom her charm makes her
slave, to whom she brings uninterrupted success, till
in despair at her loss he takes his life, the Medo-
Persian minstrels describe the glamour of love and
the sensual pleasure, as well as the destruction which
proceeds from her, in the liveliest and most forcible
manner. Even after the Indian campaign she indulges
her passions, and then puts those to death to whom she

THE STORY OF NINUS AND 8EMIRAMIS. 25

grants her favours. In this life the poems found a
motive for the plots of her sons, from which she was
at first rescued by the fidelity of a Mede, — a trait
which again reveals the origin of the poem. As
Semiramis was a heroine merely, and not a goddess, t»
the minstrels, they could represent her overthrow, her
defeat and wounds, on the Indus, which afterwards
was the limit of the conquests of the Medians and
Persians. At the end of her life the higher style
reappears, the supernatural origin comes in once more.
She flies out of the palace with the doves of Bilit, which
protected her childhood. In Ctesias the goddess of
Ascalon is Derceto,1 and therefore later writers could
maintain that the kings of Assyria, the descendants or
successors of Semiramis, were named Dercetadae.2

1 Ctesias in Strabo, p. 785. 2 AgatHas, 2, 24.

CHAPTER II.

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE ASSYRIAN KINGDOM.

To relegate Ninus and Semiramis with all their works
and deeds to the realm of fiction may appear to
be a startling step, going beyond the limits of a
prudent criticism. Does not Ctesias state accurately
the years of the reigns : Ninus reigned, according to his
statement, 52 years ; Semiramis was 62 years old, and
reigned 42 years ? Do not the chronographers assure
us that in Otesias the successors of Ninus and Semi-
ramis, from Ninyas to Sardanapalus, the last ruler over
Assyria, 34 kings, were enumerated, and the length of
their reigns accurately given, and has not Eusebius
actually preserved this list ? Since, at the same time,
we find out, through Diodorus and the chronographers,
as well as through this list, that Ctesias fixed the
continuance of the Assyrian kingdom at more than
1300 years, or more exactly at 1306, and the fall of
the kingdom took place according to his reckoning in
the year 883 B.C., Ninus must on these dates have
ascended the throne in the year 2189 B.C. (883 + 1306),
and the reign of Semiramis commenced in 2137 B.C.
(883 + 1254). Eusebius himself puts the accession of
Ninus at 2057 B.C.1

1 Diod.2,21; Euseb. "Chron." l,p.56; 2, p. ll.ed.Schone; Syncellus,
"Chron." 1, 313, 314, ed. Bonn; Brandis, "Eer. Assyr. temper,
emend." p. 13 seq.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 27

If in spite of these accurate statements we persist in
refusing to give credit to Ctesias, Berosus remains,
who, according to the evidence of the chronographers,
dealt with the rule of Semiramis over Assyria. After
mentioning the dynasty of the Medes which reigned
over Babylon from 2458 — 2224 B.C., the dynasty of
the Elamites (2224—1976 B.C.), of the Chaldaeans
(1976 — 1518 B.C.), and of the Arabs, who are said to
have reigned over Babylon from the year 1518 to the
year 1273 B.C., Berosus mentioned the rule of Semi-
ramis over the Assyrians. " After this," so we find it
in Polyhistor, "Berosus enumerates the names of 45
kings separately, and allotted to them 526 years.
After them there was a king of the Chaldaeans named
Phul, and after him Sennacherib, the king of the
Assyrians, whose son, Esarhaddon, then reigned in his
place."1 If we take these 45 kings for kings of Assyria,
who ruled over this kingdom after Semiramis, then, by
allowing the supplements of these series of kings previ-
ously mentioned (I. 247), the era of these 45 kings will
begin in the year 1273 B.C. and end in 747 B.C., and
the date of Semiramis will fall immediately before the
year 1273 B.C. In the view of Herodotus, Ninus was
at the head of the Assyrian empire, but not Semiramis.
As already observed (p. 14), he mentions Semiramis as
a queen of Babylon, and does not place her higher
than the middle of the seventh century B.c;2 but he
regards the dominion of Assyria over Upper Asia as
commencing far earlier. Before the Persians the
Medes ruled over Asia for 156 years ; before them the
Assyrians ruled for 520 years ; the Medes were the
first of the subject nations who rebelled against the
Assyrians ; the rest of the nations followed their
example. As the Median empire fell before the attack

» Euseb. " Chron." 1, p. 26, ed. Schone.- * 1, 184, 187.

28 ASSYRIA.

of the Persians in 558 B.C., the beginning of the
Median empire would fall in the year 714 B.C.
(558 + 156), and consequently the beginning of the
Assyrian kingdom in the year 1234 B.C. (714 + 520),
i. e. four or five decades later than Berosus puts the
death of Semiramis. For the date of the beginning of
the Assyrian dominion Herodotus and Berosus would
thus be nearly in agreement. It has been assumed
that the 45 kings whom the latter represents as follow-
ing Semiramis were kings of Assyria, who ruled at the
same time over Babylon, and were thus regarded as a
Babylonian dynasty. This agreement would be the
more definite if it could be supposed that, accord-
ing to the view of Herodotus, the beginning of the
156 years which he gives to the Median empire was
separated by an interval of some decades from the
date of their liberation from the power of the Assyr-
ians. In this case the empire of the Assyrians over
Asia would not have commenced very long before the
year 1273 B.C., and would have extended from that
date over Babylonia. In complete contradiction to
this are the statements of Ctesias, which carry us back
beyond 2000 B.C. for the commencement of the As-
syrian empire. They cannot be brought into harmonA
with the statements of Herodotus, even if the timf.
allotted by Ctesias to the Assyrian empire (1306 years)
is reckoned from the established date of the conquest
of Nineveh by the Medes and Babylonians (607 B.C.).
The result of such a calculation (607 + 1306) carries us
back to 1913 B.C., a date far higher than Herodotus
and Berosus give.

Is it possible in any other way to approach more
closely to the beginning of the Assyrian kingdom, the
date of its foundation, or the commencement of its
conquests ? We have already seen how the Pharaohs

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 29

of Egypt, after driving out the shepherds in the six-
teenth and fifteenth centuries B.C., reduced Syria to
subjection ; how the first and third Tuthmosis, the
second and third Amenophis, forced their way beyond
Syria to Naharina. The land of Naharina, in the
inscriptions of these kings, was certainly not the Aram
Naharaim, the high land between the Euphrates and
Tigris, in the sense of the books of the Hebrews. It
was not Mesopotamia, but simply "the land of the
stream (Nahar)." For the Hebrews also Nahar, i. e.
river, means simply the Euphrates. It has been already
shown that the arms of the Egyptians hardly went
beyond the Chaboras to the east ; and if the inscrip-
tions of Tuthmosis III. represent him as receiving on
his sixth campaign against the Syrians, i. e. about the
year 1584 B.C., the tribute of Urn Assuru, i. e. of the
chieftain of Asshur, consisting of 50 minseof lapis-lazuli;
if these inscriptions in the year 1579 once more men-
tion among the tribute of the Syrians the tribute of
this prince in lapis-lazuli, cedar-trunks, and other
wood, it is still uncertain whether the chief of the
Assyrians is to be understood by this prince. Had
Tuthmosis III. really reached and crossed the Tigris,
were Assuru Assyria, then from the description of
this prince, and the payment of tribute in lapis-lazuli
and cedar- trunks, we could draw the conclusion that
Assyria in the first half of the sixteenth century
B.C. was still in the commencement of its civilisation,
whereas we found above that as early as the beginning
of the twentieth century B.C. Babylonia was united
into a mighty kingdom, and had made considerable
advance in the development of her civilisation.

Our hypothesis was that the Semites, who took
possession of the valley of the Euphrates, were immi-
grants from the south, from Arabia, and that this new

30 ASSYRIA.

population forced its way by successive steps up the
river-valley. We were able to establish the fact
that the earliest governments among the immigrants
were formed on the lower course of the Euphrates,
and that the centre of the state in these regions
slowly moved upwards towards Babel. We found,
further, that Semitic tribes went in this direction as
far as the southern slope of the Armenian table-land.1
In this way the region on the Tigris, afterwards called
Assyria, was reached and peopled by the Semites.
With the Hebrews Asshur, beside Arphaxad and
Aram, beside Elam and Lud, is the seed of Shem.
" From Shinar " (i. e. from Babylonia), we are told
in Genesis, " Asshur went forth and built Nineveh,
and Kehoboth-Ir, and Chalah, and Resen between
Nineveh and Chalah, which is the great city." There
is no reason to call in question this statement that
Assyria was peopled and civilised from Babylonia.
Language, writing, and religion exhibit the closest
relationship and agreement between Babylonia and
Assyria.

On the west bank of the Tigris, some miles above
the confluence of the Lesser Zab, at the foot of a ridge
of hills, lie the remains of an ancient city. The stamps
on the tiles of these ruins tell us that the name of the
city was Asshur. Tiglath Pilesar, a king of Assyria,
the first of the name, whose reign, though we cannot
fix the date precisely, may certainly be put about the
year 1110 B.C., narrates in his inscriptions : The tem-
ple of the gods Ami and Bin, which Samsi-Bin, the
son of Ismidagon, built at Asshur 641 years previously,
had fallen down ; King Assur-dayan had caused the
ruins to be removed without rebuilding it. For 60
years the foundations remained untouched ; he, Tiglath

i Vol. i. 512.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 31

Pilesar, restored this ancient sanctuary. Tiles from this
ruin on the Tigris, from this city of Asshur, establish
also the fact that a prince named Samsi-Bin, son of
Ismidagon, once ruled and built in this city of Asshur.
They have the inscription : " Samsi-Bin, the son of
Ismidagon, built the temple of the god Asshur."1
Hence Samsi-Bin built temples in the city of Asshur to
the god Asshur as well as to the gods Anu and Bin.
His date falls, according as the 60 years of the inscrip-
tion of Tiglath Pilesar, during which the temple of
Anu and Bin was not in existence, are added to the
space of 641 years or included in them, either about
the year 1800 or 1740 B.C.; the date of his father
Ismidagon about the year 1830 or 1770 B.C.

In any case it is clear that a place of the name of
Asshur, the site of which is marked by the ruins of
Kileh-Shergat, was inhabited about the year 1800
B.C., and that about this time sanctuaries were raised
in it. The name of the place was taken from the
god specially worshipped there. As Babel (Gate of
El) was named after the god El, Asshur was named
after the god of that name. The city was Asshur's
city, the land Asshur's land. Beside the city of
Asshur, about 75 miles up the Tigris, there must have
been at the time indicated a second place of the name
of Ninua (Nineveh), the site of which is marked by the
ruins of Kuyundshik and Nebbi Yunus (opposite
Mosul), since, according to the statement of Shalmanesar
I., king of Assyria, Samsi-Bin built another temple
here to the goddess Istar.2 Ifemidagon, as well as
Samsi-Bin, is called in the inscription of Tiglath
Pilesar I. " Patis of Asshur." The meaning of this
title is not quite clear; the word is said to mean
viceroy. If by this title a vice-royalty over the land

1 Menant, " Annal." p. 18. 8 G. Smith, "Discov" p. 249.

32 ASSYRIA.

of Asshur is meant, we may assume that Assyria was a
colony of Babylonia — that it was under the supremacy
of the kings of Babylon, and ruled by their viceroys.
But since at a later period princes of Assyria called
themselves "Patis of Asshur," as well as "kings of
Asshur," the title may be explained as meaning that
the old princes of Assyria called themselves viceroys
of the god of the land, of the god Asshur. More-
over, it would be strange that a colony of Babylonia,
which was under the supremacy of that country, should
make its protecting god a deity different from that
worshipped in Babylonia.

From this evidence we may assume that about the
year 1800 B.C. a state named Asshur grew up between
the Tigris and the Lesser Zab. This state must have
passed beyond the lower stages of civilisation at the
time when the princes erected temples to their gods at
more than one chief place in their dominions, when they
could busy themselves with buildings in honour of the
gods after the example of the ancient princes of Erech
and Nipur, of Hammurabi, and his successors at
Babylon. With this result the statements in the
inscriptions of Tuthmosis III. do not entirely agree.
Two hundred years after the time of Ismidagon and
Samsi-Bin they speak only of the chief of Asshur, and
of tribute in lapis-lazuli and tree-trunks ; but this
divergence is not sufficient to make us affirm with cer-
tainty that the " Assuru " of Tuthmosis has no refer-
ence whatever to Assyria. If we were able to place the
earliest formation of a state on the Lower Euphrates
about the year 2500 B.C., the beginnings of Assyria,
according to the inferences to be drawn from the evi-
dence of the first Tiglath Pilesar and the tiles of
Kileh-Shergat, could not be placed later than the year
2000 B.C.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 33

Beside Ismidagon and Samsi-Bin, the inscriptions
of Tiglath Pilesar and the tiles of the ruins of Kileh-
Shergat mention four or five other names of princes who
belong to the early centuries of the Assyrian empire,
but for whom we cannot fix any precise place. The
date of the two kings, who on Assyrian tablets are
the contemporaries of Binsumnasir of Babylon, Assur-
nirar, and Nabudan, could not have been fixed with
certainty if other inscriptions had not made us
acquainted with the princes who ruled over Assyria
in succession from 1460 — 1280 B.C.1 From these we may
assume that Assur-nirar and Nabudan must have reigned
before this series of princes, i. e. before 1460 B.C., from
which it further follows that from about the year 1500
B.C. onwards Assyria was in any case an independent
state beside Babylon. We found above that the treaty
which Assur-bil-nisi, king of Assyria, concluded about
the year 1450 B.C. with Karaindas, king of Babylon, for
fixing the boundaries, must have been preceded by
hostile movements on the part of both kingdoms. We
saw that Assur-bil-nisi's successor, Busur-Assur, con-
cluded a treaty with the same object with Purnapuryas
of Babylon, and that Assur-u-ballit, who succeeded
Busur-Assur on the throne of Assyria, gave his
daughter in marriage to Purnapuryas. In order to
avenge the murder of Karachardas, the son of Purna-
puryas by this marriage, who succeeded his father on
the throne of Babylon, Assur-u-ballit invaded Baby-
lonia and placed Kurigalzu, another son of Purna-
puryas, on the throne. We might assume that about
this time, i. e. about 1400 B.C., the borders of Assyria

1 The date of Tiglath Adar is fixed by the statement of Sennacherib
that he lost his seal to the Babylonians 600 years before Sennacherib
took Babylon, i. e. about the year 1300 B.C. As the series of seven
kings who reigned before Tiglath Adar is fixed, Assur-bil-nisi, the first
of these, can be placed about 1460 B.C. if we allow 20 years to each.
VOL. II. D

34 ASSYRIA.

and Babylonia touched eacli other in the neighbourhood
of the modern Aker-Kuf, the ancient Dur-Kurigalzu.1
Assur-u-ballit, who restored the temple of Istar at
Nineveh which Samsi-Bin had built, was followed by
Pudiel, Bel-nirar, and Bin-nirar.2 The last tells us,
on a stone of Kileh-Shergat, that Assur-u-ballit con-
quered the land of Subari, Bel-nirar the army of Kassi,
that Pudiel subjugated all the land as far as the distant
border of Guti; he himself overcame the armies of
Kassi, G-uti, Lulumi and Subari ; the road to the
temple of the god Asshur, his lord, which had fallen
down, he restored with earth and tiles, and set up his
tablet with his name, "on the twentieth day of the
month Muhurili, in the year of Salmanurris." 3

Bin-nirar's son and successor was Shalmanesar I.,
who ascended the throne of Assyria about 1340 B.C.
We learnt above from Genesis, that " Asshur built the
cities of Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Resen and Ohalah."
Assur-nasirpal, who ruled over Assyria more than 400
years after Shalmanesar L, tells us that "Shalmanesar
the mighty, who lived before him, founded the ancient
city of Chalah." 4 It is thus clear that Assyria before
the year 1300 B.C. obtained a third residence in addi-
tion to the cities of Asshur and Nineveh. Like Asshur
and Nineveh, it lay on the banks of the Tigris, about
50 miles to the north of Asshur, and 25 to the south
of Nineveh. It was not, however, like Asshur, situated
on the western bank of the river, but on the eastern,

i Vol. i. p. 262.

8 This series, Pudiel, Bel-nirar and Bin-nirar, is established by
tiles of Kileh-Shergat, and the fact that it joins on to Assur-u-ballit,
by the tablet of Biii-nirar discovered by G. Smith, in which he calls
himself great grandson of Assur-u-ballit, grandson of Bel-nirar, and
son of Pudiel; G. Smith, " Discov." p. 244.

3 G. Smith, " Discov." pp. 244, 245.

* E. Schrader, " Keilinschriften und A. T." s. 20; "Records of
the Past," 7, 17.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 35

like Nineveh, a little above the junction of the Upper
Zab, in a position protected by both rivers, and thus
far more secure than Asshur. Shalmanesar also built
in both the old residences of Asshur and Nineveh.
Tiles of Kileh-Shergat bear the stamp, " Palace of
Shalmanesar, son of king Bin-nirar." * His buildings
in Nineveh are certified by an inscription, in. which
Shalmanesar says : "The temple of Istar, which Sarnsi-
Bin, the prince who was before me, built, and which
my predecessor Assur-u-ballit restored, had fallen into
decay in the course of time. I built it up again from
the ground to the roof. The prince who comes after me
and sees my cylinder (p. 37), and sets it again in its
place, as T have set the cylinder of Assur-u-ballit in its
place, him may Istar bless ; but him who destroys my
monument may Istar curse and root his name and
race out of the land." 2 In the same inscription Shal-
manesar calls himself conqueror of Niri, Lulumi and
Musri, districts for which — at any rate for the two last —
we shall have to look in the neighbourhood of Nineveh,
in the chain of the Zagrus. The son of Shalmanesar I.
was Tiglath Adar; he completed the restoration of
the temple of Istar at Nineveh, and fought with such
success against Nazimurdas of Babylon that he placed
on his seal this inscription : " Tiglath Adar, king of
the nations, son of Shalmanesar, king of Asshur, has
conquered the land of Kardunias." But he afterwards
lost this very seal to the Babylonians, who placed it as
a trophy in the treasure-house of Babylon (about
1300 B.C.).3

1 MSnant, " Aniial." p. 73. 2 G. Smith, foe. eft. p. 249.

3 G-. Smith, loc. cit. p. 250; E. Schrader, "A. 15. Keilinschriften," 3.
294. As Sennacherib states that he brought back this seal from
Babylon after 600 years, and as Sennacherib took Babylon twice in
704 and 694 B.C., the loss of it falls either in the year 1304 or 129 1
B.C. As he brings back the Assyrian images of the gods at thn secon 1

3S ASSYRIA.

These are the beginnings of the Assyrian kingdom
according to the indications of the monuments. After
the series of kings from Assur-bil-nisi to Tiglath Adar,
whose dates come down from about the year 1460 to
about 1280 B.C., there is a gap in our knowledge of some
decades. After this we hear at first of new struggles
with Babylon. In these Belkudurussur of Assyria
(about 1220 B.C.) lost his life. The Babylonians, led by
their king, Binpaliddin, invaded Assyria with a numer-
ous army in order to take the city of Asshur. But Adar-
palbitkur, the successor of Belkudurussur, succeeded in
forcing them to retire to Babylon.1 Of Adarpalbitkur
his fourth successor proudly declares that " he was the
protector of the might of Asshur, that he put an end
to his weakness in his land, that he arranged well the
army of the land of Assyria." 2 His son, Assur-dayan
(about 1180 B.C) was able to remove the war again

capture (694 B.C.), the seal of Tiglath Adar may have been brought
back on this occasion.

1 G. Smith, loc. cit. p. 250.

2 So the passage runs according to a communication from E. Schrader.
On the reading Adarpalbitkur as against the readings Ninpalazira and
Adarpalassar, see E. Schrader, " A. B. Keilinschriften," a. 152. On
•what Menant (" Annal." p. 29) grounds the assumption that Belku-
durussur was the immediate successor of Tiglath Adar I cannot say;
it would not be chronologically impossible, but the synchronistic
tablet merely informs us that Adarpalbitkur was the successor of
Belkudurussur; GK Rawlinson, " Mon." 2, 49. Still less am I able to
find any foundation for the statement that Binpaliddin of Babylon,
the opponent of Belkudurussur and Adarpalbitkur, was a vassal-king
set up by Assyria. The date of Tiglath Pilesar I. is fixed by the
Bavian inscription, which tells us that Sennacherib at his second
capture of Babylon brought back out of that city the images of the
gods lost by Tiglath Pilesar 418 years previously (Bav. 43 — 50), at the
period between 1130 and 1100 B.C. If he began to reign 1130, then the
five kings before him (the series from Adarpalbitkur to Tiglath Pilesar is
fixed by the cylinder of the latter), allowing 20 years to each reign,
bring us to 1230 B.C. for the beginning of Belkudurussur. To go
back further seems the more doubtful, as Tiglath Pilesar put Assur-
dayan, the third prince of this series, only 60 years before his own
time.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 37

into the land of Babylonia ; he claims to have carried
the booty from three places in Babylonia — Zab, Irriya
and Agarsalu — to Assyria.1 It was he who had carried
away the ruins of the fallen temple which Samsi-Bin
had built at Asshur to Anu and Bin, but had not
erected it again. According to the words of his great-
grandson, "he carried the exalted sceptre, and pros-
pered the nation of Bel ; the work of his hands and
the gifts of his fingers pleased the great gods; he
attained great age and long life." 2 Of Assur-dayan's
son and successor, Mutakkil-Nebu (about 1160 B.C.),
we only find that " Asshur, the great lord, raised him
to the throne, and upheld him in the constancy of his
heart." 3 Mutakkil-Nebu's son, Assur-ris-ilim (between
1150 and 1130 B.C.) had to undergo severe struo-o-les

/ o oo

against the Babylonians, who repeatedly invaded
Assyria under Nebuchadnezzar I. At length Assur-
ris-ilim succeeded in repulsing Nebuchadnezzar, and
took from him 40 (50) chariots of war with a banner.
Tiglath Pilesar, the son of Assur-ris-ilim, says of the
deeds of his father, doubtless with extreme exaggera-
tion, "he conquered the lands of the enemy, and sub-
jugated all the hostile lands."4

The tiles of a heap of ruins *at Asshur bear the
inscription, " Tiglath Pilesar, the favoured of Asshur,
has built and set up the temple of his lord the god
Bin." At the four corners of the foundation walls of
this building were discovered four octagonal cylinders
of clay, about a foot and a half in height, on the
inscriptions of which this king repeats the narrative of
the deeds of the first five years of his life. He restored

1 Sayce, " Records of the Past," 3, 31 j M6nant, loc. cit. p. 31.

2 Communication from E. Schrader.

3 Of. G. Smith, loc. cit. p. 251.

* Vol. L p. 263 ; Me"nant, loc. cit. p. 32.

434103

33 ASSYRIA.

the royal dwelling-places and the fortresses of the
land which were in a bad condition, and planted again
the forests of the land of Asshur; he renovated the
habitation of the gods, the temples of Istar and Bilit
in the city of Asshur. At the beginning of his
reign Ami and Bin, his lords, had bidden him set up
again the temple which Samsi-Bin had once built
for them. This he accomplished ; he caused the two
great deities to enter into their high dwelling-places
and rejoiced the heart of their great divinity. " May
Anu and Bin grant me prosperity for ever, may they
bless the work of my hands, may they hear my prayer
and lead me to victory in war and in fight, may they
subdue to my dominion all the lands which rise up
against me, the rebellious nations and the princes, my
rivals, may they accept my sacrificial offerings for the
continuance and increase of my race ; may it be the
will of Asshur and the great gods to establish my race
as firm as the mountains to the remotest days."1

These cylinders tell us of the campaign of Tiglath
Pilesar. First he defeated 20,000 Moschi (Muskai)
and their five kings. He marched against the land
of Kummukh, which rebelled against him ; even
that part of the inhabitants which fled into a city
beyond the Tigris which they had garrisoned he over-
came after crossing the Tigris. He also conquered
the people of Kurkhie (Kirkhie) who came to their
help ; he drove them into the Tigris and the river
Nami, and took prisoner in the battle Kiliantaru,
whom they had made their king ; he conquered the
land of Kummukh throughout its whole extent and
incorporated it with Assyria.2 After this he marched
against the laud of Kurkhie ; next he crossed the

1 Menant, " Annal." pp. 47, 48.
a Column, 1, 62, seqq., 1, 89.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 3!)

Lower Zab and overcame two districts there. Then
he turned against the princes of the land of Nairi (he
puts the number of these at 23) ; these, and the
princes who came from the upper sea to aid them, he
conquered, carried off their flocks, destroyed their cities,
and imposed on them a tribute of 1200 horses and 2000
oxen. These battles in the north were followed by a
campaign in the west. He invaded the land of Aram,
which knew not the god Asshur, his lord ; 1 he marched
against the city of Karkamis, in the land of the Chatti ;
he defeated their warriors on the east of the Euphrates ;
he crossed the Euphrates in pursuit of the fugitives and
there destroyed six cities. Immediately after this the
king marched again to the East, against the lands of
Khumani and Musri and imposed tribute upon them.

" Two-and-forty lands and their princes/' so the
cylinders inform us, "from the banks of the Lower
Zab as far as the bank of the Euphrates, the land of the
Chatti, and the upper sea of the setting sun, all these
my hand has reached since my accession; one after
the other I have subjugated them; I have received
hostages from them and laid tribute upon them."2
" This temple of Anu and Bin and these towers," so
the inscription of the cylinders concludes, " will grow
old ; he who in the succession of the days shall be
king in my place at a remote time, may he restore
them and place his name beside mine, then will Anu
and Bin grant to him prosperity, joy and success in
his undertakings. But he who hides my tablets, and
erases or destroys them, or puts his name in the place
of mine, him will Anu and Bin curse, his throne will
they bring down, and break the power of his dominion,
and cause his army to flee ; Bin will devote his land to
destruction, and will spread over it poverty, hunger,

1 Column, 5, 44. a Column, 6, 39.

40 ASSYRIA.

sickness, and death, and destroy his name and his race
from the earth. On the twenty-ninth day of Kisallu,
in the year of In-iliya-allik."1

In memory of his achievements against the land of
Nairi, Tiglath Pilesar also set up a special monument.
On a rock at one of the sources of the Eastern Tigris
near Karkar we see his image hewn in relief. He
wears the tall cap or kidaris ; the hair and beard are
long and curled; the robe falls in deep folds to the
ancles. The inscription runs : " By the grace of
Asshur, Samas and Bin, the great gods, my lords, I,
Tiglath Pilesar, am ruler from the great sea of the west
land (mat acharri] to the lake of the land of Nairi.
Three times I have marched to the land of Nairi." 2
The first subjugation of this district could not, there-
fore, have been complete.

As this monument proves, Tiglath Pilesar's campaigns
could not have ended with the fifth year of his reign.
From the synchronistic tablets we can ascertain that
he had to undergo severe struggles with the Babylo-
nians. Marduk-nadin-akh of Babylon invaded Assyria,
crossed the Tigris, and the battle took place on the
Lower Zab. In the next year, according to the same
tablets, Tiglath Pilesar is said to have taken the border-
fortresses of Babylon, Dur-Kurigalzu, Sippara, Babili
and Upi (Opis ?).3 However this may be, Tiglath
Pilesar in the end was at a disadvantage in his contest
with the Babylonians. Sennacherib, king of Assyria,
tells us, " The gods of the city Hekali, which Marduk-
nadin-akh, king of the land of Accad, had taken in the
time of Tiglath Pilesar, king of Asshur, and carried to
Babylon 418 years previously, I have caused to be

1 Menant, loc. cit. p. 48.

2 Vol. i. p. 519 ; E. Sclirader, " Keilinscliriften xmd A. T." s. 16.
8 M&iant, loc. cit. p. 51.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 41

brought back again from Babylon and put up again in
their place." A Babylonian tablet from the tenth year
of Marduk-nadin-akh of Babylon appears to deal with
loans on conquered Assyrian territory.1

When Tiglath Pilesar ascended the throne about the
year 1130 B.C. the empire of Assyria, as his inscrip-
tions show, had not as yet made any extensive con-
quests beyond the circle of the native country. The
Muskai, i. e. the Moschi, whom we have found on the
north-western slopes of the Armenian mountains,
against whom Tiglath Pilesar first fought, had forced
their way, as the cylinders tell us, into the land of
Kummukh.2 As the inhabitants of the land of
Kummukh are conquered on the Tigris and forced into
it, while others escape over the Tigris and defend a
fortified city on the further side of the river, as the
land itself is then incorporated with Assyria, we must
obviously look for it at no great distance to the north
on both shores of the Upper Tigris. We shall hardly be
in error, therefore, if we take this land to be the district
afterwards called Gumathene, on the Tigris, which
Ammianus describes as a fruitful and productive land,
i. e. as the canton of Amida.3 The next conflicts of
Tiglath Pilesar took place on the Lower Zab, i. e. at
the south-eastern border of the Assyrian country.
Further to the south, on the Zagrus, perhaps in the
district of Chalonitis, or between the Lower Zab and
the Adhim, or at any rate to the east, we must look for
the land of Khumani and the land of Musri. The
image at Karkar, Tiglath Pilesar's monument of victory,

1 Vol. i. p. 263 ; Bavian Inscrip. 48 — 50 ; Menant, " Annal." pp.
52, 236. Inscription on the black basalt-stone in Oppert et Meaant,
"Documents juridiques," p. 98. Is the name of the witness (col. 2,
27), Sar-babil-assur-issu (p. 115), correctly explained by "The king
of Babel has conquered Asshur " ?

2 Col. 1, 62. 3 Ammian. Marcell. 18, 9.

42 ASSYRIA.

gives us information about the position of the land of
Nam. It comprises the mountain cantons between the
Eastern Tigris and the upper course of the Great Zab,
where that river traverses the land of Arrapachitis
(Albak). The lake of the land of Nairi, to which the
inscription of Karkar extends the rule of Tiglath Pilesar,
and the upper sea from which auxiliaries come to the
princes of the land of Nairi, are both, no doubt, Lake
Van. The inhabitants of Nairi are not like those of
the land of Kummukh, incorporated with Assyria, they
have merely to pay a moderate tribute in horses and
oxen. The campaign of Tiglath Pilesar against Karkamis
(Karchemish) proves that the dominion of Assyria
before his reign did not reach the Euphrates. He
marches against the land of Aram and has then to
fight with the army of Karchemish on this side, i. e. on
the east side of the Euphrates ; the results which he
obtained on this campaign to the west of the Euphrates
he does not himself rate very highly. We saw that in
the end he remained at a disadvantage in his contest
with Babylon. On the other hand, in campaigns
which took place in years subsequent to the attempt
against Karchemish, he must have forced his way
to the west far beyond the Euphrates, in order to
be able to boast on the monument at Karkar " that
he ruled from the sea of Nairi as far as the great
sea of the west land," i. e. to the Mediterranean.
Hence we have to assume that he went forth from
Karchemish westwards almost as far as the mouth of
the Orontes. We should be more accurately informed
on this matter if the fragment of an inscription on an
obelisk beside an inscription of Assurnasirpal, who
reigned more than 200 years after Tiglath Pilesar,
could be referred to Tiglath Pilesar. The fragment
speaks in the third person of the booty gained in

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 43

hunting by a king, which is given in nearly the same
totals as the results of Tiglath Pilesar's hunts on his
cylinders. These represent him as slaying 120 lions
and capturing 800. The fragment speaks of 120 and
800 lions, of Amsi killed in Charran on the Chabor,
of Eim whom the king slew before the land of Chatti
at the foot of Mount Labnani (Lebanon), of a crocodile
(nasukfi) which the king of Musri sent as a present.
The hunter, it is said, ruled from the city of Babylon,
in the land of Accad, as far as the land of the west
(mat ac/iarrij.1

According to the inscriptions on the cylinders the
land of Aram lies to the east of the Euphrates ; the
city of Karchemish lies on the west bank in the land ot
the Chatti. The Chatti are the Hittites of the Hebrews,
the Cheta of the Egyptians. We found that the
inscriptions of Sethos and Ramses II. extended the
name of the Cheta as far as the Euphrates (I. 151,
152). But although the kingdom of the Hittites had
fallen two centuries before Tiglath Pilesar crossed
the Euphrates, the name still clung to this region, as
the inscriptions of Tiglath Pilesar and his successors
prove, more especially to the region from Hamath and
Damascus as far as Lebanon. The land of the west
(mat acharri) in the strict sense is, of course, to the
Assyrians, from their point of view, the coast of Syria.
Whatever successes Tiglath Pilesai' may have gained
in this direction, they were of a transitory nature.

The first of his sons to succeed him was Assur-bel-
kala, whose reign we may fix in the years 1100 — 1080
B.c. With three successive kings of Babylon, Marduk-
sapik-kullat, Saduni (?), and Nebu-zikir-iskun, he

1 Araziki cannot be taken for Aradus, the name of which city on the
obelisk and in the inscriptions of Assurnasirpal, Shalmanesar, and
elsewhere is Arvadu.

44 ASSYRIA.

came into contact, peaceful or hostile. With the first
he 'made a treaty of peace, with Saduni he carried on
war, with Nebu-zikir-iskun he again concluded a
peace, which fixed the borders. This was confirmed
by intermarriage ; l Assur - bel - kala married his
daughter to Nebu-zikir-iskun, while the latter gave his
daughter to Assur-bel-kala. Of the exploits of his
successor, Samsi-Bin II. (1080 — 1060 B.C.), a second
son of Tiglath Pilesar, we have no account.2 We
cannot maintain with certainty whether Assur-rab-
amar, of whom Shalmanesar II. tells us that he lost
two cities on the Euphrates which Tiglath Pilesar had
taken,3 was the direct successor of Samsi-Bin.

After this, for the space of more than 100 years
(1040 — 930), there is again a gap in our knowledge.
Not till we reach Assur-dayan II., who ascended
the throne of Assyria about the year 930 B.C., can we
again follow the series of the Assyrian kings downwards
without interruption. This Assur-dayan II. is followed
by Bin-nirar II., about 900 ; Bin-nirar, by Tiglath Adar
II. , who reigned from 889 — 883 B.C. He had to con-
tend once more against the land of Nairi, i. e. against
the region between the Eastern Tigris and the upper
course of the Upper Zab. As a memorial of the
successes which he gained here he caused his image
to be carved beside that of Tiglath Pilesar in the rocks
at Karkar (see below). Besides this, there is in exist-
ence from his time a pass, i. e. a small tablet, with the
inscription, " Permission to enter into the palace of

1 Sayce, "Records," 3, 33; M^nant, "Annal."p. 53; " Babylone,"
pp. 129, 130.

2 According to G. Smith ("Discov." p. 91, 252) this Samsi-Bin II.
restored the temple of Istar at Nineveh which Samsi-Bin I. had built
(above, p. 3).

8 Inscription of Kurkh, " Records of the Past," 3, 93 ; Meuant,
' Annal." p. 55.

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 45

Tiglath Adar, king of the land of Asshur, son of Bin-
nirar, king of the land of Asshur." l

Neither at the commencement nor in the course of
the history of Assyria do the monuments know of a
king Ninus, a queen Semiramis, or of any warlike
queen of this kingdom ; they do not even mention any
woman as standing independently at the head of
Assyria. Once, it is true, we find the name Semiramis
in the inscriptions in the form Sammuramat. Sam-
muramat was the wife of king Bin-nirar III., who
ruled over Assyria from the year 810 — 781 B.C. On
the pedestal of two statues, which an officer of this
king, the prefect of Chalah, dedicated to the god Nebo,
the inscription is : " To Nebo, the highest lord of his
lords, the protector of Bin-nirar, king of Asshur, and
protector of Sammuramat, the wife of the palace, his
lady." The name of Ninyas is quite unknown to the
monuments, and of the names of the 33 kings which
Ctesias gives, with their names and reigns as successors
of Ninyas down to the overthrow of the kingdom
and Sardanapalus (p. 26), — unless we identify the last
name in the list, that of Sardanapalus, with the Assur-
banipal of the inscriptions, i. e. with the ruler last
but one or two according to the records, — no single one
agrees with the names of the monuments, which, more-
over, give a higher total than six-and-thirty for the
reigns of the Assyrian kings. The list of Ctesias appears
to have been put together capriciously or merely
invented ; the lengths of the reigns are pure imagina-
tion, and arranged according to certain synchronisms.

Not less definite is the evidence of the monuments
that the pre-eminence of Assyria over Upper Asia
cannot have commenced in the year 2189 or 1913 B. a,
as Ctesias asserts, or as may be assumed from his data,

1 M6nant, " Annal." p. 63.

46 ASSYRIA.

nor in 1273, as has been deduced from the statements
of Berosus, nor finally in the year 1234, according to
Herodotus' statements (p. 27). Though we are able to
find only approximately the dates of the kings of
Assyria, whose Dames and deeds we have passed in
review, the result is, nevertheless, that the power of
Assyria in the fifteenth and fourteenth centuries did
not go far beyond the native country — that her forces
by no means surpassed those of Babylon — that pre-
cisely in the thirteenth and twelfth centuries B.C. the
kingdom of Babylon was at least as strong as that of
Assyria — that even towards the close of the twelfth
century Tiglath Pilesar I. could gain no success against
Babylon — that his successors sought to establish peace-
ful relations with Babylonia. There is just as little
reason to maintain the period of 520 years which
Herodotus allows for the Assyrian empire over Asia.
This cannot in any case be assumed earlier than the
date of Tiglath Pilesar L, who did at least cross the
Euphrates and enter Northern Syria. The beginning
of this empire would, therefore, be about 1130 B.C.,
not 1234 B.C. The date also which Herodotus gives
for the close of this empire (before 700 B.C.) cannot,
as will be shown, be maintained. According to this
datum the decline and fall of Assyria must have
began with the period in which, as a fact, she rose
to the proudest height and extended her power to
the widest extent. The period of 520 years can only
be kept artificially by reckoning it upwards from the
year 607 B.C., the year of the overthrow of the
Assyrian empire ; then it brings us from this date
to 1127 B.C., i. e. to the time of Tiglath Pilesar I.
But we saw that the conquests of Tiglath Pilesar did
not extend very far, that his successes west of the
Euphrates were of a transitory nature ; in no case

THE BEGINNINGS OF ASSYRIA. 47

could a dominion of Assyria over Babylon be dated
from his reign.

The complete agreement of the Assyrian and Baby-
lonian style and civilisation is proved most clearly by
the monuments. The names of the princes of Assyria
are formed analogously to those of the Babylonians ;
the names and the nature of the deities which the
Assyrians and Babylonians worship are the same. In
Assyria we meet again with Anu the god of the high
heaven, Samas the sun-god, Sin the moon-god, Bin
(Ramman) the god of the thunder ; of the spirits of the
planets Adar, the lord of Saturn, Nebo, the god of
Mercury, and Istar, the lady of Venus, in her double
nature of destroyer and giver of fruit, reappear. There
is only one striking difference : the special protector
of Assyria, Asshur, the god of the land, stands at the
head of the gods in the place of El of the Babylonians.
He it is after whom the land and the oldest metropolis
is named, whose representatives the oldest princes of
Assyria appear to have called themselves. The name
of Asshur is said to mean the good or the kind ;l
which may even on the Euphrates have been an epithet
of El, which on the Tigris became the chief name of
the deity. As the ancient princes of Ur and Erech,
of Nipur and Senkereh, as the kings of Babel — so also
the kings of Assyria, as far back as our monuments
allow us to go — built temples to their gods ; like them
they mark the tiles of their buildings with their names ;
like the kings of Babel, they cause inscriptions to be
written on cylinders, intended to preserve the memory
of their buildings and achievements, and then placed
in the masonry of their temples. The language of
the inscriptions of Assyria differs from those of the
Babylonian inscriptions, as one dialect from another ;

1 B. Schrader, " Keilinschriften und A. T." s. 7.

43 ASSYEIA.

the system of writing is the same. The population of
Assyria transferred their language and writing, their
religious conceptions and modes of worship, from the
Lower Euphrates to the Upper Tigris. If the princes
of Erech, Nipur and Babylon had to repel the attacks
of Elam, the Assyrian land, a region of moderate ex-
tent, lay under the spurs of the Armenian table-land,
under the ranges of the Zagrus. The struggle against
the tribes of these mountains, in the Zagrus and in the
region of the sources of the Euphrates and the Tigris,
and the stubborn resistance of these tribes appears to
have strengthened the warlike powers of the Assyrians,
and these ceaseless campaigns trained them to that
military excellence which finally, after a period of
exercise which lasted for centuries, won for them
the preponderance over Mesopotamia and Syria, over
Babylonia and Elain, no less than over Egypt.

CHAPTER III.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS.

AT the time when Babylonia, on the banks of the
Euphrates, flourished under the successors of Hammu-
rabi in an ancient and peculiar civilisation, and Assyria
was struggling upwards beside Babylonia on the banks
of the Tigris, strengthening her military power in the
Armenian mountains and the ranges of the Zagrus, and
already beginning to try her strength in more distant
campaigns, a Semitic tribe succeeded in rising into
eminence in the West also, in winning and exerting a
deep-reaching influence on distant and extensive lands.
It was a district of the most moderate extent from
which this influence proceeded, its dominion was of a
different kind from that of the Babylonians and
Assyrians ; it grew up on an element which elsewhere
appeared not a favourite with the Semites, and sought
its points of support in settlements on distant islands
and coasts. By this tribe the sea was actively traversed
and with ever-increasing boldness ; by circumspection,
by skill, by tough endurance and brave ventures it
succeeded in extending its dominion in ever- widening
circles, and making the sea the instrument of its wealth
and the bearer of its power.

On the coasts of Syria were settled the tribes of
the Arvadites, Giblites and Sidonians (I. 344). Their

50 PHCENICIA.

land extended from the mouth of the Eleutherus
(Nahr el Kebir) in the north to the promontory of
Carmel in the south. A narrow strip of coast under
Mount Lebanon, from 10 to 15 miles in breadth and
some 1 50 miles in length, was all that they possessed.
Richly watered by the streams sent down from Lebanon
to the sea, the small plains formed round their mouths
and separated by the spurs of the mountain ranges
are of the most abundant fertility. The Eleutherus is
followed to the south by the Adonis (Nahr el Ibra-
him), and this by the Lycus (Nahr el Kelb) ; then follow
the Tamyras (Nahr Damur), the Bostrenus (Nahr el
Auli1), the Belus (the Sihor Libnath of the Hebrews,
now Nahr Naman), and lastly the Kishon. Above the
shore rise hills clothed with date-palms, vines and
olives ; higher up on Lebanon splendid mountain pas-
tures spread out, and above these we come to the vast
forests (I. 338) which provide shade in the glowing heat,
as Tacitus says,2 and to the bright snow-fields which
crown the summit of Lebanon. Ammianus speaks of
the region under Lebanon as full of pleasantness and
beauty. The upper slopes of the mountain furnish
pasture and forests ; in the rocks are copper and iron.
The high mountain-range, which sharply divided the
inhabitants of the coast from the interior (at a much
later time, even after the improvements of the Roman
Caesars, there were, as there are now, nothing but
mule-tracks across Lebanon3), lay behind the inhabit-
ants of the coast, and before them lay the sea. At
an early period they must have become familiar with
that element. The name of the tribe which the
Hebrew Scriptures call the " first-born of Canaan "
means "fishermen." The places on the coast found

1 Eobinson, " Palestine," 3, 710. 8 Tac. " Hist." 5, 6.

3 Renan, "Mission de Phenicie," p. 836.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 51

the sea the easiest means of communication. Thus the
sea, so rich in islands, the long but proportionately
narrow basin which lay before the Sidonians, Giblites
and Arvadites, would soon attract to longer voyages
the fishermen and navigators of the coast.

We found that the beginning of civilisation in
Canaan could not be placed later than about the year
2500 B.C., and we must therefore allow a considerable
antiquity to the cities of the Sidonians, Giblites,
Arvadites, Zemarites and Arkites. The settlement on
the site of Sidon was founded, no doubt, before the
year 2000 B.C., and that on the site of Byblus cannot
certainly be placed later than this period.1 The cam-
paigns which the Pharaohs undertook against Syria
and the land of the Euphrates after the expulsion of
the Shepherds could not leave these cities unmoved.
If the Zemar of the inscriptions of Tuthmosis III. is
Zemar (Simyra) near Aradus, and Arathntu is Aradus
itself, the territories of these cities were laid waste
by this king in his sixth campaign (about the year
1580 B.C.); if Arkatu is Arka, south of Aradus, this
place must have been destroyed in his fifteenth cam-
paign (about the year 1570 B.C.). Sethos I. (1440 —
1400 B.C.) subdued the land of Limanon (i. e. the
region of Lebanon), and caused cedars to be felled there.
One of his inscriptions mentions Zor, i. e. Tyre, among
the cities conquered by him. The son and successor
of Sethos I., Ramses II., also forced his way in the
first decades of the fourteenth century as far as the
coasts of the Phenicians. At the mouth of the Nahr el
Kelb, between Sidon and Berytus, the rocks on the
coast display the memorial which he caused to be set
up in the second and third year of his reign in honour
of the successes obtained in this region.2 In the fifth

1 Vol. i. pp. 344, 345. 2 Vol. i. p. 151.

B2

62 PHOENICIA.

year of his reign Ramses, with the king of the Cheta'
defeats the king of Arathu in the neighbourhood of
Kadeshu on the Orontes, and Ramses III. about the
year 1310 B.C., mentions beside the Cheta who attack
Egypt the people of Arathu, by which name, in the
one case as in the other, may be meant the warriors
of Aradus.1 If Arathu, like Arathu tu, is Aradus,
it follows, from the position which Ramses II. and
III. give to the princes of Arathu, that beside the
power to which the kingdom of the Hittites had risen
about the middle of the fifteenth century B.C., and
which it maintained to the end of the fourteenth,2 the
Phenician cities had assumed an independent position.
The successes of the Pharaohs in Syria come to an
end in the first decades of the fourteenth century.
Egypt makes peace and enters into a contract of
marriage with the royal house of the Cheta ; the
Syrians obtain even the preponderance against Egypt
(I. 152), to which Ramses III. towards the end of the
fourteenth century was first able to oppose a successful
defence.

The overthrow of the kingdom of the Hittites,
which succumbed to the attack of the Amorites (I.
348) soon after the year 1300 B.C., must have had a
reaction on the cities of the Phenicians. Expelled
Hittites must have been driven to the coast-land, or
have fled thither, and in the middle of the thirteenth
century the successes gained by the Hebrews who
broke in from the East, over the Amorites, the
settlement of the Hebrews on the mountains of the
Amorites, must again have thrown the vanquished,
i. e. the fugitives of this nation, towards the coast.

With this retirement of the older strata of the
population of Canaan to the coast is connected the

1 Vol. i. p. 153. 2 Yol. i. p. 344.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 53

movement which from this period emanates from the
coasts of the Phenicians, and is directed towards the
islands of the Mediterranean and the ^Egean. It is true
that on this subject only the most scanty statements
and traces, only the most legendary traditions have
come down to us, so that we can ascertain these
advances only in the most wavering outlines. One
hundred miles to the west off the coast of Phoenicia
lies the island of Cyprus. On the southern coast of
this island, which looked towards Phoenicia, stood the
city of Citium, Kith and Chith in the inscriptions of
the Phenicians, and apparently Kittii in those of the
Assyrians. Sidonian coins describe Citium as a daughter
of Sidon.1 After this city the whole island is known
among the Semites as Kittim and Chittim ; this name
is even used in a wider sense for all the islands
of the Mediterranean.2 The western writers state
that before the time of the Trojan war Belus had
conquered and subjugated the island of Cyprus, and
that Citium belonged to Belus.3 The victorious Belus
is the Baal of the Phenicians. The date of the Trojan
war is of no importance for the settlement of the
Phenicians in Cyprus, for this statement is found in
Virgil only. More important is the fact that the
settlers brought the Babylonian cuneiform writing
to Cyprus. This became so firmly rooted in use
that even the Greeks, who set foot on the island at
a far later time, scarcely before the end of the ninth
century, adopted this writing, which here meanwhile
had gone through a peculiar development, and had
become a kind of syllabic-writing, and used it on coins

1 The legend runs, " From the Sidonians, Mother of Kamb, Ippo,
Kith(?), Sor," Movers, "Phoeniz." 2, 134.

2 Isaiah xxiii. 1, 19; Jeremiah ii. 10; Ezekiel xxvii. 6; Joseph.
"Antiq." 1, 6, 1.

3 Yirgil, «^En." 1, 619, 620.

54 PHOENICIA.

and in inscriptions even in the fifth century B.C.1
The settlement of the Sidonians in Cyprus must there-
fore have taken place before the time in .which the
alphabetic writing, i. e. the writing specially known as
Phenician, was in use in Syria, and hence at the latest
before 1100 B.C. How long before this time the settle-
ment of the Phenicians in Cyprus took place can,
perhaps, be measured by the fact that the Cyprian
alphabet is a simplification of the old Babylonian
cuneiform writing. The simplified form would un-
doubtedly have been driven out by the far more
convenient alphabetic writing of the Phenicians if the
Cyprian writing had not become fixed in use in this
island before the rise of the alphabetic writing. Further,
since the Phenicians, as we shall see, set foot on the
coast of Hellas from about the year 1200 B.C. onwards,
we must place the foundation of the colonies on the
coasts nearest them, the settlement in Cyprus, before this
date, about the middle of the thirteenth century B.C.

What population the Phenicians found on Cyprus it
is not possible to discover. Herodotus tells us that the
first inhabitants of the island were Ethiopians, accord-
ing to the statements of the Cyprians. It is beyond
a doubt that not Citium only, but the greater part of
the cities of the island were founded by the Phenicians,
and that the Phenician element became the ruling
element of the whole island.2 It is Belus who is said
to have conquered Cyprus, and to whom the city of
Citium is said to belong ; i. e. Citium worshipped the
god Baal. At Amathus, to the west of Citium, on the
south coast of the island, which was called the oldest
city on Cyprus, and which nevertheless bears a dis-
tinctly Semitic name (Hamath), Adonis and Ashera-

1 Brandis, " Monatsberichte Berl. Akad." 1873, s. 645 fE.

2 Herod. 7, 90.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 55

Astarte were worshipped,1 and these deities had also
one of their oldest and most honoured seats of worship
at Paphos (Pappa in the inscriptions), on the west
coast. The Homeric poems represent Aphrodite as
hastening to her altar at Paphos in Cyprus. Pausanias
observes that the Aphrodite of Cyprus was a warlike
Aphrodite,2 and as the daughters of the Cyprians
surrendered themselves to the foreign seamen in
honour of this goddess,3 it was the Astarte- Ashera of
the Phenicians who was worshipped at Amathus and
Paphos. The Zeus of the Cyprian city Salamis
(Sillumi in the inscriptions of the Assyrians), to whom,
according to the evidence of western writers, human
sacrifices were offered, can only be Baal Moloch, the
evil sun-god of the Phenicians. In the beginning of
the tenth century B.C. the cities of Cyprus stood under
the supremacy of the king of Tyre.4 The island was
of extraordinary fertility. The forests furnished wood
for ship-building ; the mountains concealed rich veins
of the metal which has obtained the name of copper
from this island.5 Hence it was a very valuable
acquisition, an essential strengthening of the power of
Sidon in the older, and Tyre in the later, period.

Following Zeno of Khodes, who wrote the history of
his home in the first half of the second century B.C.,6
Diodorus tells us : The king of the Phenicians, Agenor,
bade his son Cadmus seek his sister Europa,7 who had

1 Stephan. Byz. 'Ajua0o5c.

2 " Odyss." 8, 362; Tac. " Annal." 2, 3 ; Pausan. 1, 14, 6 ; Pompon.
Mela, 2, 7. 3 Vol. i. p. 359.

4 Joseph, "in Apion." 1, 18; " Antiq." 8, 5, 3, 9, 14, 2.

5 Movers, " Phceniz." 2, 239, 240. 6 Diod. 5, 56.

7 In Homer Europa is not the daughter of Agenor but of Phoenix
("II." 14, 321), just as Cadmus, Thasos, and Europa are sometimes
children of Agenor and sometimes of Phosnix. In Hdt. 1, 2 it is
Cretans who carry off Europa, the daughter of the king of Tyre.

56 PH(ENICIA.

disappeared, and bring back the maiden, or not return
himself to Phoenicia. Overtaken by a violent storm,
Cadmus vowed a shrine to Poseidon. He was saved,
and landed on the island of Rhodes, where the inhabit-
ants worshipped before all other gods the sun, who had
here begotten seven sons and among them Makar.
Cadmus set up a temple in Rhodes to Poseidon, as he
had vowed to do, and left behind Phenicians to keep
up the service; but in the temple which belonged
to Athena at Cnidus in Rhodes he dedicated a work
of art, an iron bowl, which bore an inscription in
Phenician letters, the oldest inscription which came
from Phrenicia to the Hellenes. From Rhodes Cadmus
came to Samothrace, and there married Harmonia.
The gods celebrated this first marriage by bringing
gifts, and blessing the married pair to the tones of
heavenly music.1

Ephorus says that Cadmus carried off Harmonia
while sailing past Samothrace, and hence in that island
search was still made for Harmonia at the festivals.2
Herodotus informs us that Cadmus of Tyre, the son of
Agenor, in his search for Europa, landed on the island
of Thera, which was then called Callisto, and there
left behind some Phenicians, either because the land
pleased him or for some other reason. These Pheni-
cians inhabited the island for eight generations before
Theras landed there from Lacedaemon. The rest went
to the island of Thasos and there built a temple to
Heracles, which he had himself seen, and the city of
Thasos. This took place five generations before Heracles
the son of Amphitryon was born. After that Cadmus
came to the land now called Bceotia, and the Phenicians
who were with him inhabited the land and taught the

1 Diod. 4, 2, 60 ; 5, 56, 57, 58, 48, 49.

2 Ephor. Frag. 12, ed. Miiller.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 57

Hellenes many things, among others the use of writing,
" which as it seems to me the Hellenes did not possess
before. They learnt this writing, as it was used by
the Phenicians ; in the course of time the form of
the letters changed with the language. From these
Phenicians the lonians, among whom they dwelt, learnt
the letters, altered their form a little, and extended
their use. As was right, they called them Phenician
letters, since the Phenicians had brought them into
Greece. I have myself seen inscriptions in Cadmeian
letters (i. e. from the time of Cadmus) in the temple
of Ismenian Apollo at Thebes." l According to the
narrative of Hellauicus, Cadmus received an oracle,
bidding him follow the cow which bore on her back
the sign of the full moon, and found a city where she
lay down. Cadmus carried out the command, and
when the cow lay down wearied, where Thebes now
stands, Cadmus built there the Cadmeia (the citadel of
Thebes).2 According to the statement of Pherecydes
Cadmus also built the city of Thebes.3 With Hecatseus
of Miletus Cadmus passes as the discoverer of letters ;
according to others he also discovered the making of
iron armour and the art of mining.4

The direction of the Phenician settlements, which
proceeds in the ^Egean sea from S.E. to N.W., cannot
be mistaken in these legends. First Rhodes, then
the Cyclades, then the islands on the Thracian coast,
Samothrace and Thasos, were colonised ; and at length,
on the strait of Euboea, the mainland of Hellas was
trodden by the Phenicians, who are said to have gained
precisely from this point a deep-reaching influence over

1 Herod. 4, 147 ; 2, 45, 49 ; 5, 58, 59.

2 Frag. 8, 9, ed. Miiller.

3 Frag. 40 — 42, 43 — 45, ed. Miiller.

4 Frag. 163, ed. Mtiller.

58 PIKENICIA.

the Hellenes. The legend of Cadmus goes far back
among the Greeks. In the Homeric poems the inhabit-
ants of Thebes are " Cadmeians." The Thebaid praised
" the divine wisdom of Cadmus ; " in the poems of
Hesiod he leads home Harmonia, "the daughter of
Ares and Aphrodite," and Pindar describes how the
Muses sang for " the divine Cadmus, the wealthiest of
mortals, when in seven-gated Thebes he led the ox-eyed
Harmonia to the bridal-bed." l Agenor, the father of
Cadmus, is a name which the Greeks have given to
the Baal of the Phenicians.2 Cadmus himself, the
wealthiest of mortals, who leads home the daughter of a
god and a goddess, — who celebrates the first marriage
at which the gods assemble, bring gifts and sing, —
whose wife was worshipped as the protecting goddess of
Thebes,3 — whose daughters, Ino, Leucothea and Semele,
are divine creatures, whom Zeus leads to the Elysian
fields,4 — can only be a god. He seeks the lost Europa,
and is to follow the cow which bears the sign of the full
moon. We know the moon-goddess of the Phenicians,
who bears the crescent moon and cow's horns, the
horned Astarte, who wears a cow's head, the goddess
of battle and sensual desire, and thus the daughter of
Ares and Aphrodite. " The great temple of Astarte
at Sidon," so we find in the book of the Syrian goddess,
" belongs, as the Sidonians say, to Astarte ; but a priest
told me that it was a temple of Europa, the sister of
Cadmus." The meaning of the word Europa has been
discussed previously (I. 371). Cadmus, who seeks the
lost moon-goddess, who at length finds and overcomes
her, and celebrates with her the holy marriage, is the
Baal Melkarth of the Phenicians. The death-bringing

1 "Theog." 937, 975; Find. "Pyth." 3, 88 segq.

2 Movers, "Phceniz." 1, 129, 131. 3 Plut. "Pelop." c. 19.
4 Pind. "Olymp." 2, 141.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 59

Istar-Astarte is changed into Bilit-Ashera, into the
fruit-giving goddess ;l the gloomy Europa changes into
Harmonia, the goddess of union, birth and increase,
yet not without leaving to her descendants deadly
gifts. It is the myth of Melkarth and Astarte
which the Greeks present to us in the story of
Cadmus ; with this myth they have connected the
foundation of the Phenician settlements in Khodes,
Thera, Samothrace, Thasos and Boeotia ; they have
changed it into the foundation of these colonies. The
name Cadmus means the man of the East ; to the
Hebrews the Arabs who dwelt to the east of them
were known as Beni Kedem, i. e. sons of the East.2
To the Greeks the Phenicians were men of the East,
just as to the English of the thirteenth century the
merchants of Lubeck were Easterlings. The citadel of
Thebes, which the men of the East built, preserved
the name of Cadmus the son of the East, and kept it
alive among the Greeks.

What we can gather from Grecian legend is con-
firmed by some statements of historians and by traces
which tell of settlements of the Phenicians. Thucy-
dides informs us that the Phenicians colonised most
of the islands of the .ZEgean.3 Diodorus has already
told us with regard to Rhodes that in the temples
of this island were Phenician works of art and in-
scriptions, and that in Rhodes the sun-god and the
seven children which he begot there were worshipped.
In the number eight made by these deities we can
hardly fail to recognise the eight great deities of
the Phenicians ; the sun-god at their head is the
Baal of the Phenicians (I. 357). And if Diodorus
mentions Makar among the seven sons of the sun-god
of Rhodes, — if according to others Rhodes, like Cyprus,

1 Vol. i. 271. 2 Movers, " Phoeniz." 1, 517. 3 Thac. 1, 8.

60 PHOENICIA.

was called Macaria, — Makar is a Greek form of the
name Melkarth. We further learn that on the highest
mountain summit in Khod.es, on Atabyris, Zeus was
worshipped under the form of a bull, and that a human
sacrifice was offered yearly to Cronos. In Atabyris
we cannot fail to recognise the Semitic Tabor, i. e. the
height. We found above that the Phenicians wor-
shipped Baal under the form of a bull, and the Greeks
are wont to denote Baal Moloch by the name of Cronos.1
These forms of worship continued to exist even when
at a later time Hellenic immigrants had got the upper
hand in Rhodes. It was the Dorians who here met
with resistance from the Phenicians at Camirus and
lalysus ; they got the upper hand, but admitted Phe-
nician families into their midst,2 and continued their
sacred rites. Diodorus informs us that the Phenicians
whom Cadmus had left behind on Rhodes had formed
a mixed community with the lalysians, and that it was
said that priests of their families had performed the
sacred duties.3 Even at a later time Rhodes stood in
close relation with Phoenicia, especially with the city
of Aradus.4 Thus it happened that the colonies which
the Rhodians planted in the seventh and sixth centuries
in Sicily, Gela and Acragas, carried thither the worship
of Zeus Atarbyrius. Zeus Atarbyrius was the protect-
ing deity of Acragas, and human sacrifices were offered
to his iron bull-image on the citadel of that city as
late as the middle of the sixth century. The coins of
Gela also exhibit a bull.5 Of the island of Thera,
Herodotus told us that the Phenicians colonised it
and inhabited it for eight generations, i. e. for more

1 Vol. i. 363, 364. 2 Atherueus, p. 360.

3 Diod. 5, 58. « Boeckh. C. I. G. 2526.

6 Hefter, " Gotterdienste auf Eliodos,"3, 18; "Welcker, " Mythologie,"
1, 145; Brandis, " Munzwesen," s. 587.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 61

than 250 years according to his computation. Hero-
dotus names the chief of the Phenicians whom
Cadmus left behind on Thera ; others speak of the
two altars which he erected there.1 The descendants
of these Phenicians were found here by the Greek
settlers from Laconia. It is certain that even in the
third century B.C. the island worshipped the hero
Phoenix.2 Of the island of Melos we learn that it was
occupied by Phenicians of Byblus, and named by
them after their mother city ; 3 the island of Oliaros
near Paros was, on the other hand, according to Hera-
cleides Ponticus, occupied by the Sidonians.4 Strabo
informs us that Samothrace was previously called
Melite (Malta) ; from its height (the island is a
mountain rising high in the sea and covered with oak
forests ; the summit reaches 5000 feet) it obtained the
name of Samos, " for high places are called Sami ; " 5
as a matter of fact the stem of the word of this mean-
ing, like the name Melite, belongs to the Phenician
language. Ephorus has already told us (p. 56) that the
Samothracians sought for Harmonia at their festivals ;
Diodorus represents Cadmus as celebrating the marriage
with Harmonia on Samothrace as well as at Thebes,
and we learn from Herodotus that the Cabiri, i. e.
the great gods of the Phenicians, were worshipped
on Samothrace ; votive tablets of the island dating
from Roman times still bear the inscription,"" to the
great gods," i. e. to the Cabiri.6 The islands of Imbros
and Lemnos also worshipped the Cabiri ; Lemnos
especially worshipped Hephaestus, who had a leading

1 SchoL Find. "Pyth." 4, 88; Pausan. 3, 1, 7, 8; Steph, Byz.
M«/i|3Xiopoc. 2 Bceckh, 0. I. G. 2448.

3 Herod. 4, 147 ; Steph. Byz. mfjXog. * Steph.. Byz. 'QXiapoQ.

6 Strabo, pp. 346, 457, 472 ; Diod. 5, 47.

6 Vol. i. 378 ; Herod. 2, 51 ; Conze, " Inseln des Thrakischen
Meeres," e. g. s. 91.

62 P1KENICIA.

place in this circle.1 The island of Thasos is said,
according to the statement of the Greeks, to have been
called after a son of Phoenix, or Agenor, of the name
of Thasos, who was consequently a brother of Cadmus.
Herodotus saw on the island a temple which the
Phenicians had built to Heracles, i. e. to Baal-Melkarth,
and the mines which they had made on the coast oppo-
site Samothrace ; " they had overturned a great moun-
tain in order to get gold from it." 2 Herodotus also tells
us that the temple of Aphrodite Urania on the island
of Cythera off the coast of Laconia was founded by the
Phenicians, and Pausanias calls this temple the oldest
and most sacred temple of Urania among the Hel-
lenes ; the wooden image in this temple exhibited the
goddess in armour. Aphrodite Urania is with the
Greeks the Syrian Aphrodite ; if she was represented on
Cythera in armour it is clear that she was worshipped
there by the Phenicians as Astarte-Ashera, i. e. as the
goddess of war and love.3

Not in the islands only, but on the coasts of Hellas
also, the Phenicians have left traces of their ancient
occupation, especially in the form of worship belong-
ing to them. On the isthmus of Corinth Melicertes,
i. e. Melkarth, was worshipped as a deity protecting
navigation ; Corinthian coins exhibit him on a dolphin.4
Aphrodite, whose shrine stood on the summit of Acro-
corinthus, was worshipped by prostitution like the
Ashera-Bilit of the Phenicians. In Attica also, in the
deme of Athmonon, there was a shrine of the goddess
of Cythera, which king Porphyrion, i. e. the purple man,
the Phenician, is said to have founded there at a very

1 Strabo, p. 473 ; Steph. Byz. *I/*/3poc; vol. i. 378.

2 Herod. 2, 44 ; 6, 47.

3 Herod. 1, 105; Pausan. 1, 14, 7; 3, 23, 1.

* Pausan. 10, 11, 5; Boackh, " Metrologie," s. 45.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 63

ancient time "before king Actaeus." 1 At Marathon,
where Heracles was worshipped, and of whom the
name represents the Phenician city Marathus, rose a
fountain which had the name Makaria, i. e. Makar,2
the name of Melkarth, which we have already met with
in Cyprus and Rhodes, and shall meet with again.
More plainly still do the tombs lately discovered in
Hymettus at the village of Spata attest the ancient
settlement of the Phenicians on the Attic coast.
These are chambers dug deeply into the rock after the
Phenician manner, with horizontal roofs after the
oldest fashion of Phenician graves ; and shafts lead
down to them from the surface. The ornaments and
works in glass, ivory, gold and brass discovered here,
which are made after Babylonian and Egyptian models,
can only have been brought by the Phenicians.3 The
citadel of Thebes, as has been said, retains the name
of Cadmus ; the poetry of the Greeks praised the
mighty walls, the seven gates of Thebes. We know
the number seven of the great Phenician gods ; we can
prove that the seven gates were dedicated to the gods
of the sun, the moon and the five planets ; 4 and the
Greeks have already admitted to us that they received
the wearing of armour, the art of mining and masonry
and finally their alphabet from Cadmus, i. e. from the
Phenicians, the Cad means of Thebes.

In the Homeric poems Europa, the daughter of
Phoenix, bears Minos to Zeus. The abode of Minos is
the "great city" of Cnossus in Crete ; he receives each
nine years the revelations of his father Zeus ; for his
daughter Ariadne Daedalus adorns a dancing place at

1 Pausan. 1, 2, 5; 1, 14, 6, 7.

2 Strabo, p. 377; Pausan. 1, 32, 5.

3 A0HNAION c' y', 1877, and below, chap. xi.

4 Brandis, " Hermes," 2, 275 ff. I cannot agree in all points with
the deductions of this extremely acute inquiry.

64 PIKEN1CIA.

Cnossus. After his death Minos carries in the under
world the golden sceptre, and by his decisions puts an
end to the contentions of the shades.1 His descendants
rule in Crete.2 Later accounts tell us that Zeus in the
form of a bull carried off Europa from Phoenicia, and
bore her over the sea to Crete. The wife of her son
Minos, Pasiphae, then united with a bull which rose
out of the sea, and brought forth the Minotaur, i. e. the
Minos-bull, a man with a bull's head.3 The son of
Minos, Androgeos (earth-man) or Eurygyes (Broad-
land), was destroyed in Attica by the bull of Marathon,
who consumed him in his flames.4 To avenge the
death of Androgeos Minos seized Megara, and blight
and famine compelled the Athenians to send, in obedi-
ence to the command of Minos, seven boys and seven
girls every ninth year to Crete, who were then sacri-
ficed to the Minotaur.5 Others narrate that Hephaestus
had given Minos a man of brass, who wandered round
the island and kept off foreign vessels, and clasped to his
glowing breast all who were disobedient to Minos.6
When Daedalus retired before the wrath of Minos from
Crete to Sicily, Minos equipped his ships to bring him
back ; but he there found, according to Herodotus, a
violent death.7 The king of the Sicanians, so Diodorus
tells us, gave him a friendly welcome, and caused a warm
bath to be prepared, and then craftily suffocated him in
it. The Cretans buried their king in a double grave ;
they laid the bones in a secret place, and built upon
them a temple to Aphrodite, and as they could not
return to Crete because the Cretans had burned their

1 "II." 14, 321; 18, 593; " Odyss." 19, 178; 11, 568.

3 " Odyss." 11, 523. 3 Diod. 4, 60.

4 Serv. ad " ^neid." 6, 30.

6 Hesych. «T' Vvpvyvg dywv ; Plut. " Thes." c. 15 ; Diod. 4, 65.
8 Apollodor. 1, 9, 26; Suidas, S

7 Herod. 7, 110.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 65

ships, they founded the city Minoa in Sicily ; but the
tomb of Minos was shown in Crete also.1

A bull-god carries the daughter of Phoenix over the sea
to Crete and begets Minos ; a bull who rises out of the
sea begets with Pasiphae, i. e. the all-shining, the Minos-
bull, to which in case of blight and famine boys and girls
are sacrificed in the number sacred among the Semites ;
Androgeos succumbs to the heat of the bull of Mara-
thon, an iron man slays his victims by pressing them
to his glowing breast. These legends of the Greeks
are unmistakable evidence of the origin of the rites
observed in Crete from the coast of Syria, of the settle-
ment of Phenicians in Crete. The bull-god may be
the Baal Samim or the Baal Moloch of the Phenicians ;
Europa has already revealed herself to us as the moon-
goddess of the Phenicians (p. 58) ; Pasiphae is only
another name for the same goddess, the lady of the
nightly sky, the starry heaven. We know that on
occasions of blight human sacrifices were offered to
Baal Moloch, the fiery, consuming, angry sun-god, and
that these sacrifices were burnt. Ister, a writer of the
third century B.C., tells us quite simply ; In ancient
times children were sacrificed to Cronos in Crete.2
Before the harbour of Megara lay an island of the
name of Minoa ; at the time of the summer heat
before the corn was ripe, the Athenians offered peace-
offerings at the Thargelia, " in the place of human
sacrifices," 3 that the consuming sun might not kill the
harvest. The name of the island and this custom, as
well as the flames of the bull of Marathon, prove that
beside the worship of the Syrian goddess at Athmonon,
and the worship of Melkarth at Marathon, the worship
of Baal Moloch had penetrated as far as Megara and

1 Diod. 4, 76—73 ; Schol. Callim. " Hymn, in Jovem," 8.

2 Istri frag. 47, ed. Muller. 3 Istri frag. 33, ed. Muller.

F

66 PHCENICIA.

Attica. Minos, the son of the sky-god, the husband of
the moon-goddess, who from time to time receives reve-
lations from heaven, and even after his death is judge of
the dead, is himself a god ; his proper name is Minotaur,
a name taken from the form of the bull's image and the
bull's head. When Baal Melkarth had found and over-
come Astarte, after he had celebrated with her the holy
marriage, he went to rest according to the Phenician
myth in the waters of the western sea which he had
warmed. The Phenicians were of opinion that the
beams of the sun when sinking there in the far west
had the most vigorous operation because of their
greater proximity.1 Minos goes to Sicily ; there in a
hot bath he ends his life, and over his resting-place
rises the temple of Astarte-Ashera, with whom he
celebrated his marriage in the west, and who by this
marriage is changed from the goddess of war into the
goddess of love. The tombs of Minos in Crete, Sicily,
and finally at Gades, of which the Greeks speak, are
in the meaning of the Phenician myth merely resting-
places of the god, who in the spring wakes from his
slumber into new power. The Greeks made Minos,
who continued to live in the under-world, a judge in
the causes of the shades, and finally a judge of the
souls themselves. On the southern coast of Sicily, at
the mouth of the Halycus, lay the city which the
Greeks called Minoa or Heraclea-Minoa after Minos.
To the Phenicians it was known as Eus Melkarth (p.
78), a title which proves beyond doubt that Minos was
one of the names given by the Greeks to this god of
the Phenicians.

The worship of Baal Moloch, which the Phenicians
brought to Crete and the shores of Megara and
Attica, was not all that the Greeks personified in the

1 MullenhoflP, " Deutsche Alterthumskunde," i. 222.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PIIENICIANS. 67

form of Minos ; they did not confine themselves to one
side of the myth of Baal Melkarth. When Grecian
colonists settled subsequently in Crete they found
the cities of the Phenicians full of t artistic capacity,
and their life regulated by legal ordinances. Thus
their legend could place the artist Dsedalus, the
discoverer and pattern of all art - industry, beside
Minos, and refer to Minos the ordinances of the cities.
Zeus himself had revealed these arrangements to him.
At a later time the Greek cities of Crete traced their own
institutions back to Minos ; here and there they may
perhaps have followed a Phenician model, or they may
have given out that such a model had been followed.
Plato represents Minos as receiving the wise laws
which he introduced into Crete from Zeus. With
Aristotle also Minos is the founder of the Cretan laws.1
In the circle of the Cabiri the sky-god Baal Samim was
the protector and defender of law (I. 377).

Lastly, Minos is with the Greeks at once the repre-
sentation and expression of the dominion which the
Phenicians exercised in ancient times over the islands
of the ^Egean sea, before the settlements of the Greeks
obtained the supremacy over the islands and the ships
of the Greeks took the lead in these waters. In the
age of the Heroes, so Herodotus tells us, Minos estab-
lished the first naval empire ; the Carians, who inhabited
the islands, he made his subjects ; they did not indeed
pay tribute, but they had to man his ships whenever
necessary.2 " The oldest king," says Thucydides, " of
whom tradition tells us that he possessed a fleet was
Minos. He ruled over the greatest part of the Greek
sea and the Cyclades, which he colonised, driving out

1 Plato, " Minos," pp. 262, 266, 319, 321 ; " De. Legg," init.; Aiistot.
"Pol." 2, 8, 1, 2; 7, 9, 2.

2 Herod. 1, 171 ; 3, 122 ; 7, 169—171.

F2

68 PH(ENICIA.

the Carians and making his sons lords of the islands."
Minos, as a king ruling by law, is then said to have
put an end to piracy.

The Phenicians could not certainly have left out
of sight the largest of the islands, which forms the
boundary of the ^Egean sea ; and the traditions of the
Greeks can hardly go wrong if they make this island
the centre of the naval supremacy of Minos, i. e. of
the supremacy of the Phenicians over the Cyclades.
Crete must have been the mainstay of their activity in
the .^Egean, just as Thebes was the point on the main-
land where they planted the firmest foot. The title
Minoa seems to lie at the base of the name of Minos, a
title borne not only by the island off Megara and the
city in Sicily, but also by two cities in Crete (one on
the promontory of Drepanum, the other in the region
of Lyctus), by some islands near Crete, a city in
Amorgus, and a city in Siphnus. The name Minoa
(from navah} could mean dwelling ; it is certain evi-
dence of a Phenician settlement. But the Phenicians
have left traces of their existence in Crete beside the
names Minos and Minoa and the forms of worship
denoted by them. Coins of the Cretan cities Gortys
and Phsestus exhibit a bull or a bull-headed man as
a stamp. Near the Cretan city of Cydonia the Jar-
danus, i. e. the Jordan, falls into the sea ; the name
of the city Labana goes back to the Phenician word
libanon, i. e. " white." Cnossus, the abode of Minos in
Homer and Herodotus,2 was previously named Kairatus;
Karath in Phenician means city. Itanus, in Crete
(JEthanath in the Semitic form), is expressly stated to be
a foundation of the Phenicians.3

With regard to the state of civilisation reached by

1 Herod. 1, 4. 2 Herod. 3, 122.

3 Strabo, p. 476 ; Steph. Byz. 'I

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 69

Syria before the year 1500 B.C., we may draw some
conclusions from the fact that not merely did the
civilisation of Egypt influence the shepherds of Semitic
race who ruled over Egypt at that period, but that
Semitic manners and customs left behind traces in
Egypt (I. 128). Hence we may assume that the
Syrians carried their wine and their oil to the Nile at
the time when their kinsmen ruled there (1 950 — 1650
B.C.). The civilisation of Syria appears more clearly
from the tributes imposed by Tuthmosis III. on Syria,
which are here and there illustrated by the pictures
accompanying the inscriptions of this Pharaoh. The
burdens imposed on the Syrians consist not only of
corn, wine, oil and horses ; not only of gold, silver
and iron, but also of arms and works of art, among
which the pictures allow us to recognise carefully-
decorated vessels. On the other hand, it is clear from
the fact that the Babylonian weights and measures were
in use in Syria at this time (I. 304) that the Syrians
before this period were in lively intercourse with the
land of the Euphrates, that even before the sixteenth
century B.C. caravans must have traversed the Syrian
deserts in every direction, and even then the Syrians
must have exchanged the products of their land for
Babylonian stuffs and the frankincense which the
Arabians on their part carried to Babylon. The
dependence of Syria on Egypt under the Tuthmosis
and Amenophis can only have augmented the inter-
course of the Syrians with the land of the Nile.
Afterwards Sethos I. (1440 — 1400) caused wood to
be felled on Lebanon ; it must have been the places on
the coast under Lebanon which carried to Egypt in
their ships, along with the wine and oil of the coast and
the interior, the wood so necessary there for building
and exchanged it for the fabrics of Egypt. Wood for

70 PHCENICIA.

building could not be conveyed on the backs of camels,
and the way by sea from the Phenician towns to the
mouths of the Nile was far easier and less dangerous
than the road by land over rocky heights and through
sandy deserts. Hence, as early as the fifteenth century
B.C., we may regard the Phenician cities as the central
points of a trade branching east and west, which must
have been augmented by the fact that they conveyed
not only products of the Syrian land to the Euphrates
and the Nile, but could also carry the goods which
they obtained in exchange in Egypt to Babylonia, and
what they obtained beyond the Euphrates to Egypt.
At the same time the fabrics of Babylon and Egypt
roused them to emulation, and called forth an industry
among the Phenicians which we see producing woven
stuffs, vessels of clay and metal, ornaments and
weapons, and becoming pre-eminent in the colouring
of stuffs with the liquor of the purple-fish, which are
found on the Phenician coasts. This industry required
above all things metals, of which Babylonia and Egypt
were no less in need, and when the purple-fish of their
own coasts were no longer sufficient for their extensive
dyeing, colouring-matter had to be obtained. Large
quantities of these fish produced a proportionately small
amount of the dye. Copper-ore was found in Cyprus,
gold in the island of Thasos, and purple-fish on the
coasts of Hellas. When the fall of the kingdom of the
Hittites and the overthrow of the Amorite princes iii
the south of Canaan augmented the numbers of the
population on the coast, these cities were no longer
content to obtain those possessions of the islands by
merely landing and making exchanges with the inhabit-
ants. Intercourse with semi-barbarous tribes must be
protected by the sword. Good harbours were needed
where the ships could be sheltered from storm and bad

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 71

weather, where the crews could find safety from the
natives, rest and fresh stores of water and provisions.
Thus arose protecting forts on the distant islands and
coasts, which received the ships of the native land.
Under the protection of these intercourse could be
carried on with the natives, and they were points of
support for the collection of the fish and the sinking
of mines.

In order to obtain the raw material necessary for
their industry no less than to carry off the surplus of
population, the Phenicians were, brought to colonise
Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, Thera, Melos, Oliarus, Samo-
thrace, Imbros, Lemnos and Thasos. In. the bays of
Laconia and Argos, in the straits of Euboea,1 purple-
fish were found in extraordinary quantities. The
Phenicians settled in the island of Cythera in the bay
of Laconia, which, as Aristotle says, was once called
Porphyrussa from its purple-fish,2 and there erected
that ancient temple to the oriental Aphrodite, Aphrodite
in armour, just as in Attica in the deme of Athmonon
they founded the temple of the Syrian Aphrodite and
excavated the tombs on Hymettus.3 Midway between
the straits of Euboea and the bay of Corinth, which
abounded with purple-fish, rose the strong fortress
of the Cadmeia, and on Acrocorinthus the shrine of
Ashera.

Herodotus and Thucydides told us above (p. 67)
that the Carians inhabited the islands of the ^Egean
sea. These were they whom Minos had made subject
to his dominion. Beside this, we are informed more
particularly that the Carians had possessed the island
of Rhodes, which lay off their coast, and had dwelt on
Chios and Samos (I. 571). What degree of civilisation

1 Pausan. 3, 21, 6. 2 Aristotle, in Steph. Byz. Kv6t)pa.

3 Above, p. 63.

72 PHCENICIA.

was reached by the population of the islands of the
^Egean sea before the Phenicians came into relations
with them may be inferred to some extent from the dis-
coveries made in the island of Thera. In and beneath
three layers of ashes and tufa caused by vast eruptions
of the voleanos of this island have been discovered
stone instruments, pottery of the most rudimentary
kind, in part with the rudest indications of the human
face and figure, and beside these weapons of copper
and brass. In the upper layers of the tufa we find far
better pottery decorated in the Phenician style. On
Melos also, and in the tombs at Camirus in Rhodes,
vessels of the same kind have been discovered ; and,
finally, in the highest of the layers at Thera are gold
ornaments of the most various kinds, and ornaments of
electron, i. e. of mixed gold and silver, all of a work-
manship essentially non-Hellenic. From these facts
we may draw the conclusion that the ships of the
Phenicians brought to these inhabitants their earliest
weapons in brass and copper, their pottery and orna-
ments ; that the Carians of the islands, following these
patterns, raised their own efforts to a higher stage,
and that afterwards the Phenicians themselves settled
in the islands and made themselves masters of them.
Perhaps we may even go a step further. In the
lower strata of the excavations at Hissarlik, on the
Trojan coast, we find exactly the same primitive
pottery, with the same indications of human forms, as
in Thera, while in the refuse lying above this are idols
and pottery adorned after Phenician patterns, which
correspond exactly to the idols of Cyprus, as well as
ornaments like those of Thera. Hence in this region
also we may assume that the Phenicians gave the
impulse and the example to the development of
civilisation, and the more so as the name of the

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OP THE PHENICIANS. 73

city of Adramyttion on the Trojan coast repeats the
name of a Phenician foundation on the coast of North
Africa (Adrames, Hadrumetum), and even Strabo
ascribes the worship of the Cabiri to some places on
the Trojan coast.1 Far more definite traces of the
Phenician style and skill are in existence on the shore
of the bay of Argos. The ancient tombs which have been
recently discovered behind the lions' gate at Mycenae
are hewn in the rocks after the manner of the Phenicians.
As in the ancient burying-places of the Phenicians, a
perpendicular shaft forms the entrance to the sepul-
chral chambers; the corpses are laid in them without
coffins, as was the most ancient custom in Phoenicia.
The masks of beaten gold-leaf which were found on
the faces of five or six of the corpses buried here are
evidence of a custom which the Phenicians borrowed
from the gilded faces of Egyptian coffins.2 The corpses
are covered with gold ornaments and other decorations.
There is a large number of weapons and ornaments of
gold, silver, copper, brass and glass in the tombs ; the
execution exhibits a technical skill sometimes more,
sometimes less practised. The ornaments remind us
of Babylonian and Assyrian patterns ; the idols in burnt
clay are in the Phenician style ; the palm-leaves and
palms, antelopes and leopards which frequently occur,
point to regions of the East ; the articles of amber and
the ostrich egg can only have reached the bay of Argos
in Phenician ships. Still there are grave reasons for
refusing to believe that the persons buried in this
tomb are princes of the Phenicians. The numerous
pieces of armour show that the dead who rest here
were buried with their armour, which is not the tradi-
tional custom either with regard to the Phenicians or
the Hellenes, but which Thucydides quotes as a mark

1 Strabo, p. 479. 2 Below, chap. 11.

74 PHCENICIA.

of the tombs of the Carians.1 We learn, moreover,
even from the Homeric poems, that the Carians loved
gold ornaments, and further, that the Greeks improved
their armour after the pattern of the Carians (I. 572).
As we also find the double axe of the Carian god, the
" Zeus Stratius " as the Greeks called him, the " axe-
god," the Chars-El in the Carian language (I. 573), on
some ornaments of the tombs of Mycenae, the suppos-
ition forces itself upon us that Carians from the western
islands must have occupied the shore of the bay of
Argos. In any case, the tombs of Mycenae, both from
their position and their contents, announce to us that
the people who excavated them and placed their dead
in them were dependent on the style and skill of the
Phenicians.

Can we fix the time at which the Phenicians first
set foot on the islands of Hellas ? Herodotus tells us
that Troy was taken in the third generation after the
death of Minos.2 If we put three full generations,
according to the calculation of Herodotus, between the
death of Minos and the conquest of Ilium, the first
event took place 100 years before the second. Since,
according to the data of Herodotus, the capture of
Ilium falls in the year 1280 or 1260 B.C., Minos
would have died in the year 1380 or 1360 B.C. The
landing of the Phenicians on Thasos and the expedi-
tion of Cadmus from Phoenicia beyond the islands to
Boeotia are placed by Herodotus five generations before
Heracles, and Heracles is placed 900 years before his
own time. If we reckon upwards from the year 450
or 430 B.C., Heracles lived about the year 1350 or 1330
B.C., and Cadmus five generations, i. e. 166f years,
before this date, or about the year 1516 or 1496 B.C.3
On the island of Thera, Herodotus further remarks, the

1 Time. 1, 8. 2 Herod. 7, 171. 3 Herod. 2, 44, 145.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 75

Phenicians whom Cadmus left behind him there had
dwelt for eight generations, i. e. 266f years, before the
Dorians came to the island.1 Melos was also occupied
by Dorians, who asserted in 416 B.C. that their com-
munity had been in existence 700 years,2 according to
which statement the Dorians came to Melos in the
year 1116 B.C. With this event the Phenician rule
over the island came to an end. If we assume that
Thera, which is close by Melos, was taken from the
Phenicians by the Dorians at the same time as the
latter island, the eight generations given by Herodotus
for the settlements of the Phenicians on Thera would
carry us back to the year 1382 B.C. (1116 + 266|), a
date which is certainly in agreement with his state-
ment about the death of Minos, but contradicts the
date given for Cadmus, who yet, according to the
narrative of Herodotus, left behind the settlers on
Thera and Thasos when he first sailed to Bceotia.
Herodotus fixes dates according to generations and the
genealogies of legend. The five generations which
separated Cadmus from Heracles were for him, no
doubt, Polydorus, Labdacus, Laius, (Edipus and Poly-
nices ; for the three generations between the death of
Minos and the capture of Troy we find in Homer only
two, Deucalion and Idomeneus.3 But we can still
find from Herodotus' calculations how far back the
Greeks placed the beginning and the end of the em-
pire of the Phenicians over their islands and coasts.
Beyond this the chronographers do not give us any help.
Eusebius and Hieronymus (Jerome) place the rape of
Europa in the year 1429 or 1426 B.C. ; the rule of
Cadmus at Thebes in the year 1427 B.C. or 1319
(1316) B.C. ; the settlement of the Phenicians on

1 Herod. 4, 147. 2 Thuc. 5, 112.

3 Herod. 5, 89; "H." 13,451; " Odyss." 19, 178.

76 PH(ENICIA.

Thera, Melos, and Thasos in the year 1415 B.C. ; the
beginning of the rule of Minos in the year 1410 B.C.,
or, according to another computation, in the year
1251 B.C.1

We can hardly obtain fixed points for determining the
time of the settlements of the Phenicians in the yEgean
sea. In the lower strata of the excavations at Hissarlik,
on the coast of Troas, clay lentils have been found with
Cyprian letters upon them.2 Since the Greeks declared
that they learnt their alphabet from, the Phenicians
and Cadmus, and since as a fact it is the alphabet of
the Phenicians which lies at the root of the Greek, the
Cyprian letters can only have been brought thither by
Phenician ships from Cyprus before the discovery of the
Phenician letters, or from the islands off the Trojan
coast occupied by the Phenicians, from Lemnos, Imbros
and Samothrace ; otherwise they must have come to the
Troad at a later time by Cyprian ships or settlers, a
supposition which is forbidden by the antiquity of the
other remains discovered with or near the lentils.
Among the sons of Japheth, the representative of the
northern nations, Genesis mentions Javan, i. e. the
Ionian, the Greek ; and enumerates the sons of Javan :
Elisha, Tarshish, Chittim, and Dodanim or Rodanim —
the reading is uncertain.3 It is a question whether the
genealogical table in Genesis belongs to the first or
second text of the Pentateuch, i. e. whether it was
written down in the middle of the eleventh or of the
tenth century B.C. In any case it follows that in the
beginning of the eleventh or tenth century B.C. the name
and nation of the lonians was known not only in the

1 Euseb. "Chron." 2, p. 34 seqq. ed. Scheme. Even in Diodorus, 4,
60, we find two Minoses, an older and a younger.

2 Lenormant, " Antiq. de la Troade," p. 32.

3 Genesis x. 2 — 4 ; 1 Chron. i. 5 — 7.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 77

h arbour- cities of Phoenicia, but in the interior of Syria,
and the inhabitants of the islands and of the northern
coasts of the Mediterranean were reckoned in the stock
of these lonians. Chittim is, as was remarked above,
primarily the island of Cyprus ; the Rodanim are the
inhabitants of Rhodes (Dodanim would have to be
referred to Dodoria) ; Elisha is Elis in the Pelopomiese,
or the island of Sicilv, if the name is not one given

«< ' O

generally to western coasts and islands ; l Tarshish is
Tartessus, i. e. the region at the mouth of the Guadal-
quivir. If Ezekiel mentions the purple which the
Phenicians bring from " the isles of Elishah," 2 the
islands and coasts of the jEgean sea are plainly meant,
on which the Phenicians collected the fish for their
purple dye. This much is clear, that at least about the
year 1000 B.C. not only the islands and coasts of the
^Egean were known in Syria, but even then the name
of the distant land of Tarshish was current in Syria. We
shall further see that as early as 1100 B.C. Phenician
ships had passed the straits of Gibraltar. Hence we
may conclude that the Phenicians must have set foot
on Cyprus about the year 1250 B.C., and on the islands
and coasts of Hellas about the year 1200 B.C.

Thucydides observes that in ancient times the Phe-
nicians had occupied the promontories of Sicily and the
small islands lying around Sicily, in order to carry on
trade with the Sicels.3 Diodorus Siculus tells us that
when the Phenicians extended their trade to the western
ocean they settled in the island of Melite (Malta),
owing to its situation in the middle of the sea and
excellent harbours, in order to have a refuge for their
ships. The island of Gaulus also, which lies close to
Melite, is said to have been a colony of the Phenicians.4

1 Kiepert, " Monatsberichte Berl. Akad." 1859.

2 Ezek. xxvii. 7. 3 Thuc. vi. 2. 4 Diod. v. 12.

78 PHOENICIA.

On the south-eastern promontory of Malta there was a
temple of Heracles-Melkarth,1 the foundation walls of
which appear to be still in existence, and still more
definite evidence of the former population of this island
is given by the Phenician inscriptions found there. The
island, like the mother-country, carried on weaving,
and the products were much sought after in antiquity.
On Gaulus also, a name mentioned on Phenician coins,
are the remains of a Phenician temple. Between Sicily
and the coast of Africa, where it approaches Sicily
most nearly, lay the island of Cossyra, coins of which
bear Phenician legends. Along with a dwarfish figure
they present the name " island of the sons," 2 i. e. no
doubt, the children of the sun-god whom we met with
in Rhodes. On the east coast of Sicily there lay, on a
small promontory scarcely connected with the main-
land (now Isola degli Magnisi), the city of Thapsos, the
name of which reveals its founders ; Tiphsach means
coming over, here coming over to the mainland. In
the same way the promontory of Pachynus (pachun
means wart), further to the south, and the harbour
of Phcenicus are evidence of Phenician colonisation.
On the south coast of Sicily, not far from the mouth of
the Halycus, the Phenicians built that city which is
known to the Greeks as Makara and Minoa, or Heraclea-
minoa; the coins of the city present in Phenician
characters the name Rus-Melkart, i. e. " head (promon-
tory) of Melkarth." 3 Off the west coast of Sicily the
Phenicians occupied the small island of Motye.4 On this
coast of the larger island, on Mount Eryx, which rises
steeply out of a bald table land (2000 feet above the
sea), they founded the city of Eryx, and on the summit

1 Ptolem. 4, 3, 47.

2 Ai benim; Movers, " Phceniz." 2, 355, 359, 362.

3 Heracl. Pont. frag. 29, ed. Miiller; Gesen. " Monum." p. 293;
Olshausen, " Eh. Mus." 1852, S. 328. 4Thuc. 6, 2.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 79

of the mount, 5000 feet high, they built a temple to
the Syrian Aphrodite. In Diodorus it is Eryx the son
of Aphrodite who builds this temple ; ^Eneas then
adorns it with many votive offerings, " since it was
dedicated to his mother."1 Virgil represents the
temple as being founded on the summit of Eryx,
near to the stars, in honour of Venus Idalia, i. e. the
goddess worshipped at Idalion (Idial) on Cyprus by
the immigrants from the East, who, with him, are the
companions of ^Eneas.2 The courtezans at this temple,
the sensual character of the worship, and the sacred
doves kept here (in a red one the goddess herself was
supposed to be seen3), even without the Phenician
inscriptions found there, would leave no doubt of its
Syrian origin. The mighty substructure of the build-
ing is still in existence. Daedalus is said to have built
it for the king of the Sicanians (p. 64). Beside the
Syrian goddess, the Phenicians also worshipped here
the Syrian god Baal Melkarth. According to the
account of Diodorus, Heracles overcame Eryx in wrest-
ling, and so took his land from him, though he left the
usufruct of it to the inhabitants.4 The kings of Sparta
traced their origin to Heracles. When Dorieus, the
son of Anaxandridas, king of Sparta, desired to emi-
grate in his anger that the crown had fallen to his
brother Cleomenes, the oracle bade him retire to Eryx ;
the land of Eryx belonged to the Heraclids because
their ancestor won it. The Carthaginians, it is true,
did not acknowledge this right ; Dorieus was slain, and
most of those who followed him.5 On the north coast
of Sicily, Panormus (Palermo) and Soloeis were the

1 Diod. 4, 83. 2 " -Sin." 5, 760.

3 Diod. 4, 83; Strabo, p. 272 ; Atheuseus, p. 374; Aelian, "Hist.
An." 4, 2 ; 10, 50.

4 Diod. 4, 23. 5 Herod. 5, 43.

80 PHOENICIA.

most important colonies of the Phenicians. Panormus,
on coins of the Phenicians Machanath, i. e. the camp,
worshipped the goddess of the sexual passion ; Soloeis
(sela, rock) worshipped Melkarth. In a hymn to
Aphrodite, Sappho inquires whether she lingers in
Cyprus or at Panormus.1 Motye, Soloeis and Panormus
were in the fifth century the strongest outposts of the
Carthaginians in Sicily.2

On Sardinia also, as Diodorus tells us, the Phenicians
planted many colonies.3 The mountains of Sardinia con-
tained iron, silver, and lead. According to the legend
of the Greeks, Sardus, the son of Makeris, as the Libyans
called Heracles, first came with Libyans to the island.
Then Heracles sent his brother's son lolaus, together
with his own sons, whom he had begotten in Attica,
to Sardinia. As Heracles had been lord of the whole
West, these regions belonged of right to lolaus and
his companions. lolaus conquered the native inhabit-
ants, took possession of and divided the best and most
level portion of the land which was afterwards known
by the name of lolaus; then he sent for Daedalus out
of Sicily and erected large buildings, which, Diodorus
adds, are still in existence ; but in Sicily temples were
erected to himself, and honour paid as to a hero, and
a famous shrine was erected in Agyrion, " where," as
Diodorus remarks of this his native city, " even to this
day yearly sacrifices are offered." 4 Makeris, the sup-
posed father of Sardus, is, like Makar, a form of the
name Melkarth. If Sardinia and the whole West as well
as Eryx is said to have belonged to Heracles, if Heracles
sends out his nearest relations to Sardinia, if the artist

1 Steph. Byz. SoXoi/c. Sapphon. frag. 6, ed. Bergk; it is possible
that Panormus on Crete may be meant.

2 Time. 6, 2. * Diod. 5, 35.

4 Diod. 4, 24, 29, 30; 5, 15 ; Arist. " De mirab. ausc." c. 104; Pausan.
10, 17, 2.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 81

Daedalus is his companion here as he was the companion
of Minos in Crete and Sicily, it becomes obvious that
the temples of Baal Melkarth on the coasts of Sardinia
and Sicily lie at the base of these legends of the Greeks,
that it was the Phenicians who brought the worship
of their god along with their colonies to these coasts,
to which they were led by the wealth of the Sardinian
mountains in copper. As we already ventured to
suppose (I. 368), lolaus may be an epithet or a special
form of Baal.1

The legend of the Greeks makes Heracles, i. e. Baal
Melkarth, lord of the whole West. As a fact, the colo-
nies of the Phenicians went beyond Sardinia in this
direction. Their first colonies on the north coast of
Africa appear to have been planted where the shore
runs out nearest Sicily ; Hippo was apparently re-
garded as the oldest colony.2 In the legends of the
coins mentioned above (p. 53) Hippo is named beside
Tyre and Citium as a daughter of Sidon. When a
second Hippo was afterwards founded further to the
west, opposite the south coast of Sardinia, at the mouth
of the Ubus, the old Hippo got the name of " Ippo-
acheret," and among the Greeks " Hippon Zarytos,"
i. e. "the other Hippo."3 Ttyke (atak, settlement,
Utica), on the mouth of the Bagradas (Medsherda),
takes the next place after this Hippo, if indeed it was
not founded before it. Aristotle tells us that the
Phenicians stated that Ityke was built 287 years
before Carthage,4 and Pliny maintains that Ityke was
founded 1178 years before his time.5 As Carthage
was founded in the year 846 B.C. (below, chap. 11),

1 Movers (" Phceniz." 1, 536) assumes that lolaus maybe identical
with Esmun (I. 377).

2 SaUust, " Jugurtha," 19, 1.

3 Movers, loc. cit. a, 144. 4 "De mirab. ausc." c. 146.
6 "Hist, nat." 16, 79.

VOL. n. o

82 PHCENICIA.

Ityke, according to Aristotle's statement, was built in
the year 1133 B.C. With this the statement of Pliny
agrees. He wrote in the years 52 — 77 A.D., and
therefore he places the foundation of Ityke in the year
1126 or 1100 B.C.

About the same time, i. e. about the year 1100 B.C.,
the Phenicians had already reached much further to
the west. In his Phenician history, Claudius lolaus
tells 'us that Archaleus (Arkal, Heracles 1), the son of
Phoenix, built Gadeira (Gades).2 " From ancient times,"
such is the account of Diodorus, " the Phenicians
carried on an uninterrupted navigation for the sake of
trade, and planted many colonies in Africa, and not a
few in Europe, in the regions lying to the west. And
when their undertakings succeeded according to their
desire and they had collected great treasures, they
resolved to traverse the sea beyond the pillars of
Heracles, which is called Oceanus. First of all, on
their passage through these pillars, they founded upon
a peninsula of Europe a city which they called
Gadeira, and erected works suitable to the place, chiefly
a beautiful temple to Heracles, with splendid offerings
according to the custom of the Phenicians. And as
this temple was honoured at that time, so also in
later times down to our own days it was held in great
reverence. When the Phenicians, in order to explore
the coasts beyond the pillars, took their course along
the shore of Libya, they were carried away far into
the Oceanus by a strong wind, and after being driven
many days by the storm they came to a large island
opposite Libya, where the fertility was so great and
the climate so beautiful that it seemed by the abund-
ance of blessings found there to be intended for the

1 Arkal or Archal may mean " fire of the All," " light of the AIL"
3 Etym. Magn.

• THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 83

dwelling of the gods rather than men." * Strabo says,
the Gaditani narrated that an oracle bade the Tyrians
send a colony to the pillars of Heracles. When those
who had been sent reached the straits of Mount Calpe
they were of opinion that the promontories which
enclosed the passage, Calpe and the opposite headland
of Abilyx in Libya,2 were the pillars which bounded the
earth, and the limit of the travels of Heracles, which
the oracle mentioned. So they landed on this side of
the straits, at the spot where the city of the Axitani
(Sexi) now stands ; but since the sacrifices were not
favourable there they turned back. Those sent out
after them sailed through the straits, and cast anchor
at an island sacred to Heracles, 1500 stades beyond
the pillars, opposite the city of Onoba in Iberia ; but
as the sacrifices were again unfavourable they also again
turned home. Finally, a third fleet landed on a little
island 750 stades beyond Mount Calpe, close to the
mainland, and not far from the mouth of the Bsetis.
Here, on the east side of the island, they built a temple
to Heracles ; on the opposite side of the island they
built the city of Gadeira, and on the extreme western
point the temple of Cronos. In the temple of Heracles
there were two fountains and "two pillars of brass,
eight cubits in height, on which is recorded the cost of
the building of this temple." 3 This foundation of
Gades, which on the coins is called Gadir and Agadir,
i. e. wall, fortification, the modern Cadiz, and without
doubt the most ancient city in Europe which has pre-
served its name, is said to have taken place in the year

1 Diod. 5, 19, 20.

2 On the meaning given in Avienus ("Ora marit ") of Abila as
"high mountain," and Calpa as "big-bellied jar," cf. Miillenhoff,
"Deutsche Alterthumsk, 1, 83.

3 Strabo, pp. 169—172. Justin (44, 5) represents the Tyrians as
founding Gades in consequence of a dream. In regard to the name
cf. Avien. " Ora marit," 267—270.

84 PHOENICIA.

1100 B.C.1 If Ityke was founded before 1100 B.C. or
about that time, \ve have no reason to doubt the
founding of Gades soon after that date. Hence the
ships of the Phenicians would have reached the ocean
about the time when Tiglath Pilesar I. left the Tigris
with his army, trod the north of Syria, and looked
on the Mediterranean.

The marvellous and impressive aspect of the rocky
gate which opens a path for the waves of the Mediter-
ranean to the boundless waters of the Atlantic Ocean
might implant in the Phenician mariners who first
passed beyond it the belief that they had found in
these two mountains the pillars which the god set up to
mark the end of the earth ; in the endless ocean beyond
them they could easily recognise the western sea in
which their sun-god went to his rest. That Gades, on
the shore of the sea into which the sun went down,
was especially zealous in the worship of Melkarth, that
the descent of the "god into the western ocean (the
supposed death of Heracles 2) and the awakening of the
god with the sun of the spring were here celebrated
with especial emphasis, is a fact which requires no
explanation. The legends of the Hesperides, the
daughters of the West, in whose garden Melkarth
celebrates the holy marriage with Astarte (I. 371), of
the islands of the blest in the western sea, appear to

1 Movers, " Phceniz." 2, 622. Strabo (p. 48) puts the first settle-
ments of the Phenicians in the midst of the Libyan coast and at
Gades just after the Trojan war, Velleius (1, 2, 6, in combination
with 1, 8, 4), in the year 1100 B.C. Cf. Movers, loc. cit. S. 148, note 90.
The Greeks called both land and river Tartessus. The pillars of the
Tynan god " Archaleus," are with them the pillars of their "Heracles,"
which he sets up as marks of his campaigns. Here, opposite the
mouth of the Tartessus, they place the island Erythea, i. e. the red
island on which the giant Geryon, i. e. " the roarer," guards the red
oxen of the sun : Erythea is one of the islands near Cadiz ; Mullenhoff,
Deutsche "Alterthumsk: " 1, 134 ff.

2 Sail. "Jugurtha,"c. 19.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 85

have a local background in the luxuriant fertility and
favoured climate of Madeira and the Canary islands.

The land off the coast of which Gades lay, the valley
of the Guadalquivir, was named by the Phenicians
Tarsis (Tarshish), and by the Greeks Tartessus. The
genealogical table in Genesis places Tarsis among the
sons of Javan. The prophet Ezekiel represents the ships
of Tarshish as bringing silver, iron, tin and lead to Tyre.
" The ships of Tarshish," so he says to the city of Tyre,
" were thy caravans ; so wert thou replenished and
very glorious in the midst of the sea." l The Sicilian
Stesichorus of Himera expresses himself in more
extravagant terms. He sang of the "fountains of
Tartessus (the Guadalquivir) rooted in silver." The
Greeks represent the Tartessus, the river which brought
down gold, tin, iron in its waters, as springing from
the silver mountain,2 and according to Herodotus
the first Greek ship, a merchantman of Samos, which
was driven about the year 630 B.C. by a storm from
the east to Tartessus, made a profit of 60 talents.3
Aristotle tells us that the first Phenicians who sailed
to Tartessus obtained so much silver in exchange for
things of no value that the ships could not carry the
burden, so that the Phenicians left behind the tackle
and even the anchor they had brought with them and
made new tackle of silver.4 Poseidonius says that
among that people it was not Hades, but Plutus, who
dwelt in the under- world. Once the forests had been
burned, and the silver and gold, melted by an enormous
fire, flowed out on the surface; every hill and mountain
became a heap of gold and silver. On the north-west
of this land the ground shone with silver, tin and

1 Ezek. xxvii. 12, 25.

2 In Strabo, p. 148 ; MiiUenhofl, loc. cit. 1, 81.

3 Herod. 4, 152. 4 "De rnirab. ausc." c. 147.

86 PH(ENICIA.

white gold mixed with silver. This soil the rivers
washed down with them. The women drew water from
the river and poured it through sieves, so that nothing
Imt gold, silver and tin remained in the sieve.1
Diodorus tells the same story of the ancient burning of
the forests on the Pyrenees (from which fire they got
their name), by which the silver ore was rendered
fluid and oozed from the mountains, so that many
streams were formed of pure silver. To the native
inhabitants the value of silver was so little known
that the Phenicians obtained it in exchange for small
presents, and gained great treasures by carrying the
silver to Asia and all other nations. The greed of
the merchants went so far that when the ships were
laden, and there was still a large quantity of silver
remaining, they took off the lead from the anchors
and replaced it with silver. Strabo assures us that
the land through which the Baetis flows was not
surpassed in fertility and all the blessings of earth
and sea by any region in the world ; neither gold nor
silver, copper nor iron, was found anywhere else in
such abundance and excellence. The gold was not
only dug up, but also obtained by washing, as the
rivers and streams brought down sands of gold. In
the sands of gold pieces were occasionally found half-a-
pound in weight, and requiring very little purification.
Stone salt was also found there, and there was abund-
ance of house cattle and sheep, which produced excellent
wool, of corn and wine. The coast of the shore beyond
the pillars was covered with shell-fish and large purple-
fish, and the sea was rich in fish (the tunnies and the
Tartessian murena so much sought after in antiquity),2
which the ebb and flow of the tide brought up to
the beach. Corn, wine, the best oil, wax, honey,

1 In Strabo, p. 148. 2 Aristoph. « Eanae," 475.

THE NAVIGATION AND COLONIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 87

pitch and cinnabar were exported from this fortunate
land.1

If the Phenicians were able in the thirteenth century
to settle upon Cyprus and Khodes, the islands of the
^Egean and the coasts of Hellas, their population
must have been numerous, their industry active, their
trade lucrative. That subsequently in the twelfth
century they also took into possession the coasts of
Sicily, Sardinia and North Africa by means of their
colonies is a proof that the request for the raw products
and metals of the West was very lively and increasing
in Syria and in Egypt, in Assyria and Babylonia.
The market of these lands must have been very remu-
nerative to the Phenicians in order to induce them
to make their discoveries, their distant voyages and
remote settlements. If the Phenicians about the year
1100 B.C. were in a position to discover the straits of
Gibraltar, the fact shows us that they must have
practised navigation for a long time. The horizon of
the Greek mariner ended even in the ninth century
in the waters of Sicily, and in the fifth century B.C.
the voyage of a Greek ship from the Syrian coast
to the pillars of Heracles occupied 80 days.2 After
the founding of Gades the Phenicians ruled over the
whole length of the Mediterranean by their harbour
fortresses and factories. Their ships crossed the long
basin in every direction, and everywhere they found
harbours of safety. They showed themselves no less
apt and inventive in the arts of navigation than the
Babylonians had shown themselves in technical inven-
tions and astronomy ; they were bolder and more
enterprising than the Assyrians in the campaigns
which the latter attempted at the time when the

1 Diod. 5, 35 ; Strabo, p. 144 seqq.

2 Scylax, "Peripl." c. 111.

88 PHCENICIA.

Phenicians were building Gades ; they were more
venturesome and enduring on the water than their
tribesmen the Arabians on the sandy sea of the desert.
In the possession of the ancient civilisation of the East
their mariners and merchants presented the same con-
trast to the Thracians and Hellenes, the Sicels, the
Libyans and Iberians which the Portuguese and the
Spaniards presented 2500 years later to the tribes of
America.

CHAPTER IV.

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL.

Not far removed from the harbour-cities, whose ships
discovered the land of silver, which carried the natural
wealth of the West to the lands of the Euphrates and
Tigris, and the Nile, in order to exchange them for the
productions of those countries, in part immediately upon
the borders of the marts which united the East and the
West, and side by side with them, dwelt the Israelites
on the heights and in the valleys which they had
conquered, in very simple and original modes of life.

Even during the war against the ancient population
of Canaan, immediately after the first successes against
the Amorites, they had, as we have seen, dropped
any common participation in the struggle, any unity
under one leader. According to their numbers and
bravery, and the resistance encountered, the various
tribes had won larger or smaller territories, better
or inferior districts. Immigration and conquest did
not lead among the Israelites to a combination of their
powers under the supremacy of one leader, but rather
to separation into clans and cantons, which was also
favoured by the nature of the country conquered, a
district lying in unconnected parts, and possessing no
central region adapted for governing the whole. Thus,
after the settlement, the life of the nation became

90 ISRAEL.

divided into separate circles according to the position
and character of the mountain canton which the
particular tribe had obtained, and the fortune which it
had experienced. Even if there was an invasion of
the enemy, the tribe attacked was left to defend
itself as well as it could. It was only very rarely,
and in times of great danger, that the nobles and
elders of the whole land, and a great number of the
men of war from all the tribes, were collected round
the sacred ark at Shiloh, at Bethel, at Mizpeh, or
at Gilgal for common counsel or common defence.
But even when a resolution was passed by the nobles
and elders and the people, individual tribes some-
times resisted, even by force of arms, the expressed
will of the nation, or at least of a great part of the
nobles and people, and the division of the tribes
sometimes led even to open war.

Within the tribes also there was no fixed arrangement,
no fixed means for preserving peace. The clans and
families for the most part possessed separate valleys,
glens, or heights. The heads of the oldest families
were also the governors of these cantons, and composed
the differences between the members of the clan, canton,
or city by their decisions ; while in other places bold
and successful warriors at the head of voluntary bands
made acquisitions, in which the descendants of the
leader took the rank of elder and judge. Eminent
houses of this kind, together with the heads of families
of ancient descent, formed the order of nobles and
elders ; " who hold the judge's staff in their hands,
and ride on spotted asses with beautiful saddles, while
the common people go afoot." l If a tribe fell into
distress and danger, the nobles and elders assembled
and took counsel, while the people stood round, unless

1 Judges v. 10, 14 ; x. 4.

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 91

some man of distinction had already risen and sum-
moned the tribe to follow him. For the people did
not adhere exclusively to the chief of the oldest family
in the canton ; nobles and others within, and in special
cases without, the tribe, who had obtained a prominent
position by warlike actions, or by the wisdom of their
decisions, whose position and power promised help,
protection and the accomplishment of the sentence,
were invited to remove strife and differences, unless
the contending persons preferred to help themselves.
Only the man who could not help himself sought, as a
rule, the decision of the elder or judge.

The names of some of the men whose decision was
sought in that time have been preserved in the tradi-
tion of the Israelites. Tholah of the tribe of Issachar,
Jair of the land of Gilead, Ebzan of Bethlehem in the
tribe of Judah, Elon of the tribe of Zebulun, and Abdon
of Ephraim, are all mentioned as judges of note. Of
Jair we are told that he had 30 sons, who rode on 30
asses, and possessed 30 villages. Ebzan is also said to
have had 30 sons and to have married 30 daughters ;
while Abdon had 40 sons and 30 grandsons, who rode
on 70 asses.1

On the heights and table-lands of the districts east
of the Jordan, in the land of Gilead, were settled the
tribes of Reuben and Gad and a part of the tribe of
Manasseh. At an early period they grew together, so
that the name of the region sometimes represents the
names of these tribes. Here the pastoral life and breed-
ing of cattle remained predominant, as in the less pro-
ductive districts on the west of the Jordan. But on
the plains and in the valleys of the west the greater
part of the settlers devoted themselves to the culture
of the vine and agriculture. The walls of the ancient

1 Judges x. 1 — 5 ; xii. 8 — 15.

92 ISRAEL.

cities were at first used as a protection against the
attacks of robbers, or raids of enemies; the inhabit-
ants, afterwards as before, planted their fields and
vineyards outside the gates.1 But the custom of
dwelling together led to the beginnings of civic life,
industrial skill, and common order. The trade of the
Phenicians, which touched the land of the Hebrews
here and there, and the more advanced culture of the
cities of the coast, could not remain without influence
on the Hebrews.

The religious feeling which separated the Israelites
from the Canaanites was not more thoroughly effective
than the community of blood and the contrast to the
ancient population of the land in bringing about the
combination and union of the Israelites. The religious
life was as much without organisation as the civic ;
on the contrary, as the Israelites spread as settlers over
a larger district, the unity and connection of religious
worship which Moses previously established again fell
to the ground. It is true, the sacred ark remained at
Shiloh, five leagues to the north of Bethel, under the
sacred tent in the land of the tribe of Ephraim. At
this place a festival was held yearly in honour of
Jehovah, to which the Israelites assembled to offer
prayer and sacrifice. On other occasions also people
went to Shiloh to offer sacrifice.2 The priestly office
in the sacred tent at the sacred ark remained with the
descendants of Aaron, in the family of Phinehas, the
son of Eleazar, the eldest son of Aaron (I. 497).
But with the settlement a number of other places of
sacrifice had risen up beside the sanctuary at Shiloh.
On the heights and under the oaks at Raman in the
land of Benjamin, at Mizpeh in the same district, as
well as at Mizpeh beyond Jordan, where Jacob and

1 e. g. Judges ix. 27. 2 Judges xxi. 19; 1 Sam. i. 3 ; ii. 13.

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 93

Laban had parted in peace,1 at Bethel on the borders
of the land of Ephraim. and Benjamin, where Abraham,
sacrificed (between Bethel and Ai) and Jacob received
the name of Israel ; 2 finally at Grilgal on the east of
Jordan, where Joshua lay encamped, and kept the pass-
over, before he attacked Jericho, Jehovah was invoked.
At these places also the firstlings of the fruits were
offered ; goats, rams, and bulls were offered, with or
without the intervention of the priest, and inquiry
made for the will of Jehovah without priestly help or
intervention. Any one who set up an altar estab-
lished a priest there, or hired a priest. For this pur-
pose men were chosen who claimed to be of the race of
Moses and Aaron, just as the service of the sacred ark
at Shiloh was in the hands of this family ; but men of
other origin and tribes were not excluded even from the
priesthood at the ark.3

In such a want of any defined and influential
position of the priesthood, in the want of any church
organisation, it was only the superior personal power of
the priests at Shiloh which could protect the religious
feeling and traditional custom against the influences
of the new surroundings, and Canaanitish rites. Tra-
dition, at any rate from the first third of the eleventh
century B.C., had no good to tell of the morals of the
priests at Shiloh. To those who came to bring an
offering the servant of the priest said, " Give flesh to
roast for the priest ; he will not have it sodden but
raw." If the person sacrificing replied, " We will burn
only the fat, then take what you desire," the servant
answered, " You must give it me now, and if you will
not I shall take it by force." If the priest desired
cooked flesh from the sacrifice, he sent his servant, who

1 Judges xx. 1 ; vol. i. 410. 2 1 Sam. x. 3 ; vol. i. 390, 411.

3 Judges xvii. 5, 10 ; xviii. 30 ; 1 Sam. vii. 1 ; 2, vi. 3.

94 ISRAEL.

struck with his three-pronged fork into the cauldron,
and what he brought out was the priest's.

The religious views of the Israelites, not sufficiently
represented among themselves, were the more exposed
to the influence of the rites of the Canaanites, as these
rites belonged to tribes of kindred nature and character.
In this way it came about that the Canaanitish gods
Baal and Astarte were worshipped beside Jehovah, the
god of Israel, and that in one or two places the old
worship was perhaps entirely driven out by these new
gods. But even where this did not take place, it
was owing to the example and impulse of the Syrian
modes of worship that images were here and there
set up on the altars of Jehovah. When the conception
of the divine nature in the spirit of a nation passes
beyond the first undefined feeling and intimation, —
when it receives a plainer and more expressive shape
in the minds of men, and the first steps of artistic and
technical skill, or the example of neighbours, are coin-
cident with this advance, — the general result is that
men desire to see the ruling powers fixed in distinct
forms, then the gods are presented in a realistic manner
in visible forms and images. And thus it was among
the Israelites. The command of Moses given in oppo-
sition to the images of Egypt (I. 354) was long since
forgotten. Michah, a man of the tribe of Ephraim,
caused a goldsmith to make a carved and molten image
of Jehovah of 200 shekels of silver ; and set it up in a
temple on Mount Ephraim, establishing as a priest a
Levite, the " descendant of Moses." When a part of
Dan marched northwards in order to win for them-
selves abodes there, which they could not conquer from
the Philistines, the men of Dan carried off this image
along with the Levite and set it up in the city of Laish
(Dan), which they took from the Sidonians (I. 371),

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 95

and the "grandson of Moses" and his descendants con-
tinued to be priests before this image.1 At Nob also there
was a gilded image of Jehovah, and many had Teraphim,
or images of gods in the form of men, in their houses.2

Nothing important was undertaken before inquiry
was made of the will of Jehovah. The inquiry was
made as a rule by casting lots before the sacred
tabernacle at Shiloh, before the altars and images of
Jehovah,3 or by questioning the priests and sooth-
sayers. Counsel was also taken of these if a cow had
gone astray, and they received in return bread or a
piece of money.

Of the feuds which the tribes of Israel carried on
at this time, some have remained in remembrance.4
The concubine of a Levite, so we are told in the
book of Judges, who dwelt on Mount Ephraim, ran
away from her husband ; she went back to her father,
to Bethlehem in Judah. Her husband rose and
followed her, pacified her, and then set out on his
return. The first evening they reached the city of the
Jebusites, but the Levite would not pass the night
among the Canaanites (I. 500), and turned aside to
Gibeah, a place in the tribe of Benjamin. Here no
one received the travellers ; they were compelled to
remain in the street till an old man came home late in
the evening from his work in the field. When he
heard that the traveller was from Ephraim he received
him into his house, for he was himself an Ephraimite,
gave fodder to the asses of the Levite and his concubine,

1 Judges xvii. ff.

2 1 Sam. xix. 13 — 16; xxi. 9; Gen. xxxi. 34; Judges xyii. 5; xviii.
14, 17 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 24.

3 e. g. Judges vi. 36 — 40 ; xviii. 5 ; xx. 18 ff. The priests wore a
pocket with lots (apparently small stones) on the breast. The Urim
and Thummim of the High Priest was originally nothing but these
lots.

4 On the composition of the Book of Judges, cf. De Wette-Schrader,
" Einleitung," 325 ff.

96 ISRAEL.

and placed his attendant with his own servants.
Then they washed their feet, and drank, and their
hearts were merry. But the men of Gibeah collected
round the house in the evening, pressed on the door,
and demanded that the stranger from Ephraim should
be given up to them ; they wished to destroy him. In
order to save himself the priest gave up to them his
concubine, that they might satisfy their passions on
her. The men of Gibeah abused her the whole night
through, so that next morning she lay dead upon the
threshold. The Levite went with the corpse to his
home at Ephraim, cut it into twelve pieces with a
knife, and sent a piece to each tribe. Every one
who saw it said, " The like was never heard since
Israel came out of Egypt." And the chiefs of the
nation assembled and pronounced a curse upon him
who did not come to Mizpah (in the land of Benjamin)
that he should be put to death. Then all the tribes
assembled at Mizpah, it is said about 400,000 men ; x
only from Jabesh in Gilead and the tribe of Benjamin
no one came. The Levite told what had happened to
him, and the tribes sent messengers to Benjamin, to
bring the men of Gibeah. But the children of Benjamin
refused, and assembled their men of war, more than
26,000 in number, and took up arms. Then the
people rose up and said, " Cursed be he who gives a
wife to Benjamin." ' Every tenth man was sent back
for supplies ; the rest marched out against Benjamin.
But " Benjamin was a ravening wolf, who ate up the
spoil at morning and divided the booty in the even-
ing ; " they were mighty archers, and could throw with
the left hand as well as the right.3 They fought twice

1 In David's time only 270,000 are given : below, chap. 7.

2 Judges xx. 8 ; xxi. 7 — 18.

3 Gen. xlix. 27; Judges xx. 16; 1 Chron. viii. 39 ; xii. 2; 2
Chron. xiv. 7.

THE TRIBES OP ISRAEL. 97

at G-ibeah with success against their countrymen. Not
till the third contest did the Israelites gain the victory,
and then only by an ambuscade and counterfeit flight.
After this overthrow the whole tribe is said to have
been massacred, the flocks and herds destroyed, and
the cities burnt. Only 600 men, as we are told,
escaped to the rock Bimmon on the Dead Sea.
When the community again assembled at Bethel the
people were troubled that a tribe should be extirpated
and wanting in Israel ; so they caused peace and a
safe return to be proclaimed to the remainder of Ben-
jamin. And when 12,000 men were sent out against
Jabesh to punish the city because none of their in-
habitants came to the gathering at Mizpeh, they were
ordered to spare the maidens of Jabesh. In obedience
to this command they brought 400 maidens back from
Jabesh, and these were given to the Benjamites. But
as this number was insufficient the Benjamites were
allowed, when the yearly festival was held at Shiloh
(p. 92), and the daughters of Shiloh came out to dance
before the city, to rush out from the vineyards and carry
off wives for themselves. Thus does tradition explain
the non-execution of the decree that no Israelite should
give his daughter to wife to a man of Benjamin, and the
rescue of the tribe of Benjamin from destruction.1

Without unity and connection in their political and
religious life, amid the quarrels and feuds of the tribes,
families and individuals, when every one helped and
avenged himself, and violence and cruelty abounded,
— in the lawless condition when " every one in Israel
did what was right in his own eyes," — the Israelites

1 These events belong, according to Judges xx. 27 ff., to the period
immediately after the conquest : as a fact, the war against Benjamin
is not to be placed long after this, i. e. about 1200 B.C. Cf. De Wette-
Schrader, " Einleitung," S. 326.

VOL. II. H

98 ISRAEL.

were in danger of becoming the prey of every external
foe, and it was a question whether they could long
maintain the land they had won. It was fortunate
that there was no united monarchy at the head either
of the Philistines or the Phenicians, that the latter
were intent on other matters, as their colonies in
the Mediterranean, while the cities of the Philistines,
though they acquired a closer combination as early as
the eleventh century B.C., or even earlier (I. 348), did
not, at least at first, go out to make foreign conquests.
But it was unavoidable that the old population, especi-
ally in the north, where they remained in the greatest
numbers amongst the Israelites, should again rise and
find strong points of support in the Canaanite princes
of Hazor and Damascus ; that the Moabites who lay to
the east of the Dead Sea, the Ammonites, the neighbours
of the land of Gilead, that the wandering tribes of the
Syrian desert should feel themselves tempted to invade
Israel, to carry off the flocks and plunder the harvests
and, if they found no vigorous resistance, to take up a
permanent settlement in the country. Without the
protection of natural borders, without combination
and guidance, as they were, the Israelites could only
succeed in resisting such attacks when in the time of
danger a skilful and brave warrior was found, who
was able to rouse his own tribe, and perhaps one or
two of the neighbouring tribes, to a vigorous resistance,
or to liberation if the enemy was already in the land.
It is the deeds of such heroes, and almost these alone,
which remained in the memory of the Israelites from
the first two centuries following their settlement ; and
these narratives, in part fabulous, must represent the
history of Israel for this period.

Eglon, king of Moab, defeated the Israelites, passed
over the Jordan, took Jericho, and here established

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 99

himself. With Gilead the tribe of Benjamin, which
dwelt nearest to Jericho, at first must have felt with
especial weight the oppression of Moab. For 18 years
the Israelites are said to have served Eglon. Then
Ehud, of the tribe of Benjamin, a reputed great grand-
son of the youngest son of Jacob, the father of the Ben-
jamites, came with others to Jericho to bring tribute.
When the tax had been delivered Ehud desired to
speak privately with the king. Permission was given,
and Ehud went with a two-edged sword in his hand,
under his garment, to the king, who sat alone in the
cool upper chamber. Ehud spoke : "I have a mes-
sage from God to thee ; " and when Eglon rose to
receive the message Ehud smote him with the sword
in the belly, "so that even the haft went in, and
the fat closed over the blade, for the king of Moab
was a very fat man. But Ehud went down to the
court, and closed the door behind him." When the
servants found the door closed they thought that the
king had covered his feet for sleep. At last they
took the key and found the king dead on the floor.
But Ehud blew the trumpet on Mount Ephraim,
assembled a host, seized the fords of Jordan, and
slew about 10,000 Moabites, and the Moabites retired
into their old possessions.1

Another narrative tells of the fortunes of the tribes
of Naphtali, Zebulun, and Issachar, which were settled
in the north, under Mount Hermon. Jabin, king of
Hazor, had chariots of iron, and Sisera his captain
was a mighty warrior, and for 20 years they oppressed
the Israelites.2 Deborah, the wife of Lapidoth, of the
tribe of Issachar, dwelt in the land of Benjamin,
between Bethel and Ramah, under the palm-tree ; she
could announce the will of Jehovah, and the people

1 Judges iii. 12 ff. 2 Judges iv., v.

H2

100 ISRAEL.

came to her to obtain counsel and judgment. At her
command Barak, the son of Abinoam, assembled the
men of the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali ; assistance
also came from Issachar, Manasseh, Ephraim and
Benjamin. Sisera went forth with 900 chariots and a
great host and the Israelites retired before him to the
south of the brook Kishon. Sisera crossed the brook
and came upon the Israelites in the valley of Megiddo ;
he was defeated, leapt from his chariot, and fled on
foot and came unto the tent of Heber the Kenite.
Jael, Heber's wife, met him and said, " Turn in, my
lord, to me ; fear not." When in his thirst he asked
for water, she opened the bottle of milk and allowed
him to drink, and when he lay down to rest she
covered him with the carpet. Being wearied, he sank
into a deep sleep. Then Jael softly took the nail of the
tent and a hammer in her hand, and smote the nail
through his temples so that it passed into the earth.
When Barak, who pursued the fugitive, came, Jael
said, " I will show thee the man whom thou seekest,"
and led him into the tent where Sisera lay dead on the
ground.

Israel's song of victory is as follows : " Listen, ye
kings ; give ear, ye princes ; I will sing to Jehovah,
I will play on the harp of Jehovah, the king of Israel.
There were no princes in Israel till I, Deborah, arose
a mother in Israel. Arise, Barak ; bring forth thy
captives, thou son of Abinoam. Shout, ye that ride
on she-asses, and ye that sit upon carpets, and ye
that go on foot, and let the people come down into
the plain, to the gates of the cities. Then I said,
Go down, 0 people of Jehovah, against the strong ; a
small people against the mighty. From Ephraim they
came and from Benjamin, from Machir (i. e. from the
Manassites on the east of the lake of Gennesareth) the

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 101

rulers came, and the chiefs of Issachar were with
Deborah, and Zebulun is a people which perilled his
life to the death, and Naphtali on the heights of the
field. On the streams of Keuben there was taking of

o

counsel, but why didst thou sit still among the herds
to hear the pipe of the herdsmen ? Gilead also
remained beyond Jordan, and Asher abode on the
shore of the sea in his valleys, and Dan on his heights.
The kings came, they fought at the water of Megiddo ;
they gained no booty of silver. Issachar, the support
of Barak, threw himself in the valley at his heels. The
brook Kishon washed away the enemy : a brook of
battles is the brook Kishon. Go forth, my soul,
upon the strong. Blessed above women shall Jael
be, above women in the tent. He asked for water,
she gave him milk ; she brought him cream in a
lordly dish. She put forth her hand to the nail, and
her right hand to the workman's hammer, and she
smote Sisera, she shattered and pierced his temples.
Between her feet he lay shattered. The mother of
Sisera looked from her window ; she called through the
lattice : 'Why linger his chariots in returning ? why
delay the wheels of his chariot ? ' Her wise maidens
answered her ; nay, she answered herself : ' Will they
not find spoil and divide it ; one or two maidens to
each, spoil of broidered robes for Sisera ? ' So must
all thine enemies perish, O Jehovah, but may those
who love him be as the sun going forth in his strength."
Whether this song was composed by Deborah, or by
some other person in her name, it is certainly an
ancient song of victory and contemporary with the
events it celebrates.

The tribes of Israel also which were settled in the
land of Gilead remembered with gratitude a mighty
warrior who had once delivered them from grievous

102 ISRAEL.

oppression. The Ammonites, the eastern neighbours
of the land of Gilead, oppressed "the sons of Israel
who dwelt beyond Jordan" for 18 years, and marched
over Jordan against Judah, Benjamin and the house
of Ephraim. Then the elders of the land of Gilead
bethought them of Jephthah (Jephthah means " freed
from the yoke "), to whom they had formerly refused
the inheritance of his father because he was not the
son of the lawful wife, but of a courtezan. He had
retired into the gorges of the mountain and col-
lected round him a band of robbers, and done deeds
of bravery. To him the elders went; he was to be
their leader in fighting against the sons of Ammon.
Jephthah said, " Have ye not driven me out of the
house of my father ? now that ye are in distress ye
come to me." Still he followed their invitation, and
the people of Gilead gathered round him at Mizpeh
and made him their chief and leader. " If I return
in triumph from the sons of Ammon," such was Jeph-
thah's vow, " the first that meets me at the door of
my house shall be dedicated to Jehovah, and I will
sacrifice it as a burnt-offering." When he had asked
the tribe of Ephraim for assistance in vain he set out
against the Ammonites with the warriors of the tribes of
Reuben, Gad and Manasseh, and overcame them in a
great battle on the river Arnon. The Ephraimites
made it a reproach against Jephthah that he had
fought against the Ammonites without them ; they
crossed the Jordan in arms. But Jephthah said, "I
was in straits, and my people with me ; I called to
you, but ye aided me not." He assembled the men of
Gilead, defeated the Ephraimites, and came to the
fords of the Jordan before the fugitives, so that more
than 42,000 men of Ephraim are said to have been slain.
When he returned to his home at Mizpeh his

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 103

only daughter came to meet him joyfully, with her
maidens and timbrels and dancing. Jephthah tore
his garments and cried, " My daughter, thou hast
brought me very low ; I have opened my mouth to
Jehovah and cannot take it back." " My father," she
answered, " if thou hast opened thy mouth to Jehovah,
do to me as thou hast spoken, for Jehovah has given
thee vengeance on thine enemies, the Ammonites.
But first let me go with my companions to the
mountains, and there for two months bewail my vir-
ginity." This was done, and on her return Jephthah
did to her according to his vow. Arid it was a custom
in Israel for the maidens to lament the daughter of
Jephthah for four days in the year. After this
Jephthah is said to have been judge for six years
longer beyond Jordan, i. e. to have maintained the
peace in these districts.

Grievous calamity came upon Israel in this period
from a migratory people of the Syrian desert, from
the incursions of the Midians, who, like the Moabites
and Ammonites, are designated in Genesis as a nation
kindred to the Israelites, with whom Moses was said
to have entered into close relations (I. 449, 468).
Now the Midianites with other tribes of the desert at-
tacked Israel in constant predatory incursions. " Like
locusts in multitude," we are told, " the enemy came
with their flocks and tents ; there was no end of them
and their camels. When Israel had sowed the sons of
the East came up and destroyed the increase of the
land as far as Gaza, and left no sustenance remaining,
no sheep, oxen and asses. And the sons of Israel were
compelled to hide themselves in ravines, and caves, and
mountain fortresses." l For seven years Israel is said
to have been desolated in this manner. Beside the

1 Judges vi. 2 — 5.

104 ISRAEL.

tribes of Issachar and Zebulun, between Mount Tabor
and the Kishon, dwelt a part of the tribe of Manasseh.
The family of Abiezer, belonging to this tribe, possessed
Ophra. In an incursion of the Midianites the sons of
Joash, a man of this family, were slain ; l only Gideon,
the youngest, remained. When the Midianites came
again, after their wont, at the time of harvest, and
encamped on the plain of Jezreel, and Gideon was
beating wheat in the vat of the wine-press in order to
save the corn from the Midianites, Jehovah aroused him.
He gathered the men of his family around him, 300
in number.2 When Jehovah had given him a favour-
able sign, and he had reconnoitred the camp of the
Midianites, together with his armour-bearer Phurah, he
determined to attack them in the night. He divided his
troop into companies containing a hundred men ; each
took a trumpet and a lighted torch, which was concealed
in an earthen pitcher. These companieswere to approach
the camp of the Midianites from three sides, and when
Gideon blew the trumpet and disclosed his torch they
were all to do the same. Immediately after the second
night-watch, when the Midianites had just changed the
guards, Gideon gave the signal. All broke their pitchers,
blew their trumpets, and cried, " The sword for Jeho-
vah and Gideon ! " Startled, terrified, and imagining
that they were attacked by mighty hosts, the Midianites
fled. Then the men of Manasseh, Asher, Zebulun and
Naphtali arose, and Gideon hastily sent messengers to

1 Judges viii. 19.

2 The observation that Gideon was the least in the house of his
father, and his family the weakest in Manasseh (Judges vi. 15),
is due no doubt to the tendency of the Ephraimitic text to show
how strong Jehovah is even in the weak. From similar motives it is
said that Gideon himself reduced his army to 300 men (Judges vii.
2 — 6). In the presence of the Ephraimites Gideon speaks only of the
family of Abiezer.

THE TRIBES OF ISRAEL. 105

the Ephraimites that they should seize the fords "of
Jordan before the Midianites. The Ephraimites as-
sembled and took two princes of the Midianites, Oreb
(Raven) and Zeeb (Wolf). The Ephraimites strove
with Gideon that he had not summoned them sooner.
Gideon replied modestly, " Is not the gleaning of the
grapes of Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer?
Did not Jehovah give the princes of Midian into your
hand ? Could I do what ye have done ? " He pur-
sued the Midianites over the Jordan in order to get
into his power their princes Zebah and Zalmunna,
who had previously slain his brothers. When he
passed the river at Succoth he asked the men of
Succoth to give bread to his wearied soldiers. But
the elders feared the vengeance of the Midianites,
arid said, "Are Zebah and Zalmunna already in thine
hand, that we should give bread to thy men ? "
Gideon replied in anger, " If Jehovah gives them into
my hand I will tear your flesh with the thorns of the
wilderness and with briers." The inhabitants of Penuel
on the Jabbok also, to which Gideon marched, refused
to feed their countrymen ; like those of Succoth, they
feared the Midianites. Gideon led his army by the
way of the dwellers in tents far away to Karkor. Here
he defeated and scattered the 15,000 Midianites who
had escaped, and captured the two princes. Then he
turned back to Succoth and said to the elders, " See,
here are Zebah and Zalmunna, for whom ye mocked
me." He caused them to be seized, seventy-seven in
number, and tore them to death with thorns and briers.
The tower of Penuel he destroyed, and caused the in-
habitants of the place to be slain. To the captured
princes he said, " What manner of men were they
whom ye once slew at Tabor ? " And they answered,
" As thou art, they looked like the sons of a king."

106 ISEAEL.

" They were my brethren, the sons of my mother,"
Gideon answered. "As Jehovah liveth, if ye had
saved them alive I would not slay you. Stand up,"
he called to his first-born son Jether, "and slay them."
But the youth feared and drew not his sword, for he
was yet young. " Slay us thyself," said the prisoners,
" for as the man is, so is his strength." This was done.
When the booty was divided Gideon claimed as his
share the golden ear-rings of the slain Midianites.
They were collected in Gideon's mantle, and the weight
reached 1700 shekels of gold, beside the purple raiment
of the dead kings, and the moons and chains on the
necks of the camels.

Gideon had gained a brilliant victory ; no more is
heard of the raids of the Midianites. Out of the booty
he set up a gilded image (ephod) at Ophra.1 He over-
threw the altar of Baal and the image of Astarte in his
city ; and this, as is expressly stated, in the night
(from which we must conclude that the inhabitants
of Ophra were attached to this worship) ; and in the
place of it he set up an altar to Jehovah on the
height, and in the city another altar, which he called
"Jehovah, peace." "Unto this day it is still in
Ophra."

After the liberation of the land, which was owing to
him, Gideon held the first place in Israel. We are
told that the crown had been offered to him and that
he refused it.2 But if Gideon left 70 sons of his body
by many wives, if we find that his influence descended
to his sons, he must have held an almost royal position,
in which a harem was not wanting. He died, as it

1 What is meant in Judges viii. 27 by an ephod is not clear. The
•words which follow in the verse — that all Israel went whoring after
Gideon — are obviously an addition of the prophetic revision.

* Judges viii. 22.

THE TRIBES OP ISRAEL. 107

seems, in a good old age, and was buried in the grave
of his fathers (after 1150 B.C.1).

The same need of protection which preserved Gideon
in power till his death had induced some cities to form
a league, after the pattern of the cities of the Philis-
tines, for mutual support and security. Shechem,
the old metropolis of the tribe of Ephraim, was the
chief city of this league. Here on the citadel at
Shechem the united cities had built a temple to Baal
Berith, i. e. to Baal of the league, and established a
fund for the league in the treasury of this temple.
One of the 70 sons of Gideon, the child of a woman of
Shechem, by name Abimelech, conceived the plan of
establishing a monarchy in Israel by availing himself
of Gideon's name and memory, the desire for order and
protection from which the league had arisen, and the
resources of the cities. At first he sought to induce
the cities to make him their chief. Supported by them,
he sought to remove his brothers and to take the
monarchy into his own hands as the only heir of
Gideon. A skilful warrior like Abimelech, who carried
with him the fame and influence of a great father,
must have been welcome to the cities as a leader and
chief in such wild times. Abimelech spoke to the
men of Shechem : " Consider that I am your bone and
your flesh ; which is better, that 70 men rule over you
or I only ? " Then the citizens of Shechem and the
inhabitants of the citadel assembled under the oak of
Shechem and made Abimelech their king, and gave
him 70 shekels of silver from the temple of Baal
Berith, " that he might be able to pay people to serve
him." "With these and the men of Shechem who followed

1 Gideon's date can only be fixed very indefinitely. lie and the
generations after him must have belonged to the second half of the
twelfth century B.C.

108 ISRAEL.

him he marched and slew all his brethren at Ophra in
his father's house (one only, Jotham, escaped him), and
Israel obeyed him. Abimelech seemed to have reached
his object. Perhaps he might have maintained the
throne thus won by blood had he not, three years
afterwards, quarrelled with the cities which helped him
to power. The cities rose against him. Abimelech
with his forces went against the chief city, Shechem.
The city was taken and destroyed, the inhabitants
massacred. About 1000 men and women fled for refuge
into the temple of Baal Berith in the citadel ; Abime-
lech caused them to be burned along with the temple.
Then he turned from Shechem to Thebez, some miles
to the north. When he stormed the city the inhabit-
ants fled into the strong tower, closed it, and went up
on the roof of the tower. Abimelech pressed on to
the door of the tower to set it on lire, when a woman
threw a stone down from above which fell on Abime-
lech and broke his skull. Then the king called to his
armour-bearer, "Draw thy sword and slay me, that it
may not be said, A woman slew him." The youthful
monarchy was wrecked on this quarrel of the citizens
with the new king.

After this time Eli the priest at the sacred taber-
nacle, a descendant of Ithamar, the youngest son of
Aaron,1 is said to have been in honour among the
Israelites. Not only was he the priest of the national
shrine, but counsel and judgment were also sought from
him. But Eli's sons, Hophni and Phinehas; did evil,
and lay with the women who came to the sacred taber-
nacle to offer prayer and sacrifice.2

1 Joseph. " Antiq." 5, 11, 5. 2 1 Sam. ii. 22—25.

CHAPTER V.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL.

MORE than a century and a half had passed since the
Israelites had won their land in Canaan. The greater
part of the tribes, beside the breeding of cattle, were
occupied with the cultivation of vines and figs, and
regular agriculture ; the minority had become accus-
tomed to life in settled cities, and the earliest stages
of industry ; but the unity of the nation was lost,
and in the place of the religious fervour which once
accompanied the exodus from Egypt, the rites of the
Syrian deities had forced their way in alongside of the
worship of Jehovah. The division and disorganisation
of the nation had exposed the Israelites to the attacks
of their neighbours ; the attempt of Abimelech to
establish a monarchy in connection with the cities had
failed ; the anarchy still continued. Worse dangers still
might be expected in the future. The forces of the
Moabites, Midianites, and Ammonites were not superior
to that of the Israelites, the attacks of the tribes of the
desert were of a transitory nature ; but what if the cities
of the coast, superior in civilisation, art, and combined
power, should find it convenient when the affairs of
Israel were in this position to extend their borders to the
interior, and Israel should be gradually subjugated from
the coast ? From the Phenicians there was nothing to
fear : navigation and trade entirely occupied them ;

110 ISRAEL.

from the beginning of the eleventh century their ships
devoted their attention to discoveries in the Atlantic
Ocean, beyond the straits of Gibraltar (p. 83). The
case was different with the warlike cities of the Philis-
tines. If the Philistines were behind the Israelites in
the extent of their territory and dominion, their forces
were held together and well organised by means of
the confederation of the cities. Bounded to the west
by the sea, and to the south by the desert, the only
path open to them for extending their power was in
the direction of the Hebrews. For a long time they
had been content to put a limit upon the extension of
the tribes of Judah and Dan, but in the first half of the
eleventh century B.C. the condition of Israel appeared
to the federation of the Philistines sufficiently inviting
to induce them to pass from defence to attack. Their
blows fell first on Judah, Simeon, and the part of Dan
which had remained in the south on the borders of the
Philistines ; tribes which had hitherto been exempted
from attack, whose territory had been protected by
the deserts on the south, and the Dead Sea on the
east. But now they were attacked from the direction
of the sea. The struggle with the Philistines was not
a matter of rapine and plunder, but of freedom and
independence. The aim of the five princes of the
Philistines (I. 348) was directed towards the extension
of their own borders and their own dominion, and the
war against the Israelites was soon carried on with
vigour. The tribes of Judah and Dan were reduced
to submission.1 If the Israelites did not succeed in
uniting their forces, if they could not repair what was
neglected at the conquest, and had since been at-
tempted in vain, the suppression of their independence,
their religious and national life, appeared certain. The

1 Judges xiii. 1 ; xiv. 4 ; xv. 11 ; 1 Sam. iv. 9.

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. Ill

question was whether the nation of Israel, accustomed
to an independent and defiant life in small communities,
and corrupted by it, possessed sufficient wisdom and
devotion to solve the difficult task now laid upon it.

It was a melancholy time for Israel when the Philis-
tines ruled over the south of the land. Later gener-
ations found some comfort for this national disgrace
in the narratives of the strong and courageous Samson,
the son of Manoah, of the tribe of Dan, whose deeds
were placed by tradition in this period. He had done
the Philistines much mischief, and slain many of them ;
even when his foolish love for a Philistine maiden
finally brought him to ruin, he slew more Philistines
at his death than in his life — " about 3000 men and
women."1 Whatever be the truth about these deeds,
no individual effort could avail to save Israel when
the Philistines seriously set themselves to conquer
the northern tribes, unless the nation roused itself
and combined all its forces under one definite head.

1 In Samson, who overcomes the lion, and sends out the foxes
with firebrands, who overthrows the pillars of the temple, and buries
himself under it, Steinthal ("Zeitschrift fur Volkerpsychologie, " 2,
21) recognises the sun-god of the Syrians. The name Samson means
as a fact " the sunny one." The long hair in which Samson's strength
lay may symbolise the growth of nature in the summer, and the
cutting off of it the decay of creative power in the winter : so too the
binding of Samson may signify the imprisoned power of the sun in
winter. As Melkarth in the winter went to rest at his pillars in the
far west, at the end of his wanderings, so Samson goes to his rest
between the two pillars in the city on the shore of the western sea. If,
finally, Samson becomes the servant of a mistress Dalilah — i. e. "the
tender " — this also is a trait which belongs to the myth of Melkarth ; cf.
I. 371. It is not to be denied that traits of this myth have forced
their way into the form and legend of Samson, although the long hair
belongs not to Samson only, but to Samuel and all the Nazarites ; yet
we must not from these traits draw the conclusion that the son of
Manoah is no more than a mythical figure, and even those traits must
have gone through many stages among the Israelites before they could
assume a form of such vigorous liveliness, such broad reality, as we
find pourtrayed in the narrative of Samson.

112 ISRAEL.

The Philistines invaded the land of Ephraim with a
mighty army, and forced their way beyond it north-
wards as far as Aphek, two leagues to the south of
Tabor. At Tabor the Israelites assembled and at-
tempted to check the Philistines, but they failed ; 4000
Israelites were slain. Then the elders of Israel, in
order to encourage the people, caused the ark of
Jehovah to be brought from Shiloh into the camp.
Eli, the priest at the sacred tabernacle, was of the age of
98 years. Hophni and Phinehas, his sons, accompanied
the sacred ark, which was welcomed by the army with
shouts of joy. In painful expectation Eli sat at the
gate of Shiloh and awaited the result. Then a man
of the tribe of Benjamin came in haste, with his clothes
rent, and earth upon his head, and said, " Israel is fled
before the Philistines, thy sons are dead, and the ark
of God is lost." Eli fell backwards from his seat, broke
his neck, and died. About 30,000 men are said to
have fallen in the battle (about 1070 B.C.).1

1 The simplest method of obtaining a fixed starting-point for the
date of the foundation of the monarchy in Israel is to reckon backwards
from the capture of Jerusalem, and the destruction of the temple by
Nebuchadnezzar. According to the canon of Ptolemy, Nebuchad-
nezzar's reign began in the year 604 B.C., the temple and Jerusalem
were burned down in the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar (2
Kings xxv. 8 ; Jer. Hi. 12), i, e. in the year 586 B.C. From this year the
Hebrews reckoned 430 years to the commencement of the building of
the temple (430 = 37 years of Solomon since the beginning of the
building + 261 years from the death of Solomon to the taking of
Samaria + 132 years from the taking of Samaria to the destruction
of the temple). Hence the building of the temple was commenced
in the year 1015 B.C. Since the commencement of the building is
placed in the fourth year of Solomon, his accession would fall in the
year 1018 B.C.; and as 40 years are allotted to David, his accession at
Hebron falls in 1058 B.C., and Saul's election about 1080 B.C. In the
present text only the number two is left of the amount of the years of
his reign (1 Sam. xiii. 1), the years of his life also are lost ; we may
perhaps assume 22 years for his reign, since Eupolemus gives him 21
years (Alex. Polyh. Frag. 18, ed. Miiller), and Josephus 20 (" Antiq."
6, 14, 9. 10, 8, 4). His contemporary, Nahash of Ammon, is on the

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 113

At the sacred tabernacle at Shiloh Samuel the son
of Elkanah had served under Eli. Elkanah was an

throne before the election of Saul, and continues beyond the death of
Saul and Ishbosheth, and even 10 years into the reigr. of David.
Nahash must have had an uncommonly long reign if Saul reigned
more than 22 years. It makes against the dates 1080 B.C. for S'aul,
1058 B.C. for David, 1018 B.C. for Solomon, that they rest upon tne
succession of kings of Judah, from the division of the kingdom down
to the fall of Samaria, which is reckoned at 261 years, while the
succession of kings of Israel during the same period only fills 241
years. Movers (" Phoeniz." 2, 1, 140 ff.) has attempted to remove this
difficulty by assuming as a starting-point the statements of Menander
of Ephesus, on the succession of kings in Tyre, preserved in Josephus
("c. Apion," 1, 18). Josephus says that from the building of the
temple, which took place in the twelfth year of Hiram king of Tyre,
down to the founding of Carthage, which took place in the seventh
year of Pygmalion king of Tyre, 143 years 8 months elapsed. From
the date given by Justin (18, 7) for the founding of Carthage (72
years before the founding of Eome; 72 + 754), i. e. from 826 B.C.,
Movers reckons back 143 years, and so fixes the building of the
temple at the year 969 B.C., on which reckoning Solomon's accession
would fall in the year 972 B.C., David's in the year 1012 B.C., and
Saul's election in 1034 B.C. But since the more trustworthy dates
for the year of the founding of Carthage, 846, 826, and 816, have an
equal claim to acceptance, we are equally justified in reckoning back
from 846 and 816 to Saul's accession.

According to the canon of the Assyrians, the epochs in which were
fixed by the observation of the solar eclipse of July 15 in the year
763 B.C., Samaria was taken in the year 722 B.C. If from this we
reckon backwards 261 years for Judah, Solomon's death would fall in
the year 983 B.C., his accession in 1023 B.C., David's accession in 1063
B.C., Saul's election in 1085 B.C. If we keep to the amount given for
Israel (241 years + 722), Solomon's death falls in 963, his accession in
1003, the building of the temple in 1000 B.C., David's accession in
1043 B.C., Saul's accession in 1065 B.C. But neither by retaining the
whole sum of 430 years, according to which the building of the temple
begins 1015 B.C. (430 -4- 586), and Solomon dies in 978 B.C., nor by
putting the death of Solomon in the year 983 or 963 B.C., do we bring
the Assyrian monuments into agreement with the chronological state-
ments of the Hebrews. If we place the date of the division of the
kingdom at the year 978 B.C., Ahab's reign, according to the numbers
given by the Hebrews for the kingdom of Israel, extends from 916 to
894 B.C. ; if we place the division at 963 B.C., it extends, according to the
same calculation, from 901 to 879 B.C. On the other hand, the Assyrian
monuments prove that Ahab fought at Karkar against Shalmanesar II.
in the year 854 B.C. (below, chap. 10). Since Ahab after this carried on
a war against Damascus, in which war he died, he must in any case
VOL. II. I

114 ISRAEL.

Ephraimite; lie dwelt at Ramah (Kamathaim, and

have been alive in 853 B.C. Hence even the lower date taken for Ahab's
reign from the Hebrew statements (901 — 879 B.C.) would have to be
brought down 26 years, and as a necessary consequence the death
of Solomon would fall, not in the year 963 B.C., but in the year
937 B.C.

If we could conclude from this statement in the Assyrian monuments
that the reigns of the kings of Israel were extended by the Hebrews
beyond the truth, it follows from another monument, the inscription
of Mesha, that abbreviations also took place. According to the Second
Book of Kings (iii. 5), Mesha of Moab revolted from Israel when Ahab
died. The stone of Mesha says: " Omri took Medaba, and Israel
dwelt therein in his and his son's days for 40 years ; in my days Camus
restored it; " Noldeke, " Inschrift des Mesa." Hence Omri, the father
of Ahab, took Medaba 40 years before the death of Ahab. Ahab,
according to the Hebrews, reigned 22 years, Omri 12. According to the
etone of Mesha the two reigns must have together amounted to more
than 40 years. Since Omri obtained the throne by force, and had at
first to carry on a long civil war, and establish himself on the throne
(1 Kings xvi. 21, 22), he could not make war upon the Moabites at the
very beginning of his reign. Here, therefore, there is an abbreviation
of the reign of Omri and Ahab by at least 10 years.

Hence the contradiction between the monuments of the Assyrians
and the numbers of the Hebrews is not to be removed by merely
bringing down the division of the kingdom to the year 937 B.C. In
order to obtain a chronological arrangement at all, we are placed in
the awkward necessity of making an attempt to bring the canon of
the Assyrians into agreement with the statements of the Hebrews by
assumptions more or less arbitrary. Jehu slew Joram king of Israel
and Ahaziah of Judah at the same time. From this date upwards to
the death of Solomon the Hebrew Scriptures reckon 98 years for
Israel, and 95 for Judah. Jehu ascended the throne of Israel in the
year 843 B.C. at the latest, since, according' to the Assyrian monuments,
he paid tribute to Shalmanesar II. in the year 842 B.C. If we reckon
the 98 years for Israel upwards from 843 B.C., we arrive at 941 B.C. for
the division of the kingdom ; and if to this we add, as the time which
has doubtlessly fallen out in the reigns of Omri and Ahab, 12 years,
953 B.C. would be the year of the death of Solomon, the year in which
the ten tribes separated from the house of David. If we keep the year
953 for the division, the year 993 comes out for the accession of
Solomon, the year 990 for the beginning of the building of the temple,
the year 1033 for the accession of David at Hebron, and the year
1055 for the election of Saul. Fifteen years may be taken for the
continuance of the heavy oppression before Saul. For the changes
which we must in consequence of this assumption establish in the
data of the reigns from Jeroboam and Eehoboam down to Athaliah
and Jehu, i. e. in the period from 953 B.C. to 843 B.C., see below.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 115

hence among the Greeks Arimathia1). Samuel was
born to him late in life, and, in gratitude that at last
a son was given to her, his mother had dedicated him to
Jehovah, and given him to Eli to serve in the sanctuary.
Thus even as a boy Samuel waited at the sacrifices in
a linen tunic, and performed the sacred rites. He
grew up in the fear of Jehovah and became a seer, who
saw what was hidden, a soothsayer, whom the people
consulted in distress of any kind, and at the same time
he announced the will of Jehovah, for Jehovah had
called him, and permitted him to see visions, " so that
he knew how to speak the word of God, which was
rare in those days/' and " Jehovah was with him and
let none of Samuel's words fall to the ground." ! After
the crushing defeat at Aphek it devolved on Samuel to
perform the duties of high priest. He summoned the
people to Mizpeh in the tribe of Benjamin and prayed
for Israel. Large libations of water were poured to
Jehovah. When the Philistines advanced Samuel

Omri's reign occupies the period from 899 — 875 B.C. (24 years instead
of 12), t. e. a period which agrees with, the importance of this reign
among the Moabites and the Assyrians; Ahab reigned from 875 — 853
B.C. According to 1 Kings xvi. 31, Ahab took Jezebel the daughter
of Ethbaal the king of the Sidonians to wife. If this Ethbaal of Sidon
is identical with the Ithobal of Tyre in Josephus, the chronology
deduced from our assumptions would not be impossible. Granted the
assertion of Josephus that the twelfth year of Hiram king of Tyre is
the fourth year of Solomon (990 B.C.), Hiram's accession would fall in
the year 1001 B.C. ; according to Josephus, Ithobal ascended the throne
of Tyre 85 years after Hiram's accession, when he had slain Pheles.
He lived according to the same authority 68 years and reigned 32
years, i. e. from 916 — 884 B.C. Ahab, either before or after the year
of his accession (875), might very well have taken the daughter of this
prince to wife. And if we assume that the statement of Appian, that
Carthage was in existence 700 years before her destruction by the
Eomans, i. e. was founded in the year 846 B.C., the 143f or 144 years
of Josephus between the building of the temple and the foundation of
Carthage, reckoned backwards from 846 B.C., lead us to the year 990
B.C. for the building of the temple.

1 Now Beit-Eima, north-east of the later Lydda.

3 1 Sam. iii. 1, 19.

i2

116 ISRAEL.

sacrificed a sucking lamb (no doubt as a sin-offering),
and burned it. " Then on that day Jehovah thundered
mightily out of heaven over the Philistines, and con-
founded them so that they were defeated."

This victory remained without lasting results. On
the contrary, the slavery of the Israelites to the Philis-
tines became more extensive and more severe. In
order to bring the northern tribes into the same sub-
jection as the tribes of Dan, Judah, and Simeon, the
Philistines established fortified camps at Michmash and
Geba (Gibeah) in the tribe of Benjamin, as a centre
from which to hold this and the northern tribes in check.
The men of the tribes of Judah and Simeon had to take
the field against their own countrymen. These arrange-
ments soon obtained their object. All Israel on this
side of the Jordan was reduced to subjection. In
order to make a rebellion impossible, the Israelites
were deprived of their arms ; indeed, the Philistines
were not content that they should give up the arms in
their possession, they even removed the smiths from
the land, that no one might provide a sword or javelin
for the Hebrews. The oppression of this dominion
pressed so heavily and with such shame on the Israelites
. that the books of Samuel themselves tell us, if the
plough-shares, bills, and mattocks became dull, or the
forks were bent, the children of Israel had to go down
into the cities of the Philistines in order to have their
implements mended and sharpened.1

At this period Samuel's activity must have been
limited to leading back the hearts of the Israelites to
the God who brought them out of Egypt ; he must
have striven to fill them with the faith with which he
was himself penetrated, and the distress of the time
would contribute to gain acceptance for his teaching

1 1 Sam. xiii. 19—23, from the older account.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 117

and his prescripts. The people sought his word and
decision ; he is said to have given judgment at Bethel,
Gilgal, and Mizpeh. He gathered scholars and disciples
round him, who praised Jehovah to the sound of harp
and lute, flute and drum, who in violent agitation
and divine excitement awaited his visions, and " were
changed into other men." l From the position which
tradition allots to Samuel, there can be no doubt that
he brought the belief in and worship of the old god
into renewed life, and caused them to sink deeper
into the hearts of the Israelites. The oppression of
his people by the Philistines he could not turn away,
though he cherished a lively hope in the help of
Jehovah.

The tribes on the east of the Jordan remained free
from the dominion of the Philistines ; yet for them
also servitude and destruction was near at hand. The
Ammonites were not inclined to let slip so favourable
an opportunity, As the land on the west of the
Jordan was subject to the Philistines, the tribes on
the east would prove an easy prey. The Ammonites
encamped before Jabesh in Gilead, and the inhabitants
were ready to submit. But Nahash, the king of the
Ammonites, as we are told, would only accept their
submission on condition that every man in Jabesh put
out his right eye. Then the elders of Jabesh sent
messengers across the Jordan and earnestly besought
their countrymen for help.

The tribe of Benjamin had to feel most heavily, no
doubt, the oppression of the Philistines. In their
territory lay the fortified camps of the enemy. Here,
at Gibeah, dwelt a man of the race of Matri, Saul the
son of Kish, the grandson of Abiel. Kish was a man of
substance and influence; his son Saul was a courageous

1 1 Sam. x. 5, 6 ; xix. 20—24.

118 ISRAEL.

man, of remarkable stature, " higher by a head than
the rest of the nation." He was in the full strength of
his years, and surrounded by valiant sons : Jonathan,
Melchishua, Abinadab, and Ishbosheth. One day,
"just as he was returning home from the field behind
his oxen," he heard the announcement which the
messengers of Jabesh brought. Himself under the
enemy's yoke, he felt the more deeply what threatened
them. His heart was fired at the shame and ruin of
his people. Regardless of the Philistines, he formed a
bold resolution ; assistance must be given to those most
in need. He cut two oxen in pieces, sent the pieces
round the tribes,1 and raised the cry, " Whoso comes
not after Saul, so shall it be done to his oxen." The
troop which gathered round him out of compassion
for the besieged in Jabesh, and in obedience to his
summons, Saul divided into three companies. With
these he succeeded in surprising the camp of the
Ammonites about the morning watch ; he dispersed
the hostile army and set Jabesh free.

Whatever violence and cruelty had been exercised
since the settlement of the Israelites in Canaan,
however many the feuds and severe the vengeance
taken, however great the distress and the oppression,
the nation, amid all the anarchy and freedom so
helpless against an enemy, still preserved a healthy
and simple feeling and vigorous power. And at this
crisis the Israelites .were not found wanting; Saul's
bold resolution, the success in setting free the city in
her sore distress, the victory thus won, the first joy and
hope after so long a period of shame, gave the people
the expectation of having found in him the man who
was able to set them free from the dominion of the
Philistines also, and restore independence, and law,

1 Compare the division of the corpse by the Levite, above, p. 96.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 119

and peace. When the thank-offering for the unex-
pected victory, for the liberation of the land of Gilgal,
was offered at Gilgal on the Jordan, as far as possible
from the camp of the Philistines, " all the people went
to Gilgal, and there made Saul king before Jehovah,
and Saul and all the men of Israel rejoiced greatly"
(1055 B.C.).

The heavy misfortunes which the land had experi-
enced for a long time, the severe oppression of the
dominion of the Philistines, had at length taught the
majority that rescue could only come by a close con-
nection and union of the powers of the tribes, and
an established authority supreme over all. To check
anarchy from within and oppression from without re-
quired a vigorous hand, a ruling will, and a recognised
power. What the people could do to put an end to the
disorganisation was now done, they had placed a man
at the head whom they might expect to be a brave
leader and resolute guide. The Israelites had used
their sovereignty to give themselves a master, and
might hope with confidence that by this step they had
laid the foundations of a happier future which they
might certainly greet with joy.1

1 Owing to the later conceptions that the king needed to be consecrated
by the prophets, that Jehovah is himself the King of Israel, an
almost inexplicable confusion has come into the narrative of Saul's
elevation. Not only have we an older and later account existing side
by side in the books of Samuel, not only has there been even a third
hand at work, but the attempts to bring the contradictory accounts
into harmony have increased the evil. In 1 Sam. viii. we are told :
The elders of Israel and the people required from Samuel a king at
Eamah, because he was old and his sons walked not in his ways. Jehovah
says to Samuel : They have not rejected thee, but me ; yet Samuel
accedes to the request of the Israelites. Samuel gives the elders a
terrifying description of the oppression which the monarchy would
exercise upon them, a description which evidently predates the experi-
ences made under David, Solomon, and later kings, whereas at the
time spoken of the nation had suffered only too long from wild anarchy.
The reasons, moreover, given by the elders, why they desired a king,

120 ISRAEL.

Immediately after his election on the Jordan, Saul
was firmly resolved to take up arms against the

do not agree with the situation, but rather with the time of Eli, who
also had foolish sons. In spite of Samuel's warning the people persist
in their wish to have a king< Further we are told in chap. ix. 1 — x.
16, how Saul at his father's bidding sets out in quest of lost she-asses,
and goes to inquire of Samuel, for the fourth part of a silver shekel,
whither they had strayed. At Jehovah's command Samuel anoints
the son of Kish to be king, when he comes to him ; he tells him
where he will find his asses, and imparts to him two other prophecies
on the way. Then we are told in chap. x. 17 — 27 that Samuel
summons an assembly of the people to Mizpeh, repeats his warning
against the monarchy, but then causes lots to be cast who shall be
king over the tribes, and families, and individuals. The lot falls upon
Saul, who makes no mention to any one of the anointing, but has
hidden himself among the stuff. Finally, in chap. xi. we find the
account given in the text, to which, in order to bring it into harmony
with what has been already related, these words are prefixed in ver. 14 :
" And Samuel said to the people, Come, let us go to Gilgal to renew
the kingdom ; " but in xi. 15 we find : " Then went all the people to
Gilgal, and made Saul king before Jehovah in Gilgal." The contra-
dictions are striking. The elders require a king from Samuel, whom
they could choose themselves (2 Sam. ii. 4 ; v. 3 ; 1 Kings xii. 1, 20 ;
2 Kings xiv. 21), and whom, according to 1 Sam. xi. 15, the people
actually choose. Jehovah will not have a king, but then permits it.
Nor is this permission all ; he himself points out to Samuel the man
whom he is to anoint. Anointed to be king, Saul goes, as if nothing
had taken place, to his home. He comes to the assembly at Mizpeh,
and again says nothing to any one of his new dignity. Already king
by anointment, he is now again made king by the casting of lots. He
returns home to till his field, when the messengers from Jabesh were
sent not to the king of Israel, but to the people of Israel, to ask for
help. In Gibeah also they do not apply to the king ; not till he sees
the people weeping in Gibeah, does Saul learn the message. Yet he
does not summon the people to follow him as king ; he requests the
following just as in earlier times individuals in extraordinary cases
sought to rouse the people to take up arms. It is impossible that a
king should be chosen by lot at a time when the bravest warrior was
needed at the head, and simple boys, who hid themselves among the
stuff, were not suited to lead the army at such a dangerous time. At
the time of Saul's very first achievements his son Jonathan stands at
his side as a warrior ; at his death his youngest son Ishbosheth was
40 years of age (2 Sam. ii. 10). Saul must therefore have been between
40 and 50 years old when he became king. The request of the elders
for a king, and Samuel's resistance, belong on the other hand to the
prophetic narrator of the books of Samuel, in whose account it was
followed by the assembly at Mizpeh and the casting of lots. The same

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 121

Philistines for the liberation of the land. He turned
upon their camp in the district of his own tribe.
While he lay opposite the fortifications at Michmash,
and thus held the garrison fast, his son Jonathan suc-
ceeded in conquering the detachment of the Philistines
stationed at Geba. But the princes of the Philistines
had no mind to look on at the union of Israel. They
assembled, as we are told, an army of 3000 chariots,
6000 cavalry, and foot soldiers beyond number ; with
these the tribes of Judah and Simeon were compelled
to take the field against their brethren.1 Whether the
numbers are correct or incorrect, the armament of the
Philistines was sufficient to cause the courage of the
Israelites to sink. Saul summoned the Israelites to
the Jordan, to Grilgal, where he had been raised to be
their chief. But in vain he caused the trumpets to be
blown and the people to be summoned. The Israelites
crept into the caves and clefts of the rock, and thorn-
narrator attempts to bring the achievement at Jabesh, and the recogni-
tion of Saul as ruler and king which followed it, into harmony with his
narrative by the addition of the restoration of the kingdom and some
other interpolations. The Philistines would hardly have permitted
minute preparations and prescribed assemblies for the election of king.
The simple elevation and recognition of Saul as king after his first suc-
cessful exploit in war corresponds to the situation of affairs (cf. 1 xii.
12). And I am the more decided in holding this account to be historically
correct, because it does not presuppose the other accounts, and because
the men of Jabesh, according to the older account, fetched the bodies of
Saul and his sons to Jabesh from Beth-shan and burned them there,
1 Sam. xxxi. 12, 13. The older account in the books of Samuel knows
nothing of the request of the elders for a king. After the defeat which
caused Eli's death, it narrates the carrying back of the ark by the
Philistines, and the setting up of it at Beth-shemesh and Kirjath-
jearim. Then follows Saul's anointing by Samuel (ix. 1 — 10, 16) ; then
the lost statement about the age of Saul when he became king, and
the length of the reign ; then the great exploits of Saul against the
Philistines (xiii. 1 — 14, 46) ; xiii. 8 — 13 stands in precise relation
to x. 8. That the achievement of Jabesh cannot have been wanting
in the older account follows from the express reference to it at the
death of Saul.

1 1 Sam. xiii. 3—7 ; xiv. 22.

122 ISRAEL.

hushes, into the towers and the cisterns, and fled
beyond Jordan to find refuge in the land of Gilead.
Only the king and his brave son Jonathan did not
quail before the numbers or gallantry of the enemies,
though only a small troop — it is said about 600 men — •
gathered round Saul. The great army of the Philistines
had first marched to the fortified camp at Michmasb,
and from this point, after leaving a garrison behind, in
which were the Israelites of Judah and Simeon, it
separated into three divisions, in order to march,
through Israel in all directions and hold the country
in subjection. One column marched to the west in
the direction of Beth-horon, the second to the north
towards Ophra, the third to the east towards the
valley of Zeboim.1 This division made it possible for
Saul to attack. He turned upon that part of the army
which was weakest and most insecure, the garrison at
Michmash, and made an unexpected attack on the
fortification. Jonathan ascended an eminence in the
rear, while Saul attacked in the van. In the tumult
of the attack the Hebrews in the camp of the Philis-
tines joined the side of their countrymen, and Saul
gained the fortification. The Philistines fled. The
king knew what was at stake and strove to push the
victory thus gained to the utmost.2 Without resting,
he urged his men to the pursuit of the fugitives.
That none of his troop might halt or stray in order to
take food, he said, " Cursed is the man who eats bread
till the evening, till I have taken vengeance on mine
enemies." Jonathan had not heard the command of
his father, and as the pursuers passed through a wood
in which wild honey lay scattered he ate a little of
the honeycomb. For this he should have been put to
death, because he was dedicated to Jehovah (I. 499).

1 1 Sam. xiii. 16—18. 2 1 Sam. xiv. 1—23.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 123

But the warriors were milder than their customs.
" Shall Jonathan, die," cried the soldiers, " who has
won this great victory in Israel ? that be far from us :
as Jehovah liveth, not a hair of his head shall fall to
the ground, for he has wrought vfiih God this day ; "
"and the people rescued Jonathan that he died not."1

This success encouraged the Israelites to come forth
from, their hiding-places and gather round their king.
But only a part of the hostile army was defeated, and
the Philistines were not so easily to be deprived of
the sovereignty over Israel. "And the strife was hot
against the Philistines so long as Saul lived," and
" king Saul was brave and delivered Israel from the
hand of the robbers," is the older of the two statements
preserved in the Books of Samuel.

Saul had rendered the service which was expected
by the Israelites when they elevated him : he had
saved his nation from the deepest distress, from the
brink of the most certain destruction. Without him
the tribes beyond the Jordan would have succumbed to
the Ammonites and Moabites, and those on this side of
the river would at length have become obedient sub-
jects of the Philistines. He found on his accession a
disarmed, discouraged nation. By his own example
he knew how to restore to them courage and self-con-
fidence, and educate them into a nation familiar with
war and skilled in it. The old military virtues of
the tribe of Benjamin (p. 96) found in Saul their full
expression and had a most beneficial result for Israel.
The close community in which from old time the small
tribe of Benjamin had been with the large tribe of
Ephraim, by the side of which it had settled, was an
advantage to Saul.2 The strong position which he gained

1 So the older account, 1 Sam. xiv. 24 — 45.

2 Numbers ii. 18—24 ; Joshua xviii. 12—20 ; Judges v. 14. That

124 ISRAEL.

by the recognition of these two tribes could not but
have an effect on the others, and contribute with the
importance of his achievements and the splendour of
their results to gain firmness and respect for the young
monarchy, and win obedience for his commands. In
the ceaseless battles which he had to carry on he was
mainly supported by his eldest son Jonathan, who
stood beside him as a faithful brother in arms, and his
cousin Abner, the son of Ner his father's brother, whom
he made his chief captain. "And wherever Saul saw a
mighty man and a brave he took him to himself."
Thus he formed around him a school of brave warriors.
He appears to have kept 3000 warriors under arms in
the district of Benjamin, and this formed the centre
for the levy of the people.2

But the Israelites had not merely to thank the king
they had set up for the recovery and vigorous defence
of their independence and their territory ; he was also
a zealous servant of Jehovah. He offered sacrifice to
Him, built altars, and inquired of Him by His priests,
who accompanied him even on his campaigns.3 He
observed strictly the sacred customs ; even after the
battle the exhausted soldiers were not allowed to eat
meat with blood in it. He was prepared to allow
even his dearest son, whose life he had unconsciously
devoted, to be put to death. He removed all magi-
cians and wizards out of the land with great severity.4
How earnestly he took up the national and religious
opposition to the Canaanites is clear from his conduct
to the Hivites of Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth, and

Ephraim remained true to Saul follows from the recognition of
Ishbosheth after Saul's death, 2 Sam. ii. 9, 10.

1 1 Sam. xiv. 52. 2 1 Sam. xiii. 2.

3 1 Sam. xiv. 3, 18, 37 ; xxviii. 6.

4 1 Sam. xxviii. 3, 9.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 125

Kirjath-jearim, who had once made a league with
Joshua, and in consequence had been allowed to
remain among the Israelites (I. 494). " Saul sought
to slay them in his zeal for Israel," and the Gibeonites
afterwards maintained that Saul had sought to anni-
hilate them, and his purpose was that they should be
destroyed and exist no more in all the land of Israel.1
The ark of the covenant, which had fallen into the
hands of the Philistines at the battle of Aphek, was
brought back to Israel in his reign. The possession of
it, so the Hebrews said, had brought no good to the
Philistines. They had set it up as a trophy of victory
in the temple of Dagon at Ashdod. But the image of
the god had fallen to pieces, and only the fish-tail was
left standing (I. 272) ; the people of Ashdod had been
attacked with boils, and their crops destroyed by mice.
The same occurred at Gath, when the ark was brought
there, and, in consequence, the city of Ekron had
refused to accept it. Then the Philistines had placed
the ark upon a wagon, and allowed the cows before it
to draw it whither they would. They drew it to
Beth-shemesh in the tribe of Judah. But when the
people of Beth-shemesh looked on the ark a grievous
mortality began among them, till the men of Kirjath-
jearim (riot far from Beth-shemesh) took away the ark,
and Abinadab set it up in a house on a hill in his field,
and established his own son Eleazar as guardian and
priest (about 1045 B.C.2). The Books of the Chronicles

1 2 Sam. xxi. 2, 5.

2 The ark was brought by David from. Kirjath-jearim to Zion. That
could not take place before the year 1025 B.C. Saul's death falls, as
was assumed above, in the year 1033 B.C. But the ark is said to have
been at Kirjath-jearim 20 years (1 Sam. vii. 2 ; vi. 21), it must there-
fore have been carried thither 1045 B.C., or a few years later. The
stay among the Philistines must have been more than seven months,
as stated in 1 Sam. vi. 61 ; the stay at Beth-shemesh was apparently
only a short one. The battle at Tabor and Eli's death cannot, as shown

126 ISRAEL.

mention the gifts which Saul dedicated to the national
sanctuary.1

As king of Israel, Saul remained true to the simplicity
of his earlier life. Of splendour, courts, ceremonial,
dignitaries, and harem we hear nothing. If not in the
field he remained on his farm at Gibeah, with his wife
Ahinoam,2 his four sons, and his two daughters. Abner
and other approved comrades in arms ate at his table.
His elder daughter Merab he married to Adriel the son
of Barzillai. Michal, the younger, he gave to a youthful
warrior, David the son of Jesse, who had distinguished
himself in the war against the Philistines, whom he had
made his armour-bearer and companion of his table,
entrusting him at the same time with the command
of 1000 men of the standing army.3 "What am I,
what is the life and the house of my father in Israel,
that I should become the son-in-law of the king ? I am
but a poor and lowly man." So David said, but Saul
remained firm in his purpose.

Of Saul's later battles against the Philistines tradi-
tion has preserved only a few fragments, from which it
is clear that the war was carried on upon the borders
by plundering incursions, which were interrupted from
time to time by greater campaigns.4 But the prepon-
derance of the Philistine power was broken. And Saul
had not only to fight against these. " He fought on
all sides," we are told, "against all the enemies of
Israel, against Moab, and against the sons of Ammon,
and against Edom, and against the kings of Zobah,

above, be placed much later than 1070 B.C. According to 1 Sam. xiv.
3 ; xviii. 19, the ark was in Saul's army at the battle of Michmash,
and Ahijah (Ahimelech), the great-grandson of Eli, was its keeper.

1 1 Chron. xxvi. 28.

2 Only one concubine is mentioned, by whom Saul had two sons.

3 1 Sam. xviii. 3, 17—20, 28; xxii. 4.

4 1 Sam. xvii., xviii., xxiii. 28.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE MONARCHY IN ISRAEL. 127

and whithersoever he turned he was victorious." l
When the Amalekites from their deserts on the penin-
sula of Sinai invaded the south of Israel, and forced
their way as far as Hebron, he defeated them there at
Maon-Carmel,2 and pursued them over the borders of
Israel into their own land as far as the desert of Sur,
" which lies before Egypt/' and took Agag their king
prisoner. It was a severe defeat which he inflicted on
them.3 " Saul's sword came not back empty," and
" the daughters of Israel clothed themselves in purple,"
and "adorned their garments with gold" from the
spoil of his victories.4 The Israelites felt what they
owed to the monarchy and to Saul.5

1 1 Sam. xiv. 47, 48.

2 1 Sam. xv. 12. The place near Hebron still bears the name
Carmel.

3 Noldeke, " Die Amalekiter," s. 14, 15. * 2 Sam. i. 21—24.

6 This follows from the fact that the monarchy remains even after
Saul's death, from the lamentation of the Israelites for Saul, and their
allegiance to his son Ishbosheth.

CHAPTER VI.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH.

THE position which Samuel gained as a priest, seer,
and judge after the death of Eli and his sons, and
continued to hold under the sway of the Philistines
must have undergone a marked change, owing to the
establishment of the monarchy in Israel, though in the
later text of the Books of Samuel it is maintained that
" Samuel judged Israel till his death." l We know that
Samuel had set up an altar to Jehovah at Ramathaim,
his home and dwelling-place (p. 115), but it is not
handed down that he had again set up there the sacred
tabernacle and the worship at the sacred ark, though
this may very well have been the case after the Philis-
tines sent back the ark. Both the older and the later text
of the two Books of Samuel represent him as in opposi-
tion to the monarchy. According to the later text,
written from a prophetic point of view, Samuel had from
the first opposed the establishment of the monarchy ;
and both the older and the more recent account know of
a contention between Saul and Samuel. The former
tells us: When Saul immediately after his election took
up arms against the Philistines, and these marched out
with their whole fighting power, and Saul gathered the
Israelites at Gilgal, Samuel bade the king wait seven
days till he came down to offer burnt-offering and

1 1 Sam. vii. lo.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND [SHBOSHETH. 129

thank-offering. " And Saul waited seven days, but
Samuel came not ; the people were scattered. Then
Saul said : Bring me the burnt-offering and the thank-
offering. He offered the burnt-sacrifice, and when he
had made an end Samuel came, and Saul went to greet
him. And Samuel said, What hast thou done? Saul
answered, When I saw that the people were scattered
from me, and thou didst not come at the time ap-
pointed, and the Philistines were encamped at Mich-
mash, I said, The Philistines will come down upon me
to G-ilgal, and I have not made supplication to Jehovah,
so I forced myself and offered the burnt-sacrifice. Then
Samuel said, Thou hast done foolishly; thou hast not
observed the command of thy God which he com-
manded thee. Jehovah would have established thy
kingdom over Israel for ever, but now thy kingdom
shall not endure." l The more recent account puts the
contention at a far later date. When Saul marched
against the Amalekites Samuel bade him "curse"
everything that belonged to Amalek, man and woman,
child and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
After the return of the victorious army Samuel came
to Gilgal, and said, What meaneth this bleating of
sheep and lowing of oxen in my ears ? Saul answered,
I have obeyed the voice of Jehovah and have gone the
way which Jehovah sent me, and I have brought with me
Agag the king of Amalek, and have " cursed " Amalek.
But from the spoil the people have taken the best of
what was " cursed," in order to sacrifice to Jehovah,
thy God, at Gilgal. Samuel answered in the tone of
Isaiah, Hath Jehovah delight in burnt-offerings and
sacrifice ? To obey is better than sacrifice. Saul con-
fesses that he has sinned and transgressed the com-
mand of Jehovah and the word of Samuel, "for I

1 1 Sam. x. 8 ; xiii. 8—15.
VOL. II. K

130 ISRAEL.

feared the people, and obeyed their voice. And now
forgive me my dn, and turn with me, that I may
entreat Jehovah. But Samuel said, I will not turn
back with thee ; because thou hast rejected the word
of Jehovah he will reject thee from being king over
Israel. Samuel turned to go, but Saul caught the hem
of his garment and said, I have sinned, yet honour me
before the elders of my people, and before Israel, and
return with me, that I may offer prayer before Jehovah.
Then Samuel turned behind Saul, and Saul offered
prayer before Jehovah. And Samuel bade them bring
Agag the king of Amalek before him, and said, As thy
sword has made women childless, so shall thy mother
be childless among women ; and he hewed Agag in
pieces before Jehovah at Gilgal. And Samuel went
up to Ramathaim and saw Saul no more." l In the
narrative of the first text Saul appears to be thoroughly
justified by the most urgent necessity; in the narrative
of the second text he acknowledges openly and com-
pletely that he has sinned. It may have been the
case that Saul did not appear to Samuel sufficiently
submissive to his utterances, which for him were the
utterances of God ; that he wished to see the rights and
power of a king exercised in a different manner and in
a different feeling from that in which Saul discharged
his office.

More dangerous for Saul than any reproach or cold-
ness on the part of Samuel was the contention which
he had in the latter years of his reign with another man,
whom he had himself raised to eminence — a strife
which cost Saul the reward of his laborious and brave
reign, and his house the throne ; while Israel lost the
fruits of great efforts, and the fortunes of the people
were again put to the hazard.

1 1 Sam. xv.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 131

Of the family of Perez l of the tribe of Judah, David
was the youngest (eighth) son of a man of some posses-
sions, Jesse of Bethlehem. He was entrusted with the
care and keeping of the sheep and goats of his father
in the desert pastures on the Dead Sea, and his shep-
herd life had caused him to grow up in a rough school.
It had made him hardy, it had given strength and
suppleness to his body ; he had gained a delight in
adventure and unshaken courage in danger. In defence
of the flocks he had withstood bears and ventured into
conflict even with a lion. In the loneliness and silence
which surrounded him he practised singing and play-
ing ; the severe and solemn nature of that region was
adapted to impress great thoughts on his mind, to give
force and elevation to his spirit. From such a school
he came into the ranks of the warriors of Saul ; the
bold deeds which even in his youth he had performed
against the Philistines induced Saul to make David
one of "the brave," whom he took into his house (about
1040 B.C.).2 He also made him one of his captains,3
and frequently sent him out against the Philistines ; in
these inroads he fought with more success than other

o

chieftains.4 Thus David was a favourite in the eyes

1 Ruth iv. 18—22.

2 In 2 Sam. v. 4, 5 it is stated that David when, he was raised at
Hebron to be king of Judah was 30 years old. This took place 1033
B.C. (p. 113, note) ; David must therefore have been born 1063 B.C., and
could not have marched out to battle before 1043 B.C.

3 1 Sam. xviii. 5.

4 The tale of the battle of David with the giant Goliath appears to
have arisen out of a later conflict of David when king with a mighty
Philistine. In 2 Sam. xxi. 18 — 22 we are told, " And there was again a
battle of Philistines at Gob. Then Elhanan, the son of Jair Orgim, a
Bethlehemite, slew Goliath of Gath ; the shaft of whose spear was as a
weaver's beam." Shortly before it is stated : " David and his servants
strove with the Philistines, and David was weary, and Ishbi thought
to slay David — the weight of his spear was 300 shekels ; then Abishai
(the brother of Joab) aided the king, and slew the Philistine," 2 Sam.
xxi. 15 — 17. From the conflict with a giant which David had to

K 2

132 ISRAEL.

of the people and the servants of the king, and Jona-
than, Saul's eldest son, made a covenant with David,
because " he loved him as his own soul." 3 In the
house of Saul David was trusted and honoured before
the other warriors ; he was his armour-bearer and the
chief of a troop of 1000 men. After Jonathan and
Abner, David was nearest the king ; he had the com-
plete confidence of Saul, and at length became his
son-in-law.2

Some years afterwards (about 1036 B c.3), Saul con-
ceived a suspicion of the man whom he had elevated
to such a height. He imagined that his son-in-law
intended to seize the throne from himself, or contest
the succession with his son Jonathan. According to
the older account it was jealousy of the military
renown of David, which threatened to obscure his

undergo when king, and the slaughter of Goliath of Gath by Elhanan, a
fellow-townsman of David's from Bethlehem, the legend may have arisen
that David himself slew a great giant. This legend was then transferred
by the theocratic narrative into David's boyhood ; in this way he was
marked from the beginning as the chosen instrument of Jehovah. The
statement in 1 Chron. xxi. 5 cannot be made to tell against this view,
•which in order to explain the contradiction between the First and
Second Books of Samuel explains the giant whom Elhanan slew, the
shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam, to be a brother of
Goliath ; the less so inasmuch as the passage from the Book of Samuel
is repeated word for word with this addition, while the battle of David
with Ishbi is omitted. If David really slew a distinguished warrior
of Gath in Saul's. time, it is the more difficult to explain how he
could afterwards fly to the prince of Gath of all others, and enter
into such close relations with him. The often-mentioned national
song, " Saul has slain his thousands and David his tens of thousands,"
is scarcely applicable to the slaying of a giant, however great he might
be, and probably comes from the time of David's reign when he had
really gained more brilliant victories than Saul.

1 1 Sam. xviii. 3.

2 1 Sam. xvi. 22 ; xviii. 5 ; xxii. 14.

3 This date may be assumed, if we put the death of Saul in the year
1033 B.C. (p. 113), since David's rebellion in Judah lasted a considerable
time, and he afterwards remained at Ziklag at least 16 months, 1
Sam. xxvii. 7 ; xxix. 3.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 133

own, that roused Saul against David ; l according to
the later, Saul feared the partiality which the people
displayed towards David. He says to Jonathan, " So
long as the son of Jesse lives, thou and thy kingdom
will not continue. "! According to the same account
an evil spirit came over Saul, he was beside himself in
the house and threw a spear at David, who played the
harp.3 David avoided the cast : he fled to Samuel at
Eamathaim into the dwellings of the seers,4 and from
thence escaped to Achish, the prince of the Philistines
of Gath.5 [n the older account also it is an evil spirit
of Jehovah which comes over Saul, and causes him to
thrust with his spear at David while he is playing the
harp. David escapes into his house. At Saul's com-
mand the house is surrounded ; and David is to be
slain the next morning. But Michal, the daughter of
Saul, David's wife, let him down from a window, and
in his place she put the teraphim, i. e. the image of
the deity, into the bed, covered it with a coverlet, laid
the net of goat's hair on the face, and gave out that
David was sick. David meanwhile flies to Nob (in the
land of Benjamin), where was set up a gilded image of
Jehovah, before which a company of priests served, and
at their head Ahimelech, a great-grandson of Eli,6
who had previously inquired of Jehovah for David.7
Ahimelech gave David the sacred loaves, and a sword
which was consecrated there, and from hence, accord-
ing to this account, David escaped to Achish. Saul
reproached his daughter for aiding David, and said,

1 1 Sam. xviii. 9. 2 1 Sam. xviii. 16 ; xx. 31.

3 1 Sam. xviii. 11.

4 As Najoth, or rather Newajoth, means dwellings, the habitations of
the prophet's disciples must be meant.

5 1 Sam. xix. 18—24; xxi. 11—15.

6 1 Sam. xxii. 9. r 1 Sam. xiv. 3.

134 ISRAEL.

" Why hast thou allowed my enemy to escape ? "
Then he gave her to wife to Phalti of Gallim.

We are not in a position to decide whether David
really pursued ambitious designs; whether, as a matter
of fact, he conspired with the priests against Saul and
his house, as Saul assumed ; whether Saul saw through
his designs and plots, or suspected him without reason.1

1 The older text, 1, xxvi. 19, represents David as saying to Saul:
" If Jehovah hath stirred thee against me, let him accept an offering,
but if men, cursed be they before Jehovah." In the Books of Samuel
the relations of Saul and David are strangely confused, for reasons
which are not far to seek. The older account of the priests and the
later one of the prophets, which are mixed together in these books,
had equally reason to place in as favourable a light as possible the
founder of the power of Israel, of the united worship, the minstrel of
the psalms, the progenitor of the kings of Judah, and to put him in
the right as against Saul and the house of Saul. To the older narrative
belongs the description of David's shepherd life, his battle with the giant,
his rise as a warrior, — the intention is to show that Jehovah is strong
in the weak. The shepherd-boy conies into the camp in order to bring
bread to his brethren and cheese to the captain. His brethren are angry
that he has left the sheep, and wish to send him back, but he will fight
with the giant who has defied the army of the living God. Saul
dissuades him from the contest, but David persists, refuses armour, and
goes forth in-trust on Jehovah, who gives not the victory by spear and
shield. By this victory ho is marked as the chosen instrument of
Jehovah. In both accounts Saul loses the favour of Jehovah by
disobedience to Samuel. According to the later text, Samuel, when he
had broken with Saul owing to the incomplete " cursing" of Amalek,
took the horn of oil and anointed the youngest son of Jesse, who was
fetched from the sheep, king over Israel amid his brethren. "When
this had been done Saul's servants bring David as a brave hero and
warrior, "prudent in speech, a comely person, cunning in playing,"
1 Sam. xvi. Yet Samuel had no right to place kings over the Israelites,
and if he went so far in his opposition to Saul, he made himself responsi-
ble for the rebellion ; if he really intended this, he would have set up
some other than a shepherd-boy against Saul. If, on the other hand,
David was really anointed, Saul was quite justified in pursuing him.
Yet it was with this anointment, as with that of Saul ; no one knew
anything of it, and David himself makes no use of this divine election,
not even when he organises the rebellion in Judah, nor after Saul's
death at Hebron, nor in the struggle against Ishbosheth, who was not
in any case anointed, nor even after the death of Ishbosheth : he is
after this chosen by the people in Hebron and anointed king over

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETli. 135

David was not content with escaping the anger and
pursuit of Saul, with placing himself and his family in
security. He repaired to the enemies of his land,

Israel. It is only the Philistines in Gath who know anything of
David's royal dignity, when he comes to them for the first time, 1 Sam.
xxi. 11. "We see plainly that this anointment is a careless interpolation
of the prophetic revision, to which the verses 11 — 15 of the chapter
quoted undoubtedly belong, just as chap. xvi. is intended to legitimise
David. The same account represents Saul as thrusting twice with his
javelin at David, xviii. 10, 11, on the very day after he has slain the
giant. As though nothing had happened, David continues in the house
of Saul, and Saul confers on him still greater honours and dignities.
In the older as well as in the later account this is turned round so as
to seem that Saul gave these to David as a " snare," that David might
fall by the hands of the Philistines, xviii. 17, 25; and with this view
Saul requires 100 foreskins of the Philistines as the price of Michal.
It is obvious that Saul had other means, more certain to accomplish
his object, at his command to destroy David, if he really intended it ;
according to the older account Saul requests Jonathan and his men,
though in vain, to slay David, xix. 1. When the attempt at assassina-
tion and the open breach has taken place in both narratives, Saul,
according to the prophetic account, marvels nevertheless that David
does not come to table, xx. 26, 27. To this text also belongs the further
statement that when Jonathan excused David, Saul thrust at him also
with his spear, xx. 33. In the older account Ahimelech, who had aided
David in his flight, makes the excuse that he knew not that David fled
before the king. " David was the most honoured among the friends
of Saul : " no one therefore knew anything of these plots and attempts
of Saul upon David. Every one sees that this is impossible. Jonathan
knows David better than Saul, and always defends him against his
father ; then David himself calls on Jonathan to kill him if there is any
wickedness in him, 1, xx. 8. The story of the arrows is very poetical,
but the sign is quite unnecessary, since they afterwards converse with
each other, 1, xx. 18 — 43. In the older account also of the occurrence
in the desert by the Dead Sea, the prophetic account has inserted a
visit of Jonathan to David. Jonathan strengthens David's courage
although he is in rebellion against his father. " Fear not," Jonathan
says to him, " the hand of niy father will not reach thce, thou shalt
be king over Israel," xxiii. 15 — 18. Saul was something different
from the madman who betwixt sane intervals and reconciliations is
constantly making fresh attacks on David's life, whether innocent or
guilty. Even the most complete recognition of all that David estab-
lished at a later time for Israel, and with an influence extending far
beyond Israel, does not make it a duty to overlook the way in which
he rose to his eminence.

136 ISRAEL.

the Philistines, who would riot have accepted at ODCC
an opponent who had done them grievous injury, if
he had not openly broken with Saul and given them
to suppose that henceforth he would support their
struggle against Saul and Israel. Yet David did not
bring his father and mother, on whom Saul could have
taken vengeance, out of the land to Gath, where they
might have been a pledge of his fidelity to the Philis-
tines ; he put them in the hands of the king of Moab,
and also entered into relations with the king of the
Ammonites.1 It was probably with the consent of the
Philistines that David returned from Gath into the land
of Judah, and there threw himself into the wild regions
by the Dead Sea, where he had previously pastured his
father's sheep and goats, in order to bring his own tribe
of Judah into arms against the king sprung from the
small tribe of Benjamin.2 The cave of Adullam was the
place of gathering. His brothers, the whole house of his
father, came, and a prophet of the name of Gad, " and
all oppressed persons, and any one who had a creditor
and was of a discontented spirit," and " David was their
chief, and had under him 400 men." 3

" Saul heard that all men knew about David and
the men who were with him, and sent out to bring
before him Ahimelech and the house of his father
and all the priests of Nob." The king sat on the
height near Gibeah under the tamarisk, with his spear
in his hand and his servants round him. " Why hast
thou conspired against me," he said to Ahimelech,
•'' thou and the son of Jesse, that he has rebelled against
me. Thou shalt die, and the house of thy father."

1 1 Sam. xxii. 3 ; 2, x. 1.

2 In 1 Sam. xxix. 3, Achish says of David, " He has now been
•with me for years."

3 So the older account, 1 Sam. xxii. 1 — 5.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 137

And he commanded his body-guard who stood near
him : " Come up and slay the priests of Jehovah, their
hand is with David/' Then 85 men were slain who
wore the linen tunic ; and Nob, the city of the priests,
Saul smote with the edge of the sword ; one only,
Abiathar, a son of Ahimelech, escaped with the image
of Jehovah to David.1

David had no doubt calculated on greater success in
the tribe of Judah. So long as his following was
confined to four or six hundred men, he could only
live a robber life with this troop. But by this course
he would have roused against himself those whom he
robbed, and strengthened the attachment to Saul. So
he attempted to keep a middle path. He sent to
Naba], a rich man at Carmel near Hebron (p. 127), who
possessed 3000 sheep and 1000 goats, a descendant of
that Caleb who had once founded himself a kingdom
here with his sword (I. 505), and bade his messengers
say : David has taken nothing of thy flocks, send him
therefore food for him and his people. But Nabal
answered : "Who is David, and who is the son of Jesse?
There are now many servants who run away from
their masters." Then David set out in the night to
fall upon Nabal's house and flocks. On the way
Abigail, Nabal's wife, met him. In fear of the free-
booters she had caused some slaughtered sheep, loaves,
and pitchers of wine, some figs and cakes of raisins, to

1 So the older story, 1 Sam. xxii. The priestly point of view from
which it is written causes it, in order to prove the innocence of the
priests, to represent David as saying on his flight to Ahimelech that he
had a hasty mission from the king, so that Ahimelech can explain to
Saul that he knew nothing about the flight. From the same point
of view we must derive the statement that the body-guard hesitated to
lay hands on the holy men, and that an Edomite slew them. That
the punishment of Nob took place long after David's flight and
rebellion, is clear from the fact that the fugitive Abiathar finds David
already in possession of Kegilah, 1 Sam. xxii. 20 ; xxiii. 6, 7.

138 ISRAEL.

be laid on asses in order to bring them secretly into
David's camp. Praised be thy wisdom, woman, said
David : by the life of Jehovah, if thou hadst not met
me there would not have been alive at break of day
a single male of Nabal and his house. Nabal died ten
days after this incident. David saw that such a wealthy
possession in this region could not but be advantage-
ous. Saul's daughter was lost to him ; he sent, there-
fore, some servants to Abigail to CarmeL They said,
David has sent us to thee to take thee to him to wife.
Abigail stood up, bowed herself with her face to earth,
and said : Behold, thy handmaid is ready to wash the
feet of the servants of thy master. Then she set out
with five of her maids, and followed the servants of
David and became his wife.1 As a fact this marriage
appears to have furthered the undertaking of David ;
the places in the south of Judah, Aroer, Hormah,
Ramoth, Jattir, Eshtemod, and even Hebron, declared
for him.2 From this point David sought to force his
way farther to the north, and possessed himself of the
fortified town of Kegilah (Keilah).3

When Saul was told that David was in Kegilah, he
said : God has delivered him into my hand in that
he has shut himself up in a city with gates and bars.

1 1 Sam. xxv. 2—12, 18—42.

2 1 Sam. xxx. 26—31.

3 That David saved and won Kegilah from the Philistines, and
obtained a great victory over them, as we find it in the older account
(1 Sam. xxiii. 1 — 5), is more than improbable. David certainly could
not undertake to fight with Saul and the Philistines at one time with 600
men. How could he meet an army of the Philistines in the field, when
he does not trust himself to maintain the walls of Kegilah against Saul
with his troop. The citizens of Kegilah would hardly have been
prepared to give him up, if just before he had done them such a kind-
ness. Finally, this battle contradicts the position in which we find
David before and afterwards with regard to the Philistines. Achish
at any rate has unbounded confidence in David since his desertion,
and will even make him " keeper of his head," 1 Sam. xxviii. 2.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 139

He set out against Kegilah. David commanded
Abiathar the priest, who had fled to him from Nob with
the image of Jehovah, to bring the image, and David
inquired of the image : Will the men of Kegilah
deliver me and my followers into the hand of Saul ?
Jehovah, God of Israel, announce this to me. And
Jehovah said, They will deliver thee.1 Then David
despaired of remaining in the city and fled ; he retired
again into the desert by the Dead Sea near Ziph and
Maon. But Saul pursued and overtook him ; nothing
but a mountain separated David's troop from the king ;
David was already surrounded and lost, when the news
was brought to Saul, " Hasten and come, for the
Philistines are in the land." This was no doubt an
incursion made by the Philistines in aid of the hardly-
pressed rebels. Saul abandoned the pursuit and went
against the Philistines : David called the mountain the
rock of escape.2 When the king had driven back the
Philistines he took 3000 men out of the army to crush
the rebellion utterly. David had retired farther to
the east, on the shore of the Dead Sea, in the neigh-
bourhood of Engedi, to the " rock of the goat," and
there he was so closely shut in by Saul that he had
to despair of remaining in Judah. He escaped with
his troop to the Philistines : the rebellion, was at an
end.3

1 1 Sam. xxiii. 9—13. 2 1 Sam. xxiii. 25—28.

8 So the older account, 1 Sam. xxvi. 1, 2 ; xxvii. 1 — 3. While
Saul has cast his spear at David, and pursues him everywhere
•with unwearying energy in order to slay him, David gives him his
life. According to the older account, Saul sleeps in his encampment in
the wilderness of Ziph. David with Abishai secretly enters this, and
he distinctly refuses, when urged by Abishai" to slay Saul, to listen
to him, because Saul is an " anointed of Jehovah," takes the spear
and the water-bowl of the king, plants himself on a mountain in the
distance, and from this reproaches Abner that he has been so careless
in providing for the safety of the king. Saul is again touched, acknow-

140 ISRAEL.

David's attempt to induce the tribe of Judah to fall
away from Saul was entirely wrecked. Driven from
the ground on which he had raised the standard of
revolt, he no longer scrupled to enter formally into the
service of the Philistines, and these must have welcomed
the aid of a brave and skilful leader, who, though

' O

once their enemy, had already in Judah engaged the
arms of Saul, the weight of which they had so often
felt, and which had taken from them their dominion
over Israel. Achish, king of Gath, to whom David
again fled, was of opinion " that David had made
himself to stink among his people, Israel, and would
be his servant for ever ; " and gave the border city
Ziklag to be a dwelling for him and his band of free-
booters.1 David now settled as a vassal of Achish at
Ziklag. At his command he was compelled to take
the field, and also to deliver up a part of the spoil
which he obtained.2 Thus from the land of the Philis-

ledges his sins and follies, begs David to return, and finally gives him
his blessing on his undertaking. David upon this declares that his Life
will he regarded before Jehovah as he has regarded Saul's life, and
escapes to the Philistines. According to the prophetic account, Saul
" covers his feet " in a cave in the desert of Engedi, in which are con-
cealed David and his men. These urge David to slay Saul, but he
replies, "Far be it from me to lay my hand on the Lord's anointed,"
and merely cuts off the corner of Saul's upper garment. When Saul
awakes and goes out of the cave, David hurries after him, prostrates
himself, and proves by the piece in his hand that those did him wrong
who said that he sought to do Saul mischief, ' ' but thou art seeking to
take my life." Saul weeps, acknowledges that David is more just than
he is; may Jehovah reward him (David) for this day. "I know,"
Saul continues, " that thou wilt be king, and the kingdom of Israel
will continue in thy hand." Let David only swear to him not to
destroy his seed. This David does, 1 Sam. xxiv. 4—23. If this
event, in itself all but impossible, ever took place, it must have had
some consequences ; yet there is no change in the relations of Saul and
David, Saul continues to pursue David. If David took the oath not
to destroy the descendants of Saul, he broke it.

1 So the older account, 1 Sam. xxvii. 12.

2 1 Sam. xxvii. 6, 12.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 141

tines, with his band, which here became strengthened
by the discontented in Israel x who fled to him over the
border, David carried on a petty war against Saul and
his country. In these campaigns David was wise
enough to spare his former adherents in Judah, the
cities which had once declared for him, and his attacks
were only directed against the adherents of Saul ; in
secret he even maintained his connection with his party
in Judah, and to the elders of the cities which clung
to him he sent presents out of the booty won in his
raids and plundering excursions.2

David had already lived more than a year in Ziklag,3
when the Philistines assembled all their forces against
Saul. When the princes of the Philistines marshalled
their army, and caused it to march past in troops,
David and his men also came among the soldiers of
Achish. Then the other princes said to Achish :
What need of these Hebrews ? Let not David go to
the battle ; he may become a traitor, and go over to
his master, in order to win favour with Saul at the
price of our heads. Achish trusted David, and said :
He has already dwelt with me for a time, for years ;
to this day I have found nothing in him. But the

1 Chron. xiii. 1—7, 20.

2 1 Sam. xxx. 26 — 30 ; supra, p. 137. In order to wash David clean
from the reproach of fighting with the Philistines against his people,
it is observed (xxvii. 8 — 11) that David always marched against the
tribes of the desert, that he cut down the prisoners, and then reported
to Achish that he " had invaded the south of Judah." The position of
Ziklag was ill-suited for attacks on the desert, and Achish had not
given him any commands to fight against the children of the desert.
At a later time Achish says of David : " Since his desertion I have
found nothing in him," xxix. 3, 6 ; he will make him even the protector
of his own life (1, xxviii. 2), and such deceit as is here attributed to
David presupposes that Achish and all the rest of the Philistines were
blind.

3 1 Sam. xxvii. 7, "one year and four months:" xxix. 3, Achish
says, " He has been with me — for years."

142 ISRAEL.

other princes insisted on their demand ; perhaps they
remembered the day of Mich mash, when Saul had
obtained his first victory over the Philistines with the
aid of the Hebrews in their camp. When Achish
announced to David that he could not accompany the
army, he answered : What have I done, and what hast
thou found in thy servant since I came to thee to this
day, that I should not fight against the enemies of my
king ? In spite of his earnest desire, David was sent
back.1

The army of the Philistines passed to the north,
through the land of Ephraim, into the land of Issachar,
and encamped at Shunem in the plain of Jezreel. On
Mount Gilboa, over against them, Saul was encamped
with the army of the Israelites.2 The battle broke
out, and the contest was severe. Saul saw his sons

1 According to the older account, 1 Sam. xxviii. 2, when Achish
requires him to march with him against Saul, David replies, " So
shalt thou behold what thy servant will do." The narrative of the
sending back of David at the wish of the remaining princes, and
David's protest against it, belong also to the older narrative. This is
repeated in Chronicles (1, xiii. 19) very emphatically, and without
any motive in the context, so that it might be possible to accept
the same view which represents David as constantly marching against
the desert from Ziklag. For the moral estimate of David it is sufficient
that it did not rest with him to join in the battle.

2 The story of the witch of Endor (xxviii. 3 ff.) belongs to the later
account. To begin with, this account contradicts itself; we are told
in the introduction (verse 3) that Saul had removed the necromancers
and " wise men " out of Israel, a statement which is repeated in the
course of the story (verse 9). Nevertheless Saul causes a witch to be
sought out, because when already encamped before the Philistines
" he is in great fear of the enemy." Saul was a brave warrior, who even
in a worse position had never trembled. He sends for this woman in
order to speak with Samuel's ghost. If Saul had any desire to see
ghosts, he would desire to see the ghost of Samuel least of all, for he,
according to the same prophetic account, had anointed David to be
king against Saul (verse 11). Samuel as a ghost has thus a third oppor-
tunity for reproaching Saul, and telling him " that Jehovah had given
the kingdom to David, because he had not satisfied his wrath on
Amalek " (p. 129).

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISIIBOSIIETH. 143

Abinadab and Melchishua, and finally Jonathan himself,
fall ; the Israelites retired, and the archers of the
enemy pressed on the king. Saul refused to fly, and
survive the death of his sous and his first defeat. He
called to his armour-bearer : Draw thy sword and slay
me, that these uncircumcised may not come upon
me and maltreat me. But the faithful comrade would
not lift his hand against his master. Then Saul threw
himself upon his sword, and the armour-bearer followed
the example of the king. The army of the Israelites
was scattered in every direction. The Philistines
rejoiced when they found the corpse of Saul on Mount
Gilboa. They took the armour from the dead king,
and sent it round their whole land, that every one
might be convinced that the dreaded leader of Israel
was no longer living. Then the armour was laid up
in the temple of Astarfce. The Philistines cut off the
head of the corpse and hung it up as a trophy in the
temple of Dagon ; the trunk and the corpses of the
three sons of Saul were set up in the market-place of
Beth-shan, not far from the field of battle, in order to
show the Israelites that they had nothing more to
hope from Saul and his race (1033 B.C.).1

Israel was benumbed with terror. The nurse let
the young son of Jonathan, Mephibosheth, fall to the

1 1 Sam. xxxi. 1 — 11 ; 1 Chron. x. 10. According to a second account
of the death of Saul in 2 Sam. i. ff., an Amalekite came unexpectedly to
Mount Gilboa. He finds Saul in flight leaning on his spear, and Saul
says to him, "Slay me." The Amalekite does so; takes the crown
from the head of the king, and his bracelets, and then flies to Ziklag
in the territory of the Philistines in order to bring the crown to David.
David causes him to be slain, because "he had lifted up his hand
against the anointed of the Lord." The object of this story is too
plain — to bring the crown of Saul into the hands of David in order to
make him the legitimate king, and at the same time to exhibit David
as loyal to Saul even after his death, and avenging his murder — and
the impossibilities in it are too great. David afterwards permitted the
execution of the remaining descendants of Saul.

144 ISRAEL.

ground when she heard the news of Gilboa. Many-
retired beyond the Jordan before the Philistines ; others
hastened to Ziklag, to place themselves under David's
protection. But from Jabesh in Gilead, which Saul had
once rescued from the most grievous distress, valiant
men set out over the Jordan to Beth-shan. Here, at
night, they took the corpses of Saul and his three sons
from the market-place, brought them to Jabesh, and
buried them under the tamarisk, and the inhabitants
of Jabesh fasted and lamented seven days for Saul's
death.1 The Israelites had reason enough to sorrow
and lament for Saul. From one of the songs of
lamentation sung in these days it is convincingly clear
what this man had done for them. " The gazelle, O
Israel," so it was sung at that time, "is stricken on
thy heights ! Fallen are thy heroes ! Tell it not in
Gath, publish it not in the streets of Ascalon, lest the
daughter of the Philistine rejoice, lest the daughter of
the uncircumcised triumph. Ye mountains of Gilboa,
let there be no dew nor rain upon you, nor offerings
of first-fruits ! For there the shield of the mighty was
cast away, the shield of Saul. From the blood of the
slain, from the fat of the mighty, the bow of Jonathan
turned not back, and the sword of Saul returned not
empty. Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant
in their lives, and in their death they were not divided.
They were swifter than eagles, stronger than lions.
Ye daughters of Israel, weep for Saul, who clothed
you delicately in purple, and put ornaments of gold
on your garments. How are the mighty fallen in
battle/'2

1 1 Sam. xxxi. 12, 13; 2, xxi. 12.

2 This lament, which was in the book of Jasher (2 Sam. i. 18), is
ascribed to David. His moral participation in the issue of the
battle must have been most clear to himself ; his rebellion and deser-
tion to the Philistines had weakened Saul's powers of fighting and

' DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 145

A single stroke had annihilated all that had been
obtained in long and toilsome struggles. The Philistines
were again masters on this side of Jordan as in the
unhappy times before Saul. But in spite of the fall
of the hero who had been the defence of Israel and
the terror of the enemies, the monarchy remained,
so firmly had Saul established it. Ishbosheth, the
youngest son of Saul, had escaped the battle ; with
Abner, the general, he had found safety beyond the
Jordan. Here he took up his abode at Machanaim,
and the tribes on the other side of the Jordan recog-
nised him as their king. Abner 's sword was a strong
support for Ishbosheth, and the adherence of the
Israelites to Saul's family soon permitted him to force
his way from Machanaim over the Jordan. Here,
also, amid the arms of the Philistines, Ishbosheth was
recognised as king. Thus Abner's courage and bravery
succeeded in wresting the fruits of the victory at Gilboa
from the Philistines, and liberating from their yoke first
Ephraim and Benjamin, and then the whole region of
the northern tribes.1

While Abner was engaged in preserving the rem-
nants of Saul's dominion for his son, and in driving
the Philistines out of the land, David looked after his
own interests. The fresh terror of the overthrow at
Gilboa had driven many Israelites to Ziklag. David's
name stood high among the warriors of Israel, and pro-
tection against the Philistines was certain to be found
with their vassal. The places in the tribe of Judah which

deprived him of brave warriors ; lie had been ready to fight in the
army of the Philistines against Saul and Jonathan. Least of all could
David sing, " Tell it not in Gath," since he himself was in the land of
Gath. The last verse, " I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan,"
etc., may certainly have come from David, and may have been added to
the lament at a later time. Thus the whole might appear to be the
work of David.
1 2 Sam. ii. 8—10.

VOL. II. L

146 ISRAEL.

had formerly joined David now again resorted to him,
and the tribe of Judah had previously been subject to
the Philistines longer than any other, and was more
accustomed to their dominion. As the tradition tells
us, David inquired of Jehovah whether he should go
from Ziklag into one of the cities of Judah, and
Jehovah answered : Go to Hebron. This was done.
"And the men of Judah there anointed David king
of the house of Judah, for only the house of Judah
adhered to David."1 Thus David, after Saul's death,
succeeded in the attempt which had failed in Saul's
lifetime ; he established an independent monarchy in
the tribe of Judah. Here he ruled at Hebron at first
quietly, under the protection of the Philistines.2 But
when Abner had again wrested the north and centre
of the land from the hands of the Philistines, when
Tshbosheth's rule again united the whole land as far
as the tribe of Judah, he turned his arms not more
against the Philistines than against their vassal at
Hebron in order to complete the liberation of Israel.

" The strife was long between the house of Saul and
the house of David/' — so runs the older account.3 Of
the events of this war between Judah and the rest of

1 2 Sam. ii. 1, 3, 4—10.

2 This conclusion must be drawn both from the earlier relation to
the Philistines, and from the fact that David during this whole time
has not to fight with the Philistines, whereas afterwards, as soon as he
has united the tribes under his rule, he has to wage the fiercest war
with them ; apparently he was supported against Ishbosheth and Abner
by the Philistines in order to put a stop to Abner's advances. Cf. Ewald,
" G-eschichte des Volks Israel," 2, 572.

3 David reigned seven years and six months at Hebron, 2 Sam. iii.
1, 10, 11; 2, v. 4, 5; 1 Kings ii. 11. Ishbosheth's reign is given at
two years only. These two statements can only be brought into
harmony by supposing that Ishbosheth was not acknowledged king of
the northern tribes till five and a half years after Saul's death, i. e.
Abner required this time to drive the Philistines out of these regions,
or that David was not acknowledged king of Israel till five and a half
years after the death of Ishbosheth.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 147

the tribes, we only know that on a certain day Joab at
the head of David's men, and Abner at the head of the
men of Ishbosheth, strove fiercely at the pool of Gibeon,
and Joab's brother Asahel was slain by Abner. For
several years the war continued without any decisive
result, till a division arose between Ishbosheth and
Abner which gave David the advantage, and finally
placed him on the throne of Saul. Ishbosheth appears
to have become distrustful of Abner, to whom he owed
everything. When Abner took Rizpah, the concubine
of Saul, to himself, Ishbosheth thought that he intended
in this way to establish a right to the throne, in order to
wrest the dominion from himself, and did not conceal
his anger.1 Then Abner turned from the man he had
exalted and entered into a secret negotiation with David.
This was received with joy by David. Crafty as he was,
he first demanded that his wife Michal, the daughter
of Saul, whom Saul after David's rebellion had married
to Phalti, should be sent back to him. David had
found out the attachment of the Israelites to the house
of Saul, and was no doubt of opinion that nothing
would sooner help him to the throne than the renewed
connection with Saul's family ; if none of the descend-
ants of Saul survived but this daughter he would be
his legitimate heir. Abner sent Michal, and went
himself to Hebron in order to arrange about the
transfer of the kingdom. They were agreed ; Abner
had done his service. He was already on his way
home to Machanaim, when Joab, the captain of David,
called him back. He came, and Joab took him aside
under the gate of Hebron, as though he had something
to tell him in secret ; instead, he thrust his sword
through his body. David asserted his innocence and
lamented Abner's death. Abner's body was buried

1 2 Sam. iii. 7.

L 2

148 ISRAEL.

solemnly at Hebron. David followed the bier in
sackcloth, but Joab remained unpunished.1 He slew
Abner because the latter had previously slain his
brother Asahel at Gibeon ; but this was done in
honourable fight, not by assassination.

When the announcement of Abner's death came to
Machanaim " Ishbosheth's hands were numbed, and all
Israel was troubled." The Israelites lamented Abner's
death. " Must Abner die as a godless man dieth ? " they
sang. " Thy hands were never bound, thy feet never
fettered ; thou hast fallen as a man falls before the
children of iniquity." 2 The pillar of the kingdom was
broken. Then two captains of the army of Ishbosheth,
brothers of the tribe of Benjamin, hoped to gain favour
with David. While Ishbosheth was resting at midday
in his chamber on his bed, they entered unobserved
into his house, cut off his head, and brought it hastily
to Hebron to David. This murder carried David
quickly to his goal, but he would not praise those who
committed it; he caused them both to be executed.

The throne of Saul was empty. David, the husband
of his daughter, was at the head of a not inconsider-
able power ; whom could the tribes who had obeyed
Ishbosheth raise to the throne except him, if an end
was to be put to the pernicious division, and the
people were again to be united under one government ?
The elders of the tribes were intelligent enough to
value rightly this position of affairs. Hence the people
met together at Hebron ; in full assembly David was
raised to be king of Israel, and anointed by the elders.3
Eight years had passed since Saul and his three elder

1 2 Sam. iii. 31—39.

2 This beautiful lament is also ascribed to David : David was the singer,
and, like the Psalms, other songs also come from him. But David could
not speak of Joab and indirectly of himself as a " child of iniquity."

3 2 Sam. v. 1—3.

DAVID'S STRUGGLE AGAINST SAUL AND ISHBOSHETH. 149

sons fell on Gilboa. All was full of joy, union, and
hope that better times would come again after the end
of the long strife (1025 B.C.).1

At length David stood at the goal which he had
pursued steadfastly under many changes of fortune.
But there were still some male descendants of Saul in
existence. The Hivites of Gibeon cherished a deadly
hatred to the race of Saul, because Saul's hand had been
heavy upon them " in his zeal for the sons of Israel."
David offered to " avenge the wrong which Saul had
done to them."2 They demanded, that as their land
had borne no fruit for three years, seven men of the race
of Saul should be given to them, that they might " hang
them up before Jehovah at Gibeah," the dwelling-
place of Saul. There were just seven male descendants
of Saul remaining : two sons by Rizpah, his concu-
bine, and five grandchildren, whom Merab, the eldest
daughter of Saul, had borne to Adriel. These David
took and "gave them into the hands of the Gibeon-
ites, and they hanged them up on the hill before
Jehovah." There was still another descendant of
Saul's remaining, Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan ;
but he was only 10 or 12 years of age, and was,
moreover, lame of both feet, from the fall which he
had suffered in the hands of his nurse. David also
thought of the close friendship which he had con-
tracted in earlier days with Jonathan ; he gave to
Mephibosheth Saul's land at Gibeah, and arranged
that Saul and Jonathan's bones should be brought from
Jabesh to Zelah, near Gibeah, and buried where Kish,
Saul's father, lay. In the tribe of Benjamin, to which
Saul belonged, and among those connected with his
house, the acts of David to the house of Saul were not
forgotten ; they hated David, the " man of blood."

1 1 Ckron. xii. 23 ff. 2 2 Sam. xxi. 3.

CHAPTER VII.

THE RULE OF DAVID.

AT the cost of his nation, in collusion with the
enemies of his land, and under the protection of the
Philistines, David had paved the way to dominion
over Israel. He had much to make good. He had to
cause the way which led him to the throne to be for-
gotten, to heal the wounds which the long contention
must have inflicted on his land, to surpass the great
services which Saul had rendered to the Israelites by
yet greater services, by more brilliant exploits, by more
firmly-rooted institutions.

A brave warrior even in early years, David had been
afterwards tested and strengthened by adventures and
dangers of every kind ; he had understood how to meet
or escape even the most difficult situations. He had
the inclination and power for great things, and was
little scrupulous in the choice of the means which
brought him most swiftly and completely to his object.
His vision was clear and wide ; clever, crafty, and
quickly decided, he nevertheless knew how to wait
when the object could not be obtained at the moment.
It was his in an extraordinary measure to retain old
comrades, to win new ones and attach them to himself.
It was not his intention to be at the beck of the
Philistines longer than he had need of them ; with
his elevation at Hebron came the moment for breaking

THE RULE OF DAVID. 151

with them. He saw that they would not lose without
a heavy price the preponderance in which his rebellion
against Saul, his leadership in Judah, his struggle
against Ishbosheth had again placed them ; that their
exasperation would be the deeper and more lasting
because he had deceived the hopes which they had
placed in him.

He began his reign with an undertaking which
shows the certainty and width of his views. His
dominion over the tribes of Simeon and Judah had
been established for almost eight years, but over
the northern tribes it was recent, and had to be con-
firmed. The remembrance of Saul was cherished most
warmly in the tribe of Benjamin, which lay next
to Judah on the north. In this land, not far from
the northern border of Judah, was a city of the name
of Jebus, inhabited by the Jebusites, a relic of the old
population which at the time of the settlement the
Benjaminites had not been able to overcome.1 The
city stood on steep heights, surrounded by deep gorges,
which formed natural trenches ; the walls of the eastern
height on which the citadel stood, Mount Zion, were
so strong that the Jebusites are said to have boasted
that the blind and lame were sufficient to defend them.
This city appeared to David excellently situated for
protection against the Philistines and for his own
royal abode ; it had the faithful tribes of Judah and
Simeon to the south, and was pushed forward like a
fortification into the territory of Benjamin and the
northern tribes. Nor was it useful only in establish-
ing his dominion over Israel. Even in Saul's reign it
had been difficult when an enemy invaded the open
cantons of Israel to find time for assembling the fight-
ing powers, the levy of the people ; there had been no

1 Joshua xv. 63 ; Judges i. 21.

152 ISRAEL.

fortified point on which the first shock of the enemy's
onset broke, no city strongly fortified and of consider-
able size in which large numbers could find protection.

Soon after the assembly at Hebron, which had trans-
ferred to him the royal authority over all the tribes of
Israel, David set himself to win this place. First he
cut off the water from the city of the Jeljusites, and
then Joab with the veteran band of David succeeded
in climbing the wall in a sudden attack. The inhabit-
ants were spared ; at any rate a part of them must
have remained, for we afterwards find Jebusites in and
about Jerusalem.1

The princes of the Philistines had begun to arm im-
mediately upon the announcement of David's election to
be king of all Israel.2 David awaited their approach in
the citadel of Zion which he had just conquered. The
Philistines encamped before the city. When they were
scattered in search of plunder in the valley of Rephaim
David inquired of Jehovah whether he should go down
against them. The answer was favourable. The Philis-
tines were surprised and defeated. But they soon
appeared a second time under the walls of Zion, and
the oracle of Jehovah bade David not to go directly
against them, but to turn aside under the balsam trees.
If he heard the tops of the trees rustle he was to
hasten on ; that was the sign from God that he would
go before him to smite the camp of the Philistines.
So it befel. David gained a great victory and was
enabled to pursue the Philistines as far as Gezer.3
Yet the war was not decided, but still continued for a
long time. Four battles took place on the borders
near Gob and Gath, and many severe combats had to
be fought with the Philistines. From all the traces

-

1 2 Sam. v. 5— 8; xxiv. 18; 1 Kings ix. 20.

2 2 Sam. v. 17. 3 2 Sam. v. 22—25.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 153

of tradition it is clear that this war was the most
stubborn and dangerous of all that David had to wage.
In Israel there were stories of the brave deeds of
individual heroes which were accomplished in these
battles : of Abishai, the brother of Joab, who saved
the king in battle, when the mighty Philistine Ishbi
thought to overcome him ; of Elhanan, who slew
Goliath of Gath; and of the deeds of Jonathan, the
nephew of David, and Sibbechai against the Philistines.1
At length David succeeded in "wresting the bridle out
of the hand of the Philistines," and " breaking their
horn in pieces ; " 2 he drove them back to their old
borders. They had suffered such serious blows that
for a long time they abstained from all further attacks,
after they had carried on warfare against the Hebrews
for about 70 years. Yet even David, in spite of this
success, made no serious attempt to advance the borders
of Israel towards the sea, or to subjugate the cities of
the Philistines.

When the most pressing danger from the Philistines
was over, David turned his arms to the south and east,
against the Amalekites, the Moabites, and Ammonites,
who had once caused so much misery and disaster to
Israel. Against the Amalekites Saul had already
accomplished the main task (p. 127). David smote
them with such effect that the name of the Amalekites
is hardly once mentioned afterwards ; the remainder
of the race seem to have been amalgamated with the
Edomites.3 David had at a former time entered into
connection with the king of Moab ; when he fled from
Saul he placed his parents under his protection. The

1 Above, p. 131, note 4; 2 Sain. xxi. 15—22; 1 Chron. xxi. 4—8;
xix. 1.

2 2 Sam. viii. 1. Jesus, son of Sirach, xlvii. 8.

3 Noldeke, " Amalekiter," s. 17 — 25.

154 ISRAEL.

cause of the rupture is unknown ; we only know that
David utterly overthrew the Moabites and caused two-
thirds of the prisoners to be put to death. It is said
that they were compelled to lie down ; they were then
divided by a measuring cord into three parts, of which
two were slain by iron threshing-carts being drawn
over them, and only a third part were spared.1 Nahash,
the king of Ammon, with whom David had also pre-
viously been in relations (p. 136), was succeeded by his
son Hanon. This prince insulted David's envoys, he
caused their beards to be shaved off, and their garments
to be cut away as high as the middle.

David sent Joab with the levy of the people against
the Ammonites to avenge the insult. Hanon called
on the king of Zobah — Saul had already had to fight
against Zobah — and the rulers of Beth-Rehob, Maacah,
and Tob in Syria for assistance. Hadad-Ezer of Zobah
sent 20,000 men ; from Tob came 12,000 ; from Maacah
1000. Joab divided his army, left his brother
Abishai to oppose the Ammonites, and turned himself
with picked men against the Syrians and defeated
them before they could join the Ammonites.2 After this
defeat the Ammonites also retired before Abishai into
their fortified city of Rabbath- Ammon on the Nahr-
Ammon. But in the next spring Hadad-Ezer collected
his whole force. David marched across the Jordan to
meet the Syrians, and defeated Hadad-Ezer in a decisive
battle at Helam ; the Israelites carried off the chariots
of the enemy for spoil; 1700 horsemen and 20,000
foot-soldiers were captured.3 David followed up this
victory and overran the cities of the king of Zobah,
when the king of Damascus took the field in aid of
Hadad-Ezer, and the Edomites invaded Judah from

1 2 Sam. viii. 2. 2 2 Sam. x. 6—14.

3 2 Sam. viii. 3, 4 ; x. 15—19.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 155

the south. David remained in the field against the
Syrians, and sent Joab with only a part of the army
against the Edomites. In the salt valley, at the
southern end of the Dead Sea, Joab and Abishai
defeated the Edomites; 12,000 out of 18,000 are
said to have fallen on this day.1 In spite of this
severe defeat the Edomites made a stubborn resistance.
Joab, in continuous struggles which went on for six
months, destroyed a great part of the male popula-
tion (the son of the king of Edom was carried by the
servants of his father to Egypt), and subjugated the
rest of the inhabitants to the dominion of David.
While Joab was fighting in Edom, David had defeated
the men of Damascus and brought the war in the
north to an end. Thoi, the king of Hamath, whom
Hadad-Ezer had previously oppressed, entered into a
league with David. Only the Ammonites still con-
tinued to resist. Joab was sent against them in the
next year ; he laid their land waste, and took one
city after another. The captives were placed under
saws and axes, and burnt in kilns, or slain like the
Moabites under iron threshing-wagons. At length
Joab could announce to David that Rabbath-Ammon,
the chief city of the Ammonites, was reduced to
extremities ; the king must come to enter into the
city. Rabbath was destroyed (about 1015 B.C.2) ; the
inhabitants shared the fate of the other Ammonite
cities. From the Syrian campaign David had brought
back a trophy of 100 war-horses, copper vessels from
the cities of Hadad- Ezer of Zobah which were captured,

1 Psalms Ix. 2 ; 2 Sam. viii. 13.

2 The date rests on the fact that Solomon was born soon after, and
was more than 20 years old when he came to the throne ; see below.
The war against Hadad-Ezer cannot be placed before 1020, since Rezon,
who escaped, remained Solomon's opponent as long as Solomon lived.
1 Kings xi. 25.

156 ISRAEL.

and finally the golden shields which the commanders
of this king had carried. From Rabbath he brought
home the golden crown of the king of the Ammonites,
— it is said to have been a Kikkar (I. 285) in
weight and set with precious stones, — together with
other utensils of silver and gold. The Moabites, the
Ammonites, and Edomites were compelled to pay
tribute. Garrisons were put in the strong places ;
even Damascus is said to have received a garrison of
Israelites.1

After Saul had first saved Israel out of the hand of
their oppressors, after these advantages were lost by
the domestic strife, David had now formed the Israel-
ites into a ruling nation from isolated tribes who had
been so often and so long plundered by their enemies.
He had come victorious out of the most severe struggles.
With reason could Israel now sing: "Saul has slain
his thousands, David his tens of thousands."

It was a rapid and brilliant transformation. David
was master from the borders of Egypt, the north-east
point of the Red Sea, to Damascus. He was not con-
tent with successfully establishing his rule for the
moment by these great and brilliant deeds of arms ;
he intended to give it a solid support for the future.
He employed the spoils of his victories in order to
fortify more strongly and extend the city which he
had chosen for his metropolis ; it was now called the
city of David, and afterwards Jerusalem.2 On Zion,
the citadel of Jerusalem, David caused a royal palace
to be built. In the city the remnant of the Jebusites
had been joined by inhabitants from the tribes of
Judah and Benjamin. If David hoped to lessen the
disaffection of the tribe of Benjamin by establishing a
royal citadel in their land he had not calculated wrongly.

1 2 Sam. viii. 6, 7, 14; x. 19. 2 1 Kings xi. 27.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 157

The sequel shows that Benjamin, which previously held
to Ephraim, now stood fast by Judah.

In possession of a considerable and well-fortified
metropolis, and a strong royal citadel, David was able
to rule over Israel with greater safety and severity
than Saul from his rural court at Gibeah. Moreover,
David intended to create independent means and pro-
perty for the crown, and kept together what he had
won. From the tribute of the subjugated nations he
formed a treasury, which was placed under the care of
Asmaveth. In addition we hear of overseers of the
royal gardens, oliveyards, vineyards, and sycamore
plantations, and we learn that David kept flocks of
small cattle, herds of oxen, and camels.1

The strongest support of the throne were his selected
and thoroughly devoted troops of warriors. David was
accompanied by a body-guard which was always with
him (Saul had had round him some "runners"). It
appears from the name, Pelethites and Cherethites, to
have been entirely composed of foreigners ; their leader
was Benaiah.2 The core of the army was formed not
by this body-guard, but by the freebooters who once
gathered round him in the cave of Adullam and at
Ziklag, warriors tried often and in numerous battles.
They remained in one body in Jerusalem, and were
maintained by the king. This band — it was ap-
parently about 600 men in number,3 and in the ranks
were also foreigners, Hittites, Ammonites, Moabites, and
others, who formerly associated with David, or were
attracted by the fame of his deeds — was called the troop
of the mighty, " Gibborim ; " accompanied by armour-
bearers and servants, they took the field. They were

1 1 Chron. xxvii. 25—31.

2 2 Sam. xx. 23; 1 Chron. xviii. 17.

3 2 Sam. xv. 18.

158 ISRAEL.

divided into three portions, under three leaders ; at their
head fought 30 selected heroes : Abishai, Joab's brother,
was the captain.1 As simple peasants, the Israelites had
always fought on foot, without horses and horsemen ;
David, after the pattern of the Syrians, introduced
chariots. Josheb Bassebet was the captain of the
war-chariots.2 Along with the Gibborim, the chariots
were intended to give, as trained divisions, firmness
and support to the levy of the whole people.

In order to regulate the levy, Joab, the chief cap-
tain, with some of his subordinates, was commanded to
enumerate and write down all the fighting men from the
Jabbok to Mount Hermon, and from Dan to Beersheba.
Nine months and twenty days were required by the cap-
tains for this task. When the muster was completed,
captains were appointed for hundreds and thousands ;
but in order that the whole mass of the people need
not be called out on every campaign and every attack
of the enemy, — in which hitherto, for the most part,
only those who were eager for battle had engaged,
while those who preferred peace and rest remained at
home, — the whole number of the fighting men was
divided into twelve portions, of which each, in number
24,000 men, was pledged to service for one month iii
the year. Each of these divisions had a separate
captain. As occasion required, several of the divisions,
or all, might be called out. If we may trust these
accounts, Israel had at that time 300,000 fighting
men, and consequently a population of about two
millions.3

1 2 Sam. xxiii. 18 ; 1 Chron. xi. 15, 26—45.

2 2 Sam. xxiii. 8.

3 2 Sam. xxir. 9. The number of the levy here, as in almost all
accounts of the assembling of the people, must be grossly exaggerated :
800,000 are given in Israel, 500,000 in Judah only. Chronicles raises
the first number to 1,100,000, and reduces the second to 30,000, 1

THE RULE OF DAVID. 159

Hitherto the descendants of the oldest families, the
heads of the tribes, the successors of those who in the
conquest of the land had won for themselves separate
localities and valleys, had enjoyed a pre-eminent
position within the circle of the various tribes (p. 91).
To them, or to brave warriors, the Israelites had gone,
— to men who had become of importance owing to their
possessions, and who had the reputation of passing
sound judgments,— or to priests and soothsayers, when
they sought for advice, protection, and justice. Since
the establishment of the monarchy the king was the
supreme judge. David exercised this office as Saul
had done.1 But though he retained the right of
deciding in the last instance, David seems to have
appointed the princes and judges of the tribes ; he
charged certain of his adherents with the duty of
giving justice to the tribes and communities, although,
of course, every man had the right of appeal from his
decision to the decision of the king. Jurisdiction
and administration not yet being separated, we may
suppose that a regular government, which secured to
the throne the execution of its will and of the orders
given, was established by this means already in David's
reign. We find that, beside the captains of the army,

xxii. 5. The statement given in Chronicles about the division of the
levy into 12 troops, and the strength of these troops (1 xxviii. 1 — 15),
contradicts these numbers. As this arrangement of the army is
mentioned in Chronicles only, which books show a great tendency to
systematise, the division into 12 remains uncertain. That there was
a numbering of the people is not to be doubted. It is counted as
one of David's errors, and Jehovah strikes the people with pestilence.
This narrative is connected with the command to redeem the firstborn,
the boys (vol. i. 499), the ordinance given in Exod. xxx. 12, which is
connected with the same conception : " When thou takest the sum of
the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every
man a ransom for his soul to Jehovah that there be no plague among
them."

1 2 Sam. viii. 15.

160 ISRAEL.

the officers of the house and treasury, the king had a
chancellor, a scribe, and overseer of the taxes. Ahi-
thophel was the man on whose advice David mainly
depended ; his most trusted friend was Hushai ; and
in the last twenty years of his life the prophet Nathan
enjoyed a high place in his favour.1

It was a marvellous career that lay behind David.
He had grown up in a hardy youth ; early approved as
a brave warrior and skilful leader, he was then raised
to the side of Saul and Jonathan ; after this he
experienced the most sudden reverse of fortune, and
at length by very perplexed paths he reached the
highest stage. On this he had been able to retrieve
many mistakes ; he came victorious out of every con-
flict. Saul's deeds were surpassed, and Israel was
proud of the successes of David and the respect which
he won for her. He had securely established his
authority ; it was founded so firmly that the crown
must pass to his descendants. The religious feeling
which impelled him to inquire of Jehovah before every
undertaking, which brought him at an early period
into connection with the seers and priests, could not
but increase as he looked back upon the course of his
life. Who had greater reason than he to be thankful
to the God who protected him and guided him so
marvellously, who saved him out of every danger and
had raised him to such power and splendour? In
early days singing and harp-playing had occupied the
leisure of his shepherd life ; gifted with poetic powers,
he understood how to give a powerful expression to
his gratitude towards Jehovah. After these great
wars he is said to have sung : " Jehovah, my rock,
my fortress, my shield ; the horn of my salvation, my
defence. I called on him who is worthy of praise, and

1 2 Sam. xx. 23—26 ; 1 Chron. xxvil 16—22.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 161

was delivered from my enemies. Out of his palace
he heard my voice, and my cry came into his ears.
Then the earth moved and quaked, and the foundations
of the earth trembled, for he was wroth. Smoke rose
out of his nostrils, and a consuming fire went from his
mouth ; coals burned forth from him. He bowed the
heavens, and came down on the cherubim, and hovered
on the wings of the wind. He made darkness his veil,
the tempest and dark cloud his tabernacle. Jehovah
thundered, and the Highest gave forth his voice,
hail-stones and coals of fire. He shot forth his arrows
and destroyed the enemy, the lightning fell and dis-
persed them. With thee, Jehovah, I wenb against hosts,
and with my God I climbed over walls. Jehovah girded
me with power ; he gave me feet like harts' feet ; he
taught my hand the battle, so that my arm strung the
iron bow. I pursued my enemies and overtook them,
and turned not back till I had destroyed them ; I
shattered them in pieces that they could not rise up ;
I scattered them like dust before the wind ; I cast them
forth like dung. Thou, Jehovah, didst save me from
the battles of the nations, and didst place me at their
head ; nations which I knew not serve me. At a
rumour they obey me, and the sons of strangers flatter
me ; they sink away and tremble out of their castles.
Praised be my protector, exalted be the God of my
salvation."1

It was not in praise and thanksgiving only that
David gave expression to the grateful feeling which
filled him towards God; he had it much at heart to
create a lasting abode and visible centre for the worship
of Jehovah. For 20 years the sacred ark of Israel had
remained at Kirjath-jearim, in the house of Abinadab,
who had made one of his sons the custodian of it. David

1 Psalin xviii. ; cf. De Wette-Schrader, " Einloitung," S. 345.

VOL. II. M

162 ISRAEL.

determined to convey it into his metropolis, that it
might there be in secure keeping, and receive proper
reverence. It was placed on a new wagon ; Abinadab's
sons, Ahio and Uzzah, led it forth. On the way an
evil omen occurred : the oxen which drew the wao;oii

O

broke loose, the ark tottered, and Uzzah put out his
hand to stay it. " Then the anger of Jehovah broke
forth against Uzzah, and he smote him, and he died
there before God." After this incident David feared
to carry the ark further ; it remained on the road, at
the house of Obed-edom ; and not until it was seen
that it brought prosperity to the house of Obed-edom
did David, three months after, again take it up and
carry it to Jerusalem. In festal train the people
accompanied it with " shouting and trumpets ; " and
David, clad in the linen tunic of the priests, " danced
before Jehovah." " Lift up your heads, O ye gates,
that the King of glory may come in/' he is said to have
sung. The tabernacle was already erected on Zion, and
in it the ark of Jehovah was then placed ; and "David
sacrificed burnt offerings and thank offerings, and gave
to all the people, to each man a measure of wine, a
loaf of bread and a cake of raisins" (about 1020 B.C.1).
Abiathar, the son of Ahimclech, of the house of Eli,
of the race of Ithamar, of the tribe of Aaron, who had
formerly fled to him with the image of Jehovah from

1 2 Sam. vi. 1 — 8, 12 — 15 ; Psalm xxiv. On the date see above, p,
125, n. 2. M. Niebuhr (" Assur und Babel," a 350) explains the
number of 466^ years given by Josephus (" Ant." 20, 10) by assuming
that it contains the interval of 430^ years which the Hebrews give for
the interval between the building of the temple and its destruction.
To this amount is added eight years for the captive high priest Joza-
dak, down to the time when his son Joshua became high priest, and 28
years for Zadok's priesthood before the commencement of the building
of the temple. If we reckon the 28 years of Zadok backwards for the
time that we have assumed for the beginning of the temple, 990 B.C.,
•we arrive at the year 1018 B.C. for the erection of the new tabernacle.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 163

Nob and remained by his side, and beside him Zadok,
of the house of Eleazar, of the tribe of Aaron, who had
hitherto been high prisst at the place of sacrifice at
Gibeon,1 were made by David the custodians of the
new tabernacle, which he then adorned with the costly
spoil of his victories. By bringing the ark of the cove-
nant into his city he gave it a sacred pledge, the
assurance of the protection and the grace of Jehovah.
His city was the dwelling of Jehovah, the citadel of
Zion the mount of G-od. David's new metropolis was
thus at the same time raised to be the central point
of the national worship, and in the fullest sense the
metropolis of the land. Service before the ark of the
covenant on Zion could not but throw into the shade
the old places of sacrifice at Shiloh, Bethel, Gibeon,
Gilgal, and Nob.

The erection of the sacred ark on Zion, the found-
ation of a central point for the worship, certainly met
the wishes of the priests. Only by a strictly -regulated
and dominant mode of worship, by centralising the
service, could the priests hope to bring into vogue the
arrangement of ritual which they regarded as the true
method appointed by God. Relying on the import-
ance of such a central point, on the authority of the
crown, they could expect obedience to their regulations.
David on his part would hardly fail to see what weight
the influence of an allied priesthood could add to the
strength of the throne.

What David did for Israel by the cultivation of
religious song, by setting up the old national shrine in
the new metropolis, by the dedication of it to be the
abode of Jehovah has been of deep-reaching and even
decisive influence for the fortunes of Israel and the
course of her religious development. It is, of course,

1 1 Chron. xvi. 39.

M2

164 ISRAEL.

beyond doubt that only a few of the Psalms which
David is said to have sung can with certainty be
traced back to him ; but from the fact that the greater
part of these poems could be ascribed to him, it follows
with the greater certainty that he must have given a
powerful impulse to the religious poetry of Israel, that
the words of thankfulness and trust in God from the
lips of the victorious royal minstrel had the greatest
influence on the Israelites. This influence connected
with the exaltation and worship of the national sacred
relic at Zion gave a new life and firmer root to the
belief of the Israelites, both in the direction of religious
feeling and religious prescriptions. When the chief place
of sacrifice was marked out indubitably by the sacred
ark on Zion, and members of the oldest priestly family
officiated there, it was natural that by degrees a con-
siderable number of priests should collect there, in
order to share and co-operate in the worship in the
sacred tent, in the tabernacle. These priests were
arranged according to their families or "houses;" the
greater number claimed Eleazar, the third son of
Aaron, as their progenitor, while the less claimed to
be descended from Ithamar, the fourth son of Aaron.1
The eyes of the priesthood were already turned from
Hebron to the early history of the nation, to the cor-
rect mode of worship, as Aaron and Moses had formerly
proclaimed and practised it, which since the settlement
in Canaan had become almost forgotten and obsolete
with priests and laymen, since different customs had
come into use at different places of sacrifice. The
service at the new and yet ancient shrine at Jerusalem
must support the impulse to practise, here at any rate,
the old correct customs in perfect purity as a pattern
and example, to insist on the custom of Zion as pleasing

1 2 Sam. xv. 24, 27 ; 1 Chron. vii. 4 — 15, 50 — 53 ; xxiii. — xxvi.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 165

to God» and established by Moses, and to bring once
more into authority and practice the true regulations of
the sacrificial rites for the whole land. Agreement and
union in the mode of worship would be most quickly and
most thoroughly obtained if the place of the tabernacle
could be shown to be the only correct place of sacrifice.
Though the Philistines had opposed the growth of
the strength of Israel, the combination and arrangement
of her powers, with perseverance and stubbornness, the
cities of the Phenicians seem rather to have welcomed
the establishment of a strict ruling authority in Israel,
which preserved peace in the land and so made trade
easier. Perhaps too they looked with pleasure on the
formation of a power which could balance that of the
Philistines, and prevent them from advancing as far as
the gates of Tyre. At any rate Hiram, king of Tyre,
who began to rule in that city in the year 1001 B.C.,1
entered into friendly relations with David. He sent
him Tyrian artisans, who adorned David's palace on
Zion. The Israelites were not skilled in fine building.
After this palace was completed we must look on
David's house and court as splendid and numerous.
There was the chancellor, the keeper of the treasury,
the chief tax-gatherer, the scribe with his subordinates;
there were singers, male and female, the body-guard,
and the servants.2 David had brought seven wives
from Hebron to his new metropolis. Michal, the
daughter of Saul, had borne no children to David ;
his eldest son, Amnon, was by Ahinoam of Jezreel;
the second, Chileab, by Abigail, the widow of Nabal.
When he ruled the tribe of Judah from Hebron he
married a fourth wife, Maacah, the daughter of

1 If Josephus is right, that the fourth year of Solomon was the twelfth
year of Hiram of Tyre.

2 2 Sam. xix. 35.

166 ISRAEL.

Thalmai, prince of Geshur, in order, no doubt, to
strengthen by this connection his power, then so weak.
Maacah bore him a third son, Absalom, and a daugh-
ter, Tamar ; his fifth wife, Haggith, bore a fourth son,
Adonijah. In Jerusalem he took yet more wives and
concubines into his house, who, besides these sons, bore
seventeen sons and several daughters, beside Tamar.
When his sons became men, the unavoidable conse-
quences of the harem came to light : the mutual
jealousy of the sons of the various wives, and the
ambition of some of the wives to obtain the succession
for their sons.

The establishment of the monarchy had brought a
rich return to the Israelites. Under its guidance, not
only had the enemies of the land been beaten back, but
Israel had gained a leading place in Syria. Moreover,
David had transformed the somewhat insecure leader-
ship conferred on Saul by his election into a firm and
deep-reaching supremacy ; a mere name, a wavering
authority, he had raised after the pattern of his neigh-
bours into a strict rule, which could lead the people
at will, and dispose of them at pleasure. This trans-
formation had taken place so quickly, the enrolment of
Israel in the forms of Syrian monarchy was carried out
so thoroughly, that there could not fail to be a strong
reaction. The new officers were oppressive ; task-work
for the king, levies of the army for muster and for
service beyond the land, were to the Israelites new and
very unwonted burdens. When external dangers had
passed away with the humiliation of the neighbours, and
the days of the old incursions, distresses, and oppres-
sions were forgotten, it might very well happen that the
Israelites felt the new arrangement of the community,
the mode in which they were governed, to be a burden
rather than a benefit. In the later years of the reign of

THE RULE OF DAVID. 167

David a lively aversion to his rule was spread through
all the tribes ; and it is remarkable that it was most
deeply felt in his own tribe of Judah, which had for-
merly exalted him. in Hebron. On this feeling of the
people, David's third son, Absalom, founded the plan
of depriving his father of the sovereignty, in order to
ascend the throne before it came to him by inheritance.1
Absalom, David's son by Maacah of G-eshur, was a
handsome man, without blemish from head to foot,
adorned with a heavy growth of hair, and a favourite
of the people, though the guilt of a foul deed lay upon
him. The beauty of Tamar, the full sister of Absalom,
had roused the passions of Amnon, the eldest son of
David. He enticed her into his house by deceit, dis-
honoured her and thrust her in scorn into the street.
As the king did not punish the crime, Absalom invited
Amnon to his plot of Baal Hazor, to the sheep-shearing,
and there caused him to be stabbed by his servants in
order to avenge his sister's shame. After this he fled
to his grandfather, the prince of Geshur. After three
years' banishment he was allowed to return, but might
not see his father's face ; this was not permitted till
two year safter his return. Amnon was dead ; Chileab,
David's second son, died, as it seems, in this period.
Absalom was now again received into favour, and
became the legitimate heir to the throne.

1 Absalom's rebellion cannot have taken place till the latter years
of David. Absalom was born in Hebron, and therefore, at the least,
after David's thirtieth year, 2 Sam. v. 4. He must at the least have been
towards 20 years old when he caused Amnon to be murdered. Five
years passed before David would allow him to enter his presence, 2
Sam. xiii. 38, and xiv. 28. Lastly, his efforts to gain popularity, and
the preparations for rebellion, must have occupied two years. If it is
stated in 2 Sam. xv. 7 that after Absalom's return from Geshur 40
years elapsed till his rebellion, Absalom must have been 63 years old
at the time of his rebellion, and David at the least 93 years old. Hence
in the passage quoted four years must be read instead of 40.

168 ISRAEL.

As a token of his claims, Absalom procured horses,
and chariots and a retinue of 50 men. Early in the
morning he was at the gates of Jerusalem ; he in-
quired of every one whence he came, allowed no one
to prostrate himself before him, but shook all by the
hand and kissed them. If he heard that any one came
for justice, he caused the matter to be told to him, and
then said : Your cause is good, but you will not be
heard ; if I were judge in Israel you would certainly
gain your rights. Four years after his return from
Geshur, when Ahithophel, the most distinguished of
David's counsellors, and Amasa, the son of a sister of
David, had gone over to his side,1 Absalom considered
his prospects favourable. He sent trusty men to all
the tribes with instructions to proclaim him king as
soon as they understood that he was in Hebron. Under
pretence of offering sacrifice at Hebron, which city
perhaps looked with jealousy on the new metropolis,
Absalom went from Jerusalem to Hebron. The tribes
obeyed this signal for revolt ; everywhere the people
on this side Jordan declared for Absalom, and great
numbers gathered round him. At their head he set
out against Jerusalem, against his father.

David was completely taken by surprise. His own
son now brought on him retribution for all that he had
previously done to Saul. Clever and circumspect as
the old king was, he seems to have found his master in
his son. Not secure of the people even at Jerusalem,
he could not venture to defend himself in his fortified
metropolis ; nothing remained but to retire in all haste.
Yet even in this desperate position the cunning which
had so often come to his aid in his varied life did not
desert him. Absalom he fea.red little ; his greatest terror
was the counsels of Ahithophel. Hence he commanded

1 2 Sam. xv. 1—6; xrii. 2o; 1 Chron. ii. 17.

THE RULE OP DAVID. 169

Husliai (p. 160) to remain behind, and in appearance to
take Absalom's part, in order to counteract Ahithophel.
If Absalom could be induced not to pursue his advantage
immediately, and David could gain time to collect his
adherents, much would be won. Abiathar and Zadok
also, the high priests of the sacred tabernacle, who
wished to share his flight, were bidden to remain in
Jerusalem. Their position as priests was a sufficient
protection for them ; by means of their sons they were
to furnish information of what took place in the city.1
Accompanied by some of his wives and their children,
by his most faithful adherents, the Gibborim, and the
body-guard, David left the city in the early morning.
Over the Kidron, along the Mount of Olives, he
hastened eastwards to find protection beyond the
Jordan. At Bahurim Sbimei, a man of Benjamin, of
the race of Matri, to which Saul belonged, saw from
an eminence the flight of the king. He threw stones
down upon him and said : May Jehovah bring upon
thee all the blood of the house of Saul, in whose place
thou hast become king ; see, thou art now in calamity;
away, thou man of blood. The body-guard wished to
take the man and slay him, but David restrained them,
and said : My son, who has come forth from my
loins, is seeking my life ; how much more a man of
Benjamin ; let him curse. Perhaps at this moment
David's spirit was really broken ; perhaps he did not
wish that the people should be further roused by new
acts of violence ; in the sequel he showed that he had
neither forgotten nor forgiven the words of Shimei.

On the same day Absalom marched into Jerusalem,
and among those who greeted him he saw with astonish-
ment Hushai, the ancient friend of his father. He
believed Hushai's assurance that he wished to "serve

1 2 Sam. XT. 5—14.

170 ISRAEL.

him whom Jehovah and all the men of Israel had
chosen." Ahithophel considered the success which had
been obtained, the rebellion which spread through the
whole country on this side of the Jordan, and the
possession of the strong metropolis and the palace
without a blow, insufficient and indecisive. He saw
the situation clearly, and was convinced that all would
be lost if the king had time to collect round him his
old adherents, his companions in victory. Filled with
the conviction that the only way to obtain the end in
view was to make an immediate use of the great
advantages won by the surprise, he insisted that
Absalom should at once set out in pursuit of David.
The people which Absalom had led from Hebron were
numerous, of these he wished to leave behind the
burdensome multitude and select 12,000 for this ex-
pedition. Hushai opposed this proposal with great
skill. Thou knowest thy father, he said to Absalom,
he is a mighty warrior, like a bear deprived of her whelps
in the forest, and his men are mighty and of fierce
courage. He will not be encamped on the field, but
will have concealed himself in one of the hiding-places.
If any of our men fall it will be said, Absalom's men
have been defeated, and all thy adherents will lose
courage. Rather rouse all Israel, and inarch out at
their head, that we may encamp against David like
the sand of the sea, and none of his men may escape.
Absalom followed this advice to his ruin. Yet Hushai
was not certain that Ahithophel would not win over
Absalom to his opinion, or go of his own will against
David ; so he sent his maid before the gate to the fuller's
well (to the south of the city, where the valleys of
Hinnom and Kidron join), where Jonathan, the son of
Abiathar, and Ahimaaz, the son of Zadok, lay concealed
(Absalom's men had not allowed them to leave the

THE RULE OF DAVID. 171

gate), with instructions to them to hasten to the king
and warn him not to encamp on this side of Jordan.
Though watched by Absalom's guards and pursued,
the two men came without disaster to David, who
again set out in the night. When Ahithophel heard
that the king was beyond Jordan he despaired of the
undertaking ; he saddled his ass, went to his own city,
set his house in order and hung himself.

Absalom took formal possession of the sovereignty,
and as a sign that he had broken for ever with his
father and assumed the government, he took the royal
harem into his possession. A tent was set up on the
roof of the palace of Zion, under which Absalom lived
with the ten concubines whom David had left behind
in Jerusalem before the eyes of Israel. When this was
done he raised the whole people to march against his
father, and went with numerous troops to the Jordan.
David was at Mahanaim, like Ishbosheth before him,
eagerly busied with his army. It was due to the
cunning arrangements made in the flight from Jerusa-
lem that he had escaped without danger beyond Jordan,
and was enabled to assemble his own adherents there
while Absalom was calling out and collecting the whole
army. From the Ammonites, whom he had treated so
harshly, he seems nevertheless to have received support.1

While Absalom crossed the Jordan, David divided the
forces he had at his disposal into three corps, the com-
mand of which he entrusted to Joab, his brother Abishai,
and Ithai, a Philistine of Gath. He remained behind
in Mahanaim, and bade the captains deal gently with
Absalom in the event of victory. The armies met in
the forest of Ephraim, not far from the Jordan. In spite
of the superiority of the numbers opposed to them, the
tried and veteran soldiers of David had the advantage

1 2 Sam. xvii. 27.

172 ISRAEL.

over the ill-armed and ill-organised masses of peasants.
Absalom started back on his mule, fell into a thicket,
and became entangled by his long hair in the branches
of a large terebinth. He remained hanging while his
mule ran away from under him. Joab found him in
this position, and thrust his spear thrice through his
heart. Either the fall of the hostile leader, the author
of the rebellion, appeared a sufficient success to David's
men, or the advantage gained over Absalom's army was
not very great, or they found themselves too weak to
follow it up. Joab led the army back to Mahanaim.

Though the rebellion had lost its leader by the fall
of Absalom, it was far from being crushed. Absalom's
captain, Amasa, the nephew of David, collected the
masses of the rebellious army ; the elders of the tribes,
as well as the people, were ready to continue the
struggle against David, though some were again in-
clined to accept their old king. If the tribes could be
divided, and Amasa separated from the elders of Judah,
the victory was almost certain. On this David built
his plan. By means of the priests Abiathar and Zadok
he caused it to be made known to the elders of Judah
that the rest of the tribes had made overtures to him,
to recognise him again as king, which was not the case ;
— would they be the last to lead back their own flesh
and blood, their tribesman David ? At the same time
the priests were bidden to offer to Amasa the post of
captain-general as the reward of his return, and this
offer David confirmed with an oath : So might God do
to him if Amasa were not captain all his days in the
p]ace of Joab.1 The elders of Judah allowed themselves
to be entrapped no less than Amasa, who little knew
with whom he had to do. They sent a message to
the king that he might return over the Jordan, and

1 2 Sam. xix. 11—13.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 173

went to meet him at Gilgal. David showed himself
placable, and prepared to pardon the adherents of
Absalom. Shimei, who had cursed him on his retire-
ment from Jerusalem, went to meet him at the Jordan ;
and when the boat which carried David over reached
the hither bank he fell at his feet. David promised
not to slay him with the sword.1 From Mephibosheth,
the son of Jonathan, who had declared for Absalom,
he only took the half of Saul's inheritance.2

The remaining tribes were enraged at the tribe of
Judah, partly because they had abandoned the common
cause, partly because Judah had entirely appropriated
the merit of bringing back the king. Their feelings
were wavering : half were for submission, the others
for continuing the resistance.3 Then rose up a man
of Benjamin, Sheba, the son of Bichri. "What part
have we in David, what portion in the son of Jesse ? "
he cried to the waverers, caused the trumpets to be
blown, and gave a new centre to rebellion and resist-
ance. David commissioned Amasa to call out the
warriors of Judah within three days and lead them to
Jerusalem. While Amasa was occupied with carrying
out this command, David sent Joab with the Gibborim
and the body-guard against Sheba. At Gibeon Joab
met Amasa. Is all well with thee, my brother ? he
said, and took him by the beard with his right hand
to greet him, while with the left he thrust his sword
through his body.4 Thus, after he had been gained by
deceptive promises, the dangerous man was removed
as Abner had been before him. Sheba could not
withstand the impetuous advance of Joab ; the tribes
submitted. Sheba's first resistance was made far in the

1 2 Sam. xix. 18—33 ; 1 Kings ii. 8.

2 2 Sam. xvi. 3—5 ; xix. 24—30. 3 2 Sam. xix. 40.
* 2 Sam. xx. 8—13 ; 1 Kings ii. 5.

174 ISRAEL.

north at Dan, in the city of Abel-beth-maachah, and
there he defended himself so stubbornly that a rampart
was thrown up against the city and besieging engines
brought up agaicst the walls. When the walls were
near upon falling, and the citizens saw destruction
before them, they saved themselves by cutting off
Sheba's head and sending it to Joab.1 The reaction
of the people against the new government, at the head
of which Absalom, Amasa, and Sheba had successively
placed themselves, was overcome.

Many years before, at the time when Joab was
besieging Rabbath, the metropolis of the Ammonites,
David had gone out on the roof of his house in Zion in
the cool of the evening. This position overlooked the
houses in the ravine which separated the citadel from
the city. In one of these David saw a beautiful woman
in her bath. This was Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, a
Hittite, who served in the troop of the "mighty." The
king sent for her to his palace, and she soon announced
to David that she was with child. David gave orders
to Joab to send Uriah from the camp to Jerusalem.
He asked him of the state of the war and the army,
and then bade him go home to his wife, but Uriah lay
before the gate of the palace. When David asked him
on the next morning why he had not gone home to
his house, he answered : Israel is in the field, and my
fellows lie in the camp before Rabbath, and shall I go
to my house to eat and drink and lie with my wife ?
Remain here, replied David ; to-morrow morning I
will let thee go. David invited him into the palace
and made him drunken, but, as before, Uriah passed
the night before the gate of the palace. Then, on the
following day, David sent Uriah to the camp with a
letter to Joab : Place Uriah in the thickest of the

1 2 Sam. xx. 15—22.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 17.5

battle, and turn away from him, that he may be
smitten, and die. Soon after a messenger came from
the camp and announced to the king : The men of
Rabbath made a sally ; we repulsed them, and drove
them to the gate ; then the bowmen shot at thy
servants from the walls, and some of our men were
slain, amonor them Uriah. David caused Bathsheba,
when the time for mourning was over, to come into his
harem, and after the death of her first child, she bore
a second child, whom David called Solomon, i. e. the
peaceful,1 as the times of war were over with the cap-
ture of Rabbath and the subjugation of the Ammonites.
After Absalom's death the heir to the crown was
Adonijah, the fourth son of David, whom Haggith had
borne to him while at Hebron. Solomon was the
seventh in the series of the surviving sons of David,
and as yet quite young ; yet Bathsheba attempted to
place her son on the throne. One of the two high
priests, Zadok, supported Bathsheba's views, as also
Nathan the prophet, who acquired great influence
with David in the last years of his reign. Both might
expect a greater deference to priestly influence from
the youthful Solomon than from the older and more
independent Adonijah, and the more so if they
assisted the young man to gain the throne against the
legitimate successor. So Bathsheba prevailed upon
David to swear an oath by Jehovah that Solomon
should be his successor in the place of Adonijah.2 But
Adonijah did not doubt that the throne belonged to
him, that all Israel was of the same conviction, and
their eyes turned upon him.3 If Zadok was in favour of
Solomon's succession, Abiathar, the old and influential
adherent of David, was for Adonijah, and what was

1 2 Sam. xii. 15—24 ; 1 Chron. xxii. 9. 2 1 Kings i. 17, 20.
3 1 Kings ii. 15, 22.

176 ISRAEL.

more important, the captain of the army, Joab, who
had won David's best victories, also declared for him.
On the other hand, Bathsheba's party won Benaiah,
the captain of the body-guard, so that the power and
prospects of both party were about equal.

When David, 70 years old, lay on his death-bed,
Adonijah felt that he must anticipate his opponents.
He summoned his adherents to meet outside the walls
at the fuller's well (p. 170). Joab appeared with the
leaders of the army, Abiathar came to offer sacrifice,
and all the sons of David except Solomon. The sacri-
fice was already being offered, the sheep, oxen and
calves were killed, the proclamation of Adonijah was
to follow immediately after the sacrifice, when the
intelligence was carried to the opposite party. Bath-
sheba and Nathan hastened to the dying king to
remind him of his oath in favour of Solomon. He
gave orders that Solomon should be placed on the
mule which he always rode himself and that Zadok
should anoint the youth under the wall of Zion east-
wards of the city at the fount of Gihon. Then
Benaiah with the body-guard was to bring him back
into the city at once with the sound of trumpets, and
lead him into the palace, in order to set him upon the
throne there. This was done. Zadok took the horn
of oil from the sacred tabernacle, and when the new
ruler returned in solemn procession to the palace all
the people cried with joy : Long live king Solomon.
When Adouijah and his adherents heard the shouting
from the city, and understood what had taken place,
they gave up their cause for lost, and dispersed in
dread in every direction. David rejoiced over this
last success ; l he called Solomon to his bedside, and
said to him : " Do good to the sons of Barzillai the

1 1 Kings ii. 5 — 9.

THE RULE OF DAVID. 177

Gileadite; he received me well when I fled over
Jordan before thy brother Absalom. Shimei, who
cursed me when I fled to Mahanaim, I have sworn not
to slay ; let him not go unpunished, and bring his
grey hairs to the grave with blood. What Joab did
to Abner and Amasa thou knowest ; let not his grey
hairs go down to the grave in peace."1 David was
buried in the grave which he had caused to be made
on Zion, where the heights of the citadel meet the
western height, on which the city lay.

Thus David had succeeded in healing the wounds
which his ambition had inflicted in past days on Israel ;
he understood how to establish firmly the monarchy, and
along with it the power and security of the state. He
had given such an important impulse to the worship, to
the religious poetry, and consequently to the religious
life, of the Hebrews, that his reign has remained of de-
cisive importance for the entire development of Israel.
But beside these great successes and high merits lie very
dark shadows. If we cannot but admire the activity
and bravery, the wisdom and circumspection, which
distinguish his reign, there stands beside these qualities
not only the weakness of his later years, which caused
him to make a capricious alteration in the succession,
thereby endangering the work of his life ; other actions,
both of his earlier and later years, show plainly that in
spite of religious feeling and sentiment he did not hesi-
tate to set aside very fundamental rules of morality
when it came to winning the object he had in view.

If even in his last moments he causes Joab to be
put to death by the hand of his son, it may be

1 1 Kings ii. 5 — 9. The verses 2 Sam. xxiii. 1 — 7 may have been a
speech of David's at some former time, if they are not an addition of
the prophet's. Contrasted with the very definite and realistic colouring
of the passage quoted from the Book of Kings, they can hardly be
considered the last words.

VOL. II. N

178 ISRAEL.

that this old servant, when he had taken the side
of the other son in the succession, appeared very
dangerous for the rule of the younger son. But Joab
had rendered the greatest services to David, he had
won for him the most brilliant victories ; and if our
account makes David give the murder of Abner and
Amasa as the reason for that command, David had
made no attempt to punish one deed or the other ; on
the contrary, he had gladly availed himself of at least
the results and fruits of them. We must not indeed
measure those days of unrestrained force and violent
passion in hatred and love, in devotion and ambition,
by the standard of our own tamer impulses ; the
manner of the ancient East, above all of the Semites,
was too much inclined to the most bloody revenge.
Yet David's instructions to destroy a man of no im-
portance, whom he had once in a difficult position
sworn to spare, out of the grave, by the hand of his
son, goes beyond the limit of all that we can elsewhere
find in those times and feelings.

CHAPTER VIII.

KING SOLOMON.

IN the last hour of his life David had raised his
favourite son to the throne. The young king was not
much more than 20 years of age,1 and the news of the
death of the dreaded ruler of Israel could not but
awaken among all who had felt the weight of his arm
the hope of withdrawing themselves from the burden
laid upon them. The son of the king of Edom, whom
his father's servants had carried away, in safety into
Egypt, had grown up there under the protection of the
Pharaoh ; at the news of David's death he hastened
to Edom to summon his people to freedom and the
struggle against Israel. A captain of Hadad-Ezer
of Zobah, whom David overthrew, Rezon by name,
fled at that time into the desert, where he collected a
troop round him and lived by plundering. Now he
threw himself on Damascus, gained the city, and made
himself prince. Moreover, the power of Solomon was
not firmly established even in Israel; the people had
expected the accession of Adonijah,2 and though he

1 Bathsheba became David's wife not long before the capture of
Rabbath-Ammon. Her first child died. According to 1 Kings iii. 7,
Solomon, at the time of his accession, is still a boy. But since, accord-
ing to 1 Kings xiv. 21, his son Kehoboam is 42 years old at Solomon's
death, and Solomon had reigned 40 years, Solomon must have been
more than 20 at the death of David. Hence, on p. 155 above, the date
of the capture of Rabbath- Ammon is fixed at 1015 B.C.

3 1 Kings ii. 15.

N 2

180 ISRAEL.

and his confederates retired at the first alarm, there
was no lack of adherents. Serious dangers and com-
motions appeared to threaten the new reigri. Adonijah
had fled for refuge to the altar ; he besought Solomon
for a pledge not to slay him. Solomon promised to
spare him if he remained quietly at home. Joab did
not know what commands David had.given Solomon in
his dying hour, but he did know that Solomon would
not forgive him for supporting Adonijah. He sought
refuge in the tabernacle of Jehovah, and took hold of
the horns of the altar in the tent. Solomon bade
Benaiah cut him down. Benaiah hesitated to pollute
the altar with blood ; he reported that Joab could
not be induced to leave the altar. The young king
repeated his command, " Cut him down, and take from
me and from the house of my father the blood of Abner
and the blood of Amasa." So Joab was slain by Benaiah
at the altar of the sacred tent, and buried " in his house
in the desert." The high priest Abiathar escaped with
his life. " I will not slay thee," so Solomon said to
him, " because thou didst once suffer with my father."
He banished him as a " man of death " to his inherit-
ance at Anathoth. Zadok was henceforth sole high
priest at the sacred tent. When Adonijah afterwards
besought Solomon to give him one of the concubines
of David, Abishag the Shunamite, to wife, Solomon
thought that he sought to obtain the throne by this
means. He commanded Benaiah to slay him on the
spot. With the death of Adonijah his party lost their
head and centre : it ceased to exist.

Solomon broke the rebellion of the Edomites not by
his arms only, but also by withdrawing from them the
support of Egypt. He sought the hand of the daughter
of the king of Egypt and obtained it.1 Thus he not

1 1 Kings iii. 1. From the statement in 1 Kings xi. 14 — 21, this

KING SOLOMON. 181

only withdrew from Edom their reliance on Egypt, he
also obtained the active support of his father-in-law.
The Edomites were defeated in battle by Solomon ;
Egyptian soldiers reduced Gezer for him.1 On the
other hand. Solomon could not defeat the new kino- of

* o

Damascus. Rezon maintained his place, and was an
" adversary to Israel as long as Solomon lived." 2
Hence it is hardly possible that Solomon reduced the
kingdom of Hamath, north of Damascus, to subjection,
as the Chronicles assert ; 3 on the other hand, it appears
that the oasis of Tadmor, in the Syrian desert, north of
Damascus, was gained, and the city of that name was
founded and established there. Hence, even after the
loss of Damascus, he had command of one of the roads to
the Euphrates.4 We may assume that Solomon retained
the kingdom of David without any essential alteration
in extent ; that he, like his predecessor, held sway as
far as the north-east point of the Red Sea ; and that
even if his rule did not extend, like David's, to the
Euphrates, yet he possessed a predominant position in
this direction. The connection in which Hiram king
of Tyre stood with his father he not only maintained,
but made it more close and more extensive.

With the close of the third year of the reign of
Solomon the wars which the change on the throne
kindled came to an end. It is said to have been David's
intention in the last years of his reigri to build a
temple in the place of the sacred tent on Zion. As

must have been the daughter of Amenophtis, the Pharaoh who
succeeded the king mentioned here, the fourth Tanite in Manetho'a
list. Below, Book IV. chap. 3.

1 1 Kings ix. 16. 2 1 Kings xi. 23—25.

3 2 Chron. viii. 3.

4 2 Chron. vii. 8; viii. 4; 1 Kings ix. 18; Joseph. "Antiq." 8, 6,
1. The passage in the Book of Kings appears, it is true, to indicate
Thamar in Southern Judsea.

182 ISRAEL.

soon as times of peace came Solomon set himself to carry
out this purpose. Hiram of Tyre promised to deliver
wood from the forests of Lebanon at a price, and to put
at his disposal architects and moulders of brass. To
the north of the palace which David had built on Zion
the mountain, on which the citadel was, rose higher.
Here the new temple was to be erected. The first task
was to level the height ; a terrace was raised upon it
by removing some parts and filling up others, arid
building substructures ; this terrace was intended to
form the precincts and support the temple itself. The
surrounding hills and the neighbourhood provided
an ample supply of stones for building ; stone of
a better quality was quarried in Lebanon and carried
down. The trees felled in Lebanon were carried to
the coast, floated round the promontory of Carmel
as far as Japho (Joppa), and again dragged up from
this point to Jerusalem.1 The vessels and the orna-
ments of brass intended for the temple were cast " in
clay ground" beyond the Jordan, between Succoth and
Zarthan, by the Tyrian Hiram.2 A wall of huge
stones, on which were built the dwellings of the priests,
surrounded the temple precincts. The temple itself
was a building of moderate dimensions, but richly
adorned. A portico of 20 cubits in breadth and 10
cubits in depth, opening to the east, formed the
entrance into the temple. Before this portico, after the
Syrian manner, stood two pillars of brass, one called
Jachin, the other Boaz. The temple, exclusive of the
portico, was 60 cubits in length, 20 cubits in breadth,
and 30 cubits in height. The breadth was limited by
the unsupported span of the beams of the roof. On
both sides of the temple itself leaned side-buildings,
which rose to the height of half the main structure.

1 1 Kings v. 7—10, 15—17. 2 1 Kings vii. 46.

KING SOLOMON. 183

The front space of the temple was lighted by trellised
openings over these side-buildings. This front space,
which was the largest, and entered from the portico
by a door of cypress wood, adorned with carved work
overlaid with gold, was richly ornamented. The
floor was laid with cypress wood overlaid with gold ;
the walls and the roof were covered with panels of
cedar wood, which in richly-carved work displayed
cherubs and palm-branches, so that not a stone could
be seen in the interior. In this space of the temple —
the " holy " — was an altar overlaid with gold for
offering frankincense (for the smoke -offering), and a
sacred table for the sacrificial bread. Nearer to the
inner space of the temple — the "holy of holies" —
were ten candlesticks, and further in a candlestick with
seven branches. The holy of holies, i. e. the smaller
inner space of the temple, which was intended to
receive the sacred ark, was divided from the holy by
a wall of cedar wood, in which was a double door of
olive wood, hanging on golden hinges. Only the
high priest could enter the holy of holies, the walls
of which were covered with gold-leaf, and even from
him the sight of the ark was hidden by a curtain
of blue and red purple, and approach was barred by a
golden chain. Immediately before the ark were two
cherubs of carved olive wood overlaid with gold, 10
cubits high, with outspread wings, so that from the
point of one wing to the point of the other was also a
distance of 10 cubits.1

The sacrifices of animals were offered in the open air
of the court in front of the temple. For this object a
great altar of brass was erected in the middle of the
court, 10 cubits in height and 20 in the square.
Southward of this altar was placed a great basin, in

1 1 Kings vi., vii. 13—51 ; 2 Chron. iii. 4, 10.

184 ISRAEL.

which the priests had to perform their ablutions and
purifications ; this was a much-admired work of the
artisan Hiram, and called the sea of brass. Supported
by twelve brazen oxen, arranged in four sets of three,
and turned to the four quarters of the sky, the round
bowl, which was of the shape of a lily broken open,
measured five cubits in depth and 30 in circumference.1
Beside this great basin five smaller iron bowls were set
up on either side of the altar. These rested on wheels,
and were adorned with cherubs and lions, palms and
flowers, with the greatest skill. They were intended
to serve for washing and purifying the animals and
implements of sacrifice.

Solomon commenced the building of the temple in
the second month of the fourth year of his reign (990
B.C.). After seven years and six months it was finished
in the eighth month of the eleventh year of Solomon's
reign (983 B.C.). The elders of all Israel, the priests
and Levites, and all the people " from Hamath to the
brook of Egypt," flocked to Jerusalem. In solemn
pomp the sacred ark was drawn up to the temple
height; oxen and sheep without number were sacrificed
for seven days, and from that time forward the king
offered a solemn sacrifice each year at the three great
festivals in the new temple.2

The house which David had built for himself on
Zion no longer satisfied the requirements of Solomon
and his larger court. When the temple was finished
he undertook the building of a new palace, which was
carried out on such a scale that the completion occu-
pied thirteen years.3 The new palace was not built on

1 A similar vessel of stone, 30 feet in circumference, adorned with
the image of a bull, lies among the fragments of Amathus in Cyprus :
O. Miiller, " Archaeologie," § 240, Anm. 4.

2 1 Kings ix. 25. 3 1 Kings vii. 1—12.

KING SOLOMON. 185

Zion, but on the western ridge, which supported the
city to the west of Zion and David's palace. It con-
sisted of several buildings, surrounded by courts and
houses for the servants, and enclosed by a separate wall.
The largest building was a house of stone three stories
high, the stories and roof of which were supported by
cedar pillars and beams of cedar; the length was 100,
the breadth 50, and the height 30 cubits (about 50 feet).
A balustrade or staircase in this house was made of
sandal wood, which the ships of Ezion-geber had
brought from Ophir.1 On this building abutted three
colonnades, the largest 50 cubits long and 30 broad ;
the third was the hall of the throne and of justice.2
Here stood the magnificent throne of Solomon, " of
which the like was never made in any kingdom," of
ivory overlaid with gold. Six steps, on which were
twelve lions, led up to it ; beside the arms of the
seat were also two lions.3 Then followed the dwelling
of Solomon, from which a separate stair-way was
made leading up to the temple, together with the
chambers for the wives of the king, — their number is
given at 700, the number of the concubines at 300,4 —
and lastly a separate house for his Egyptian consort,
who passed as the first wife, and was honoured
and distinguished above the rest. In the four-and-
twentieth year of Solomon's reign (970 B.C.) this
building was brought to an end, " and the daughter
of Pharaoh went up from the city of David into the
house which Solomon had built for her." 5

Solomon felt it incumbent on him to secure his land,
and not merely to adorn the metropolis by splendid

1 1 Kings x. 12 ; 2 Chron. ix. 11. 2 1 Kings vii. 7.

3 1 Kings x. 18—20.

4 The Song of Solomon says, "There are 60 queens, 80 concubines,
and maids without number."

5 1 Kings ix. 10, 24.

186 ISRAEL.

buildings, but to make it inaccessible to attack. To
protect northern Israel against Rezon and Damascus
he fortified Hazor, whose king had once so grievously
oppressed Israel, and Baalath ; to protect the western
border he fortified Megiddo, Gezer, and Beth-horon.1
The defensive works which David had added to the
old fortifications of the metropolis he enlarged and
extended. The gorge which, running from north to
south, divided the city of Jerusalem on the western
height from the citadel of Zion on the east he closed
towards the north by a separate fortification, the tower
of Millo. By another fortification, Ophel, he protected
a depression of Mount Zion between David's palace
and the new temple, which allowed the citadel to be
ascended from the east. The space over which the
city had extended on the western height opposite the
temple, in consequence of the growth of a suburb there
towards the north, the lower city, he surrounded with
a wall.2 He raised the number of the chariots of war,
which David had introduced, to 1400, for which 4000
horses were kept. He formed a cavalry force of 12,000
horses, he built stables and sheds for the horsemen and
chariots. If we include the body-guard, the standing
army which Solomon maintained may very well have
reached 20,000 men.3

The excellent arrangement of his military means and
forces must have contributed to make Israel respected
and to preserve peace in the land. In Solomon's
reign, so we are told in the Books of Kings, every one
could dwell in peace under his own vine and his
own fig tree.4 This peace from without, united with
the peace which the power and authority of the
throne secured in the country, must have invigorated

1 1 Kings ix. 15—19. 2 1 Kings xi. 27; ix. 15—24-.

3 1 Kings iv. 26 ; x. 26. 4 1 Kings iv. 20, 25 ; v. 4.

KING SOLOMON. 187

trade, favoured industry, and considerably increased
the welfare of Israel. The example of the court, the
splendour and magnificence of which was not increased
by buildings only, made the wealthy Israelites ac-
quainted with needs and enjoyments hitherto unknown
to their simple modes of life. If hitherto the Israelites
had sold to the Phenicians win3 and oil, the wool of
their flocks, and the surplus products of their lands for
utensils and stuffs, the finer manufactures of the Pheni-
cians now found a demand in Israel, If the kino- of

O

Israel was friendly to the Pheuicians, he allowed them.
a road by land through his territories to Egypt ; now
that the Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites had
been subjugated he could close or open the caravan
road past Rabbath-Ainmon, Kir Moab, and Elath to
South Arabia (I. 320), and when Tadmor was in his
hands he could permit or prohibit a road to the
Euphrates beside that past Damascus. Solomon pro-
hibited none of these ; on the contrary, he promoted
the intercourse of the merchants by erecting restino--

«/ O O

places and warehouses on all the lines of traffic which
crossed his dominions.1 The exportation of chariots
and war-horses from Egypt to Syria, which the
Pharaoh no doubt permitted in an especial degree
to his son-in-law, Solomon carried on by means of
merchants commissioned by him.2 Another trade
undertaking, at once much more far-seeing, and
promising far greater gains, he commenced in union
with the king of Tyre. It was of great importance to
the Phenicians to obtain an easier connection with
South Arabia in the place of, or at least in addition
to, the dangerous and very uncertain caravan routes
past Damascus and Dumah (I. 320), or past Elath
along the coast of the Bed Sea, to South Arabia. The

1 1 Kings ix. 19. 2 1 Kings x. 29.

188 ISRAEL.

circuit by Babylon was very distant, and not much
more secure. The rule of Solomon over Edom pointed
out the way, and secured the possibility of reaching
South Arabia by the Red Sea, At Eziongeber, near
Elath, Tyrian shipbuilders built the vessels which were
to explore the coasts of South Arabia, the coasts of the
land of gold. Guided by Phenician pilots, Phenicians
and Israelites sailed into the unknown sea, and to
unknown and remote corners of the earth. They
succeeded not only in reaching the South Arabian
coasts and the coasts of East Africa, but in passing
beyond to Ophir, i. <?., as it seems, to the mouths of
the Indus. After an absence of three years the first
expedition brought back gold in quantities, silver,
ivory, sandal wood, precious stones, apes and pea-
cocks. The profits of this expedition are said to have
contributed as Solomon's share 420 Kikkars of gold,
i. e. towards 20,000,000 thalers (about £3,000,000).1

With the increased sale of the products of the
country, the improvement and security of the great
routes of traffic, the entrance of Israel into the trade
of the Phenicians, and the influx of a considerable
amount of capital, money seems to have become very
rapidly and seriously depreciated in price in Israel.
Before the establishment of the monarchy a priest is
said to have received 10 silver shekels, with food and
clothing, for his yearly service at a sacred place.2 The
amount from which Abimelech is said to have main-
tained his retinue (p. 107) is placed at only 70 shekels
of silver. ^Before the epoch of the monarchy the prophet
received a quarter of a shekel as a return for his
services. David purchased the threshing-floor of

1 1 Kings ix. 26—28 ; x. 22.

2 Judges xvii. 10. The Hebrew silver shekel is to be reckoned at
more than 2s. 6d. ; the gold shekel from 36 to 45«. C£ Vol. i. 304.

KING SOLOMON. 189

Araunah at Zion with two oxen for 50 shekels of
silver.1 On the other hand, Solomon appears to have
paid the keepers of his vineyards a yearly salary of
200 silver shekels, and in his time 150 shekels were
paid for an Egyptian horse, and 600 shekels (500
thalers = £80) for a war-chariot.2

The prosperity of the land allowed Solomon to
increase the income of the throne by taxation of the
people. His income from the navigation to Ophir,
from trade, from the royal demesnes, and the taxes of
Israel is said to have brought in a yearly sum of
666 Kikkars of gold, i. e. about 30,000,000 of thalers
(about £5, 000,000). 3 He applied these revenues to
the support of his army, to his fortifications, sheds, and
splendid buildings, to the erection of the stations on
the trade roads, and finally to the adornment of the
court. " He built in Jerusalem, on Lebanon, and in
the whole land of his dominion," say the Books of
Kings.4 We hear of conduits, pools and country
houses of the king on Antilibanus ; of vineyards and
gardens at Baal-Hammon. The splendour of his court
is described in extravagant terms. All the drinking-
vessels and many other utensils in the palace at Jeru-
salem, and in the forest-house in Antilibanus, are said
to have been of pure gold, and the servants were
richly clad.5 In a costly litter of cedar wood, of which
the posts were of silver, the arms of gold, and the seat
of purple, Solomon was conveyed to his vineyards and
pleasure-houses in Antilibanus, surrounded by a retinue
of 60 men chosen from the body-guard.6 At solemn
processions the body-guard carried 500 ornamented

1 2 Sam. xxiv. 24.

2 Song of Solomon viii. 11 ; cf. Mover's " Phoenizier," 3, 48 if, 81 ff.

3 1 Kings x. 14. * 1 Kings ix. 19.

6 1 Kings x. 21 ; 2 Chron. ix. 20. 6 Song of Solomon iii. 7—10.

190 ISEAEL.

shields : 200 were of pure gold, — for each 600 shekels
were used, — 300 of alloyed gold.1 The number of male
and female singers, of the servants for the king and
crowded harem, and the kitchen, must have been very-
great, as may be inferred from the very considerable
consumption of food and drink in the palace. From
the court and from trade such an amount of gold
flowed to Jerusalem that silver was in consequence
depreciated.2

The new arrangement of state life, which was partly
established, partly introduced, by Solomon, the lei-
sure of peace, the close contact with Phoenicia and
Egypt, the entrance of Israel into extensive trade, the
increase of prosperity, the richer, more various, and
more complicated conditions of life, the wider range of
vision, could not be without their influence on the
intellectual life of the Israelites. From this time an
increased activity is displayed. They were impelled
and forced to observation, comparison and considera-
tion in quite another manner than before. The results
of these new reflections grew into fixed rules, into pro-
verbs and apophthegms. In this intellectual move-
ment Solomon took a leading part. A man of poetical
gifts like his father, he composed religious and other
poems (1005 in number, according to the tradition).
The impulse to knowledge and the sense of art which
he excites must first have found room within himself;
his vision, like his means, reached the furthest. Hence
we have no reason to doubt that he was one of the
wisest in his nation. " God," says the Book of Kings,
"gave Solomon a spirit beyond measure, as the sand
of the sea. And the wisdom of Solomon was greater
than the wisdom of all the sons of the East, and the
wisdom of Egypt. He was wiser than all men, and
1 1 Kings x. 27. » 1 Kings x. 27.

KING SOLOMON. 191

lie spoke of the trees, from the cedar on Lebanon to
the hyssop which grows on the wall, and of the cattle
and the birds, and the worms and the fishes." l
Beside poetry and extensive knowledge of nature, in
which he surpassed his wisest countrymen, Ethal
and Heman, Chalcol and Darda, it was his keen
observation, his penetrating knowledge of mankind,
his experience of life which made the greatest impres-
sion. His proverbs and rules of life seemed to the
Israelites so pointed and exhaustive that they attri-
buted to Solomon the entire treasure of their gnomic
wisdom, which was afterwards collected into one body.
Among these proverbs scarcely any can with complete
certainty be ascribed to Solomon, but the fact that
all are attributed to him is a sufficient proof that
Solomon possessed a very striking power in keen
observation of human nature and human affairs, in
the pregnant expression of practical experience, in
combining its lessons into pointed and vigorous
sentences.

As a proof of his acuteness and the calm penetra-
tion of his judicial decisions, the people used to narrate
the story of the two women who once came before
Solomon into the hall of justice. One said : I and
that woman lived in one house, and each of us bore a
male child. In the night the son of this woman died.
She rose, laid her dead son at my breast, and took my
living child to her bosom. When I woke I had a
dead child in my arms ; but in the morning I perceived
that this child was not the son which I had borne.
The other woman answered : No ; the living boy is my
son, and thine is the dead child. The king turned to his
retinue and said : Cut the living child into two parts,
and give half to one and half to the other. Then

1 1 Kings iv. 29—34.

192 ISRAEL.

tenderness for her child arose in the mother of the
living child. I pray you, my lord, she said, give her
the living child, but slay it not. And the king gave
sentence : This is the mother, give her the child. It
is further narrated that the fame of Solomon's wisdom
reached even to distant lands, and kings set forth to

' O

hear it. From Arabia the queen of the Sabaeans
(Sheba, I. 315) is said to have come with a long train
of camels, carrying spices, gold, and precious stones,
in order to try Solomon with enigmas. And Solomon
told her all that she asked, and solved all the enigmas,
and nothing was hidden from him. When the queen
perceived such wisdom, and saw the house which he
had built, and the food on his table, and his counsel-
lors, and his cup-bearers, and servants, and the burnt
sacrifice which he offered in the house of Jehovah,
she sent him 120 Kikkarsof gold, and such an amount
of spices as never afterwards came to Jerusalem. This
narrative may not be without some foundation, in fact
we saw above how old was the trade of Egypt and
Syria with the land of frankincense. We shall after-
wards find queens among the Arabians in the eighth
and seventh centuries B.C. : Zabibieh, Samsieh, and
Adijah, and even at the head of the tribes of the
desert. To this day the East preserves the memory
of the wise king Solomon, who, in their legends and
stories, has at the same time become a great magician
and exorcist.

However great the splendour of Israel in Solomon's
reign, this advance was not without a darker side.
The new paths in which Solomon led his people
brought the Israelites comfort and opulence, the
advantages and impulses of a higher civilisation and
more active intellectual life. But with the splendour
and luxury of the court, and the increasing wealth,

KING SOLOMON. 193

the old simplicity of manners disappeared. The land
had to bear the burden of a rule which was completely
assimilated to the forms of court life, and the mode of
government established in Egypt and Syria, in Babylon
and Assyria. The court, the army and the buildings
required heavy sums and services, and these for the
most part had to be paid and undertaken by the people.
Solomon not only imposed on the tribes the mainten-
ance of his standing troops, the cavalry and the
chariots, he also demanded that they should support
the court by contributions in kind. This service was
not inconsiderable. Each day 30 Kor of fine and 60
Kor of ordinary meal were required, 10 stalled oxen,
and 20 oxen from the pasture, and 100 head of small
cattle. Besides this, deer and fallow-deer, gazelles
and fed geese were supplied. The assistance which
Hiram king of Tyre gave to Solomon's buildings, the
wood from Lebanon, had to be paid for ; each year
20,000 Kor of wheat and 20,000 Bath of oil and wine
were sent to Tyre, and this the Israelites had to provide.
Further, the people had to pay a regular yearly tax in
money to the king.1 Still more oppressive was the
task-work for the buildings of the king. It is true that
the remnant of the tribes subject to the Israelites, the
Amorites, Hittites, Hivites and Jebusites, were taken
chiefly for these tasks, for Solomon had compelled
them to do constant task- work,2 but the Israelites
themselves were also employed in great numbers in the

1 1 Kings iv. 22, 23, 26—28.

2 1 Kings ix. 20, 21. In order to prove that Solomon used these
and no others for his workmen, the Chronicles (2, ii. 16, 17) reckon
this remnant at 153,000 men, i. e. exactly at the number of task work-
men with their overseers given in the Book of Kings. According to
this the incredible number of half a million of Canaanites must have
settled among the Israelites. The general assertion of the Books of
Kings (1, ix. 22) is supported by the detailed evidence in the same
books, 1, v. 13 ; xi. 28; xii. 4 ff.

VOL. II. O

194 ISKAEL.

building. Over each tribe of Israel Solomon placed an
overseer of the task-work, and these overseers were all
subordinate to Adoniram, the chief task-master. The
Israelites summoned for these services are said to have
had two months' rest after one month of work, and there
was a regular system of release. In the years when
the buildings were carried on with the greatest vigour,
80,000 workmen are said to have been engaged in fell-
ing wood in Lebanon, in quarrying and hewing stones
under Tyrian artisans, while 70,000 others carried out
the transport of this material. Though the workmen
were constantly changed and the extension of the task
was not unendurable, these burdens were unusual and
certainly undesirable. In order to introduce regu-
larity into the payments in kind and the taxes of the
land, the country was divided into twelve districts, —
no doubt on the basis of the territorial possessions of
the tribes, — and over these royal officers were placed.
Each district had to provide the requirements of the
royal house for one month in the year. These over-
seers of the districts were subordinate to a head over-
seer, Azariah, the son of that Nathan to whom, next
to his mother, Solomon owed the throne.1 Yet in
spite of all the services of subjects, in spite of all
means of receipts, Solomon's expenditure was in excess
of his income. When the settlement with Hiram'fol-
lowed the completion of the building of the temple and
palace, it was found that Hiram had still 120 Kikkars
of gold to receive. As Solomon could not pay the
sum, he ceded to Tyre twenty Israelite places on the
border. No doubt the king of Tyre was well pleased to
complete and round off his territory on the mainland.2

1 1 Kings iv. 11—15; v. 13—18.

2 1 Kings ix. 10 — 14. The contradictory statement in Chronicles
(2, via. 2) cannot be taken into consideration.

KING SOLOMON. 195

The example of a lavish and luxurious court, the
spectacle of a crowded harem, the influence and de-
meanour of these females, was not only injurious to the
morals of the people, but to their religious conduct.
If the national elevation of the Israelites under Saul
and David had forced back the foreign rites which had
taken a place after the settlement beside the worship of
Jehovah, it is now the court which adopts the culture
and manners of the Phenicians and Syrians, and by
which the worship of strange gods in Israel again be-
comes prominent. Among the wives of the king many
were from Sidon, Ammon, Moab and Edom. Solomon
may have considered it wise to display tolerance towards
the worship of the tributary nations, but it was going
far beyond tolerance when the king, who had built
such a richly-adorned and costly temple to the national
god of Israel, erected, in order to please these women,
altars and shrines to Astarte of Sidon, to Camus of the
Moabites, and Milcom of the Ammonites.1

Yet the impulse which Solomon's reign gave to the
worship of Jehovah was far the most predominant.
It is true that the idea of raising a splendid temple to
Jehovah in Jerusalem arose out of the model of the
temple-service of the Phenicians and Philistines and
their magnificent rites (I. 367), whereas the Israelites
hitherto had known nothing but places for sacrifice
on altars on the heights and under the oaks, — nothing
but a sacred tent. The temple itself was an approxi-
mation to the worship of the Syrians ; but it was at
the same time the completion of the work begun by
David. This building of the temple was the most

1 1 Kings xi. 4—9, 33. Though this account belongs to times no
earlier than the author of Deuteronomy, yet since the destruction of
these places of worship " set up by Solomon" is expressly mentioned
under Josiah (2 Kings xxiii. 13), it cannot be doubted.

02

196 ISRAEL.

important of the acts of Solomon during his reign,
and an undertaking, which in its origin was to some
degree at variance with national feeling, not only con-
tributed to the maintenance of the national religion, but
also had very considerable influence upon its develop-
ment. Solomon, after his manner, may have had the
splendour and glory of the structure chiefly in view,
— yet just as the monarchy comprised the political life
of the nation, so did the specious, magnificent temple
centralise the religious life of the nation, even more than
David's sacred tent. By this the old places of sacrifice
were forced into the shade, and even more rarely visited.
The building of the temple increased the preponder-
ance of the sacrifice offered in the metropolis. The
priests of the altars in the country, who mostly lived
upon their share in the sacrifices, turned to Jerusalem,
and took up their dwelling in the city. Here they
already found the priesthood, which had gathered
round Abiathar and Zadok (p. 164). The union of a
large number of priestly families at Jerusalem, under the
guidance of the high priest appointed already by David,
caused the feeling and the consciousness of the solid
community and corporate nature of their order to rise
in these men, while the priests had previously lived an
isolated life, at the places of sacrifice among the people,
and hardly distinguished from them, and thus they were
led to a far more earnest and systematic performance of
the sacred worship. It was easy to make use of the
number of priests already in existence in order to give
to the rites the richer and more brilliant forms which
the splendour and dignity of the temple required. For
this object the arrangements of the sacred service must
be divided, and the sacred acts allotted to special
sections of the priests at hand.

KING SOLOMON. 197

The organisation of the priesthood needed for these
divisions was naturally brought about by the fact that
those entrusted with the office of high priest supposed
themselves to be descendants of Aaron, and that even
in David's reign these had been joined by the priests
who claimed to be of the same origin. These families,
the descendants of Eleazar and Ithamar, retained the
essential arrangements of the sacrifice and the expia-
tion, the priesthood in the stricter sense. Even the
families, who side by side with these are said to have
belonged to the race of Aaron, which, like Aaron, are
said to have sprung from the branch of Kohath, were
not any longer admitted to this service. The priestly
families of this and other origin, which are first found
at a later date in Jerusalem, who retained their dwell-
ing outside Jerusalem, were united with the races of
Gershom and Merari, and to them, as to the families
of the race of Kohath which did not come through
Aaron, were transferred the lesser services in the
worship and in the very complicated ritual. Those
men of these races who were acquainted with music
and singing, together with such musicians as were not
of priestly blood, were also divided into sections.
They had to accompany the sacrifice and acts of
religious worship with sacred songs and the harp.
Others were made overseers of the sacred vessels and
the dedicatory offerings, others set apart for the puri-
fication of the sanctuary and for door-keepers. All
these services were hereditary in the combinations of
families allotted to them. This organisation of the
priesthood cannot have come into existence, as the
tradition tells us, immediately after the completion of
the temple ; it can only have taken place as the effects
of a splendid centre of worship in the metropolis of

198 ISRAEL.

the kingdom became more widely felt, and was finally
brought to completion under the guidance of the
priests attending on the sacred ark.1

Thus there was connected with the building of the
temple by Solomon, not only the reunion of the families
of the tribe of Levi — if these even previously had formed
a separate tribe ; — by means of adoption from all the
families which for generations had been dedicated to
the sacred rites, the formation and separation of the
priestly order became perfect.2 At first, without any
independent position, this order was dependent on the
protection of the monarchy, which built the temple for
it, and the importance of the priests was increased with
the splendour of the worship. At the head of the new
order stood the priests of the ark of Jehovah, who had
already, in earlier times, maintained a pre-eminent
position, which was now increased considerably by the
reform in the worship. But they also were dependent
on the court, though they soon came to exercise a
certain influence upon it. As David had made Zadok
and Abiathar high priests, so Solomon removed
Abiathar and transferred the highest priestly office to
Zadok, of the branch of Eleazar. Far more important
than the position of the priesthood at the court was
the feeling and consciousness of the mission given to

1 1 Chron. xxiv. — xxvii. Here, as is usual in the Chronicles, the
division of the priests is given systematically, and the idea of such a
division is ascribed to the last years of David. "The Levites were
numbered according to David's last commands," 1 Chron. xxiv. ; cf.
cap. xxvii. Throughout the Chronicles make a point of exhibiting
David as the originator, and Solomon as the executive instrument.
We must content ourselves with the result that the temple is of decisive
importance in separating the priests from the people, and for gathering
together and organising the order.

2 It appears that the lists of the priestly families were taken down
in writing when the organisation of the order was concluded: Nehem.
vii. 64.

KING SOLOMON. 199

them, of the duties and rights, to which the priesthood
attained when combined in the new society. As they
were at pains to practise a worship pleasing to Jehovah,
they succeeded even before Solomon in discovering an
established connection between the past and the pre-
sent of the nation, in recognising the covenant which
Jehovah had made with his people. From isolated
records, traditions, and old customs they collected the
law of ritual in the manner which they considered as
established from antiquity, the observation of which
was, from their point of view, the maintenance of the
covenant into which Israel had entered with his God.
This was the light in which, even in David's time, the
fortunes of Israel appeared to the priests, and from
this point of view they were recorded in the first
decade of David's reign. The order which the priests
required for the worship, its unity, centralisation and
adornment, the exact obedience to the ritual which was
considered by them true and pleasing to God, the posi-
tion which the priesthood had now obtained, or claimed,
appeared to them as already ordained and current in the
time when Jehovah saved his people with a mighty
arm, and led them from Egypt to Canaan. They had
been thrust into the background and forgotten, owing
to the guilt and backsliding of later times. Now the
time was come to establish in power the true and
ancient ordinances of Moses in real earnest, and to
restore them. It was of striking ethical importance,
that by these views the present was placed in near
relation and the closest combination with a sublime
antiquity, with the foundation of the religious ordi-
nances. The impulse to religious feeling which arose
out of these views and efforts found expression in a
lyrical poetry of penetrating force. David had not
only attempted simple songs, but also, as we have seen,

200 ISRAEL.

more extended invocations of Jehovah ; and the skilled
musical accompaniment which now came to the aid of
religious song in the families of the musicians, must
have contributed to still greater elevation and choice
of expression. The intensity of religious feeling and
its expression in sacred songs must also have come into
contact more especially with that impulse which had
hitherto been represented in the seers and prophets,
who believed that they apprehended the will of
Jehovah in their own breasts, and, in consequence of
their favoured relation to him, understood his com-
mands by virtue of internal illumination. All these
impulses operated beyond the priestly order. In
union with the lofty spiritual activity of the people,
they led, in the first instance, to the result that in
the last years of Solomon the annalistic account of
the fortunes of the people and the record of the law
was accompanied by a narrative of greater liveliness,
of a deeper and clearer view of the divine and human
nature (I. 386), which at the same time, in the fate
of Joseph, gave especial prominence to the newly-
obtained knowledge of Egyptian life, the service
rendered by the daughter of the king of Egypt to the
great leader of Israel in the ancient times, the bless-
ing derived from the friendly relations of Israel and
Egypt, and the distress brought upon Egypt by the
breach with Israel.

CHAPTER IX.

THE LAW OF THE PEIESTS.

OUT of the peculiar relation in which Israel stood from
all antiquity to his God, out of the protection and
prosperity which he had granted to the patriarchs
and their seed, out of the liberation from the oppres-
sion of the Egyptians, which Jehovah had prepared
for the Israelites with a strong arm, out of the bestowal
of Canaan, i. e. the promise of Jehovah to conquer the
land, which the Israelites had now possessed for
centuries, there grew up in the circles of the priests,
from about the time of Samuel, the idea of the covenant
which Jehovah had made with the patriarchs, and
through them with Israel. Jehovah had assured
Israel of his protection and blessing; on the other hand,
Israel had undertaken to serve him, to obey his com-
mands, and do his will. If Israel lives according to
the command of Jehovah, the blessing of his God will
certainly be his in the future also ; the reward of true
service will not and cannot be withheld from him.
The will of Jehovah which Israel has to obey, the law
of Jehovah which he has to fulfil, was contained in
the moral precepts, the rules of law, and rubrics for
purification and sacrifice, the writing down of which in
the frame-work of a brief account of the fortunes of
the fathers, the slavery in Egypt, the liberation and
the conquest of Canaan, on the basis of older sketches

202 ISRAEL.

of separate parts, was brought to a conclusion at
Hebron, in the priestly families of the tribe of Aaron,
about the first decade of David's reign (I. 385). In
this writing were laid down the views held by the
priesthood on the life pleasing to God, on the past of
the nation and the priests, and of the correct mode of
worship. It was the ideal picture of conduct in morals,
law and worship which the priests strove after, which
must in any case have existed in that great period
when Jehovah spoke to the Israelites by the mouth of
Moses. And, as a fact, the foundations of the moral
law, the fundamental rules of law and customs of
sacrifice, as we found above (I. 484), do go back to that
time of powerful movement of the national feeling, of
lofty exaltation of religious emotion against the dreary
polytheism of Egypt.

It is doubtful, whether the families of the priests and
sacrificial servants who traced back their lineage to Levi,
the son of Jacob (p. 197), and were now united by David
and Solomon for service at the sacred tabernacle, for
sacrifice and attendance at the temple, had of antiquity
formed a separate tribe, which afterwards became dis-
persed (I. 488), — or if this tribe first was united under
the impression made by the idea of true priesthood,
which those writings denoted as an example and
pattern, and under the influence of the change intro-
duced by the foundation of a central-point for the
worship of Israel in the tabernacle of David, and then
in the temple of Solomon, for the priestly families
scattered through the land, by means of a gradual
union of the priestly families ; at all events, a position
at least equal in dignity to the rest of the tribes ought
to be found for the tribe of Levi, which knew the will
and law of Jehovah, and the correct mode of sacrifice.
It was not indeed possible in Israel to give the first

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 203

and most ancient place to the tribe of the priests, as
has been done in other nations where a division of
orders has crystallised into hereditary tribes. In the
memory of the nation Reuben was the first-born tribe,
i. e. the complex of the oldest families, the oldest
element of the nation, and the importance of the
tribes derived from Joseph and the tribe of Judah in
and after the conquest of Canaan was so firmly fixed
that the tribe of Levi could not hope to contend with
them successfully in the question of antiquity. But
what was wanting in rank of derivation could be
made up by special blessings given by Jehovah, and
by peculiar sanctity. According to an old conception
the first-born male belonged to Jehovah. In the
sketch of 'the fortunes of Israel and of the law,
Jehovah says to Moses, he will accept the tribe of
Levi in place of the first-born males of the people.
The number of the first-born males of one month old
of all the other tribes was taken — they reached 22,373 ;
the number of all the men and boys down to the age
of one month in the tribe of Levi was 22,000. These
22,000 Levites Jehovah took in the place of the first-
born of the people, and the remaining 373 were ran-
somed from Jehovah at the price of five shekels of
silver for each person.1 Thus the Levites were raised
by Jehovah to be the first-born tribe of Israel. Levi
was the tribe which Jehovah had selected for his
service, the chosen tribe of a chosen nation. Moses
and Aaron were of this tribe, and if, instead of a few
families who stood beside Moses when he led Israel
out of Egypt, and restored the worship of the tribal
deity, the whole tribe of Levi was represented as
active in his behalf, and as a supporter of Moses, the
consecration of age was not wanting to this tribe, and

1 Exod. xiii. 2 ; Numbers iii. 5 — 51 ; viii. 16.

204 ISRAEL.

reverence was naturally paid to it in return for such
ancient services.

The Levites were not to busy themselves with care
for their maintenance, they were not to work for hire,
or possess any property ; they were to occupy them-
selves exclusively with their sacred duties. Instead of
inheritance Jehovah was to be their heritage.1 It is
true that the plan for the maintenance of the tribe of
Levi, sketched in the first text on the occasion of the
division of Canaan, the 48 cities allotted to them in the
lands of the other twelve tribes (13 for the priests and
35 for the assistant Levites2), could never be carried
out ; yet claims might be founded on it. Moreover,
the necessary means for support were supplied in
other ways. The firstlings of corn, fruits, the vintage,
the olive tree, were offered by being laid on the altar.
No inconsiderable portion of other offerings was pre-
sented in the same manner. All these gifts could be
applied by the priests to their own purposes.3 But by
far the most fruitful source of income for the priesthood
was the tithe of the produce of the fields, which was
offered according to an ancient custom to Jehovah as
his share of the harvest. The law required that a
tenth of corn, and wine, and oils, and of all other
fruits, and the tenth head of all new-born domestic
animals, should be given to the priests.4 The statements
of the prophets and the evidence of the historical books
prove that the tithes were offered as a rule, though
not invariably. As the Levites who were not priests
had no share in the sacrifices, the law provided that
the tithe should go to them, but the Levites were in
turn to restore a tenth part of these tithes to the
priests. Finally, the law required that a portion of

1 Numbers xviii. 20—26. 2 Vol. i. 488, 502.

3 Numbers xviii. 8—20. 4 Levit, xxvii. 29—33.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 205

the booty taken in war should go to the Levites ;
that in all numberings of the people and levies each
person should pay a sum to the temple for the ransom
of his life.1

Only the descendants of Aaron could take part
in the most important parts of the ceremonial of sacri-
fice. From his twenty-fifth or thirtieth year to his
fiftieth every Levite was subject to the temple service.2
The law prescribed a formal dedication, with purifica-
tions, expiations, sacrifices, and symbolical actions for
the exercise of the lower as well as the higher priest-
hood, for the offering of sacrifice and the sprinkling
of the blood as well as for the due performance of the
door-keeping. At the dedication of a priest these
ceremonies lasted for seven days, but the chief import
of the ritual was to denote the future priest himself as
a sacrifice offered to Jehovah. Only those might be
dedicated who were free from any bodily blemish.
" A blind man, or a lame, or he that hath a flat nose,
or anything superfluous, or a man that is broken-
footed, or broken-handed, or crook-backt, or a dwarf,
or that hath a blemish in his eye, or be scurvy, or
scabbed, or hath his stones broken shall not come nigh
to offer the offering of the Lord made by fire." 3

No priest was to make baldness on his head or shave
off the corners of his beard, or make any cuttings in his
flesh ; 4 before the sacrifice he might not take wine or
any intoxicating drink ; he was required to devote
himself to especial purity and cleanliness, and observe
in a stricter degree the laws concerning food ; he might
not marry a widow or a woman divorced from her
husband, still less a harlot ; he was to avoid most

1 Genesis xiv. 20; xxviii. 22.

* Exod. xxx. 11—16; xxxviii. 25—28.

3 Levit. xxi. 16—21. 4 Levit. xxi. 5.

206 ISRAEL. '.

carefully any contact with a corpse : only in the case of
his nearest relatives was this defilement allowed. The
clothing of the priests was definitely prescribed. He
must wear a robe of white linen (byssus), woven in
one piece ; and this robe was held together by a girdle
of three colours, red, blue and white. The priest also
wore a band of white linen round his head, and trousers
of white linen in order that he might not discover his
nakedness when he ascended the steps of the altar.1

The foremost place among the consecrated priests
was occupied by the high priest. He alone had the
right to enter the inner space of the sanctuary, the
cell in which stood the ark of the covenant — the other
priests could enter the outer space only ; he alone
could offer sacrifice in the name of the whole people,
he alone could announce the will and oracle of Jehovah,
and consecrate the priests. The ritual for the high
priest was most strict. In the belief of the Hebrews
the most accurate knowledge and the most careful
circumspection was needed in order to offer an effective
sacrifice and avoid arousing the anger of Jehovah by
some omission in the rite, and if the law required of all
priests that they should devote themselves to especial
purity and holiness, this demand was made with
peculiar severity upon the high priest. He might
marry only with a pure virgin of the stock of his
kindred ; he must keep himself so far from all defile-
ment that he might not touch the corpse even of his
father and his mother ; he might not, on any occasion,
rend his garments in sorrow. The distinguishing garb
of the high priest was a robe of blue linen, which on
the edge was adorned with pomegranates and bells ;
the bells were intended, as the law says, to announce
the coming of the priest to the God who dwelt in the

1 Exod. xx. 26.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 207

shrine of the temple, that the priest might not die.1
Over this robe the high priest wore a short wrapper,
the so-called ephod or shoulder-garment, and on his
breast in front the tablet with the holy Urim and
Thuminim, by means of which he inquired of Jehovah,
if the king or any one from the people asked for an
oracle. The other priests also, at least in more ancient
times, wore the ephod with the Urim and Thummim;
but the ephod of the high priest was fastened on the
shoulders by two precious stones, and the front side of
his breastplate was made of twelve precious stones set
in gold, on which were engraved the names of the
twelve tribes. The head-band of the high priest was
distinguished from that of the other priests by a plate
of gold bearing the inscription, " Holy is Jehovah ; "
he might not even uncover his head.2

The mode of worship was regulated by the law in
a systematic manner. Beside the Sabbath, on keeping
which the law laid special stress, and regarded it as a
symbol of the relation of Israel to Jehovah, the Israel-
ites celebrated feasts at the new moon and the full
moon,3 and held three great national festivals in the
year. These festivals marked in the first instance
certain divisions of the natural year. Yet the first,
the festival of spring, had from ancient times a peculiar
religious significance. It has been remarked above
that at the spring festival not only were the firstlings
of the harvest, the first ears of corn, offered to the
tribal God, but that also, as at the beginning of a
new season of fertility, a sin offering, the vicarious
sacrifice of a lamb, was made for the first-born which

1 Exod. xxviii. 31—35 ; xxxix. 22—27.

2 Exod. xxviii. 4—30, 36—43.

3 1 Sam. xx. 5, 24, 27, and many passages in the prophets ; Numbers
xxviii. 11 ; xxix. 6 ; Ewald, " Alterthiimer," s. 360.

208 ISRAEL.

were not offered. The spring festival was also the
festival of the sparing of the first-born, the Passah or
passover of Jehovah (I. 414). The priestly ordinance,
which sought to give a definite historical cause for
the customs of the festival, and to mark the favours
which Jehovah had granted to his people, connects
the old usages of this festival with the exodus from
Egypt, and we have already seen how from this point
of view old ceremonies of this festival were trans-
formed, and new ones were added (I. 445). As the
spring festival was kept in the first month of the
Hebrew year, Nisan (March — April) (it began on the
evening of the day after the new moon, at the rise of
the full moon, when the sun is in the Ram), the
exodus from Egypt was supposed to have taken place
on the morning which followed this night. The
Passah continued for seven days, in which, from the
morning of the second day to the evening of the
seventh, only unleavened bread could be eaten, i. e.
the firstlings of the corn in their original form, and no
business could be carried on. On each of the seven
days of the feast, according to the law, two young bulls,
a ram and seven yearling lambs were offered as a burnt
offering for Israel in the temple, and besides these a
goat, as a sin offering. The neglect of the festival,
the eating of leavened bread on any of the days, was
threatened by the law with extirpation from the com-
munity.1 As the greater number of the tribes attained
to a settled life and agriculture, the feast of the ripe
fruits or harvest naturally rose to importance beside
this festival of the earliest fruits. Seven full weeks
after the commencement of the Passah, or six weeks
after the end of it, the feast of new bread was cele-
brated. The sheaves were brought, the corn trodden

1 Exod. xii 15—19; Numbers ix. 13; xxviii. 16—24.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 209

out, the first new meal prepared. According to the
law, each house in Israel, i. e., no doubt, each which
possessed land and flocks, had to bring two leavened
firstling loaves of new wheaten meal and two yearling
lambs as a thank offering. Before these were offered
no one could eat bread made from the new corn.1 The
festival of autumn, which took place in the seventh
month of the Hebrew year (September — October), from
the fourteenth to the twenty-first day of the month,
was merrier and of longer duration. It was the
festival of the completion of the in-gathering, and of
the vintage, and consequently can hardly go back
beyond the. time of the settlement in Canaan.2 It
was customary to erect arbours of palm leaves, willows,
and oak branches, as was indeed necessary at a time
when men were occupied in remote orchards and vine-
yards, and in these the feast was kept, unless it was
preferred to keep it at some important place of
sacrifice, in order to offer the thank offering there,3 and
in this case those who came to the feast also passed
the day in tents or arbours. Like the feast of spring,
the feast of tabernacles continued for seven days.
According to the law, Israel was to offer 70 bulls, 14
rams, and seven times 14 lambs at this festival as a
burnt offering. To this feast also a historical mean-
ing was given ; the tabernacles were erected to
remind Israel of the fact that he had once dwelt in
tents in the wilderness.

At these three festivals, " thrice in the year, all
the males of Israel must appear before Jehovah." 4
Such was the law of the priests. It was the intention

1 Levit. xxii. 9—21.

2 At the division of the kingdom Jeroboam is said to have changed
this festival to the fifteenth day of the eighth month ; 1 Kings xii. 33.

3 E.g. 1 Sam. i. 3 ; 1 Kings xii. 27—32.
* Exod. xxiii. 13; xxxiv. 23.

VOL. II. P

210 ISRAEL.

of the priests that the three great festivals should
be celebrated at the dwelling of Jehovah, i. e. at
the tabernacle, and afterwards at the temple ; hence
at the great festivals the Israelites were to go to
Jerusalem. But the strict carrying out of such a
common celebration was opposed to the character
of the festivals themselves. We saw that even when
the sacred ark still stood at Shiloh, pilgrimages
were made thither once a year at the festival of
Jehovah. After the erection of the tabernacle and the
temple this, no doubt, took place more frequently,
and the numbers were greater. Yet the object of the
priests could not be completely realised. The paschal
festival was the redemption of the separate house, of
each individual family. This meaning and object was
very definitely stamped on the ritual. In a similar
manner, the feast of the beginning of harvest and
of the first fruits required celebration at home, on the
plot of land, and this was still more the case with the
festival of thanksgiving for the completed harvest.

Before the people rejoiced in the blessing of the
completed harvest at the feast of tabernacles, all mis-
deeds which might have defiled the year to that time
must be cancelled and removed by a special sacrifice.
For this object the law on this occasion made a require-
ment never demanded at any other time. From the
evening of the ninth to the evening of the tenth day
there was not only a cessation of business, but a strict
fast was kept. Every man among the people must
subject himself to this regulation, and he who trans-
gressed it was threatened with the loss of bis life.1 The
high priest had first to cleanse himself and the other
priests, and then the dwelling of Jehovah ; for even the
sanctuary might be defiled by the inadvertence of the

1 Levit. xxiii. 29.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 211

priests. When the high priest had bathed he must clothe
himself in a coat and trousers of white linen, with a
girdle and head-band of the same material, and offer a
young bull as a sin offering. Bearing a vessel filled with
the blood of this victim, and with the censer from the
altar of incense in the interior of the sanctuary, which
contained burning coals and frankincense, the high
priest went alone into the holy of holies, behind the
curtain before the ark of the covenant. Immediately
on his entrance the clouds arising from the censer must
fill the chamber, that the priest might not see the face
of Jehovah over the cherubs and die. Then the high
priest sprinkled the blood from the vessel seven times
towards the ark, and when thus cleansed he turned
back to the court of the sanctuary, in which two goats
stood ready for sacrifice. He cast lots which of the
two should be sacrificed to Jehovah and which to
Azazel, the evil spirit of the desert. When the lot
was cast, the high priest laid his hand on the head of
the goat assigned to Azazel, confessed all the sins arid
transgressions of Israel on this goat, and laid them on
his head, in order that he might" carry them into the
desert-land into which the goat was driven from the
sanctuary. Then the high priest slew the other goat
assigned to Jehovah, and, returning into the holy of
holies, sprinkled with his blood the ark of the coven-
ant for the second time, in order to purify the people.
When the altar of incense, in the outer part of the
sanctuary, had been sprinkled in a similar manner, the
high priest declared that Jehovah was appeased.
After a second bath he put on his usual robes, and
offered three rams as burnt offerings for himself, the
priesthood, and the nation.1

All sacrifices were to be offered at the tabernacle,

1 Lerit. xvi., xxiii. 26—32.

P2

212 ISRAEL.

" before the dwelling of Jehovah ; " and afterwards

0 '

in like manner in the temple. The law of the priests
threatened any one with death who sacrificed else-
where.1 The most essential regulations for the offering
of sacrifice are perhaps the following: — Any one who
intended to bring an offering must purify himself for
several days. Wild animals could not be offered. In
the Hebrew conception the sacrifice is the surrender
of a part of a man's possessions and enjoyments.
Hence only domestic offerings could be offered, because
only these are really property. Cattle, sheep, and
goats were the animals appointed for sacrifice. The
poorer people were also allowed to offer doves. Each
victim must be without blemish and healthy, and it
must not be weakened and desecrated by labour.
Before the animal was killed the sacrificer laid his
hand on its head for a time ; then he who offered
the sacrifice, whether priest or layman, slew the
victim, but only the priest could receive the warm
blood in the sacrificial vessel. With this vessel in his
hand the priest went round the altar and sprinkled
the feet, the corners, and the sides of it with the
blood of the victim. In the Hebrew conception the
life of the victim was in its blood, and thus the sprink-
lings which were to be made with it form the most
important part of the holy ceremony. From ancient
times the burnt offering was the most solemn kind of
sacrifice. Only male animals, and, as a rule, bulls and
rams, could be offered as burnt offerings. When they
had been slain and skinned these offerings were
entirely burnt in the fire on the altar, without any
part being enjoyed by the sacrificer or the priest, as
was the case in other kinds of offerings ; only the skin
fell to the share of the priests. As the burnt offering

1 Levit. xyii. 3 — 5.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 213

was intended to gain the favour of Jehovah, so were
the sin offerings intended to appease his anger and
blot out transgressions. For sin offerings female
animals were used as a rule, as male animals for the
burnt offerings,1 but young bulls and he-goats were
also offered as expiatory offerings for the whole people,
and for oversights or transgressions of the priests in
the ritual, and for sin offerings for princes. In sin
offerings only certain parts of the entrails were burnt,
the kidneys, the liver, and other parts ; and in this
sacrifice the priests sprinkled the blood on the horns
of the altar ; the flesh which was not burned belonged
to the priests. In thank offerings and offerings of
slaughter (so called because in these the slaying and
eating of the victim was the principal matter) only the
fat was burnt, the priests kept the breast and the
right thigh,2 the rest was eaten by the sacrificer at a
banquet with the guests whom he had invited ; but
this banquet must be held at the place of sacrifice, on
the same or at any rate on the following day. Drink
offerings consisted of libations of wine, which were
poured on and round the altar (libations of water
are also mentioned, though not in the law, p. 115) ;
the food offerings in fruits, corn, and white meal, which
the priests threw into the fire of the altar ; in bread and
cookery, which, drenched with oil and sprinkled with
salt and incense, was partly burned, and partly fell to
the lot of the priests. Lastly, the incense offerings
consisted in the burning of incense, which did not take
place, like the other sacrifices, on the larger altar in
the court of the sanctuary, but on the small altar,
which stood in the space before the holy of holies
of the tabernacle, and afterwards of the temple.3

1 Levit. i. — Yi. 2 Levit. vii. 23 — 34, and in other passages.

3 Supr. p. 183. Exod.xxx. 1—9.

214 ISRAEL.

According to the law, a service was to be continu-
ally going on in the dwelling of Jehovah. The sacred
fire on the altar in the interior of the tabernacle was
never to be quenched ; before the holy of holies on
the sacred table twelve unleavened loaves always lay
sprinkled with salt and incense, as a symbolical and
continual offering of the twelve tribes. Each Sabbath
this bread was renewed, and the loaves when removed
fell to the priests. Before the curtain of the holy of
holies the candlestick with seven lamps was always
burning, and every morning and evening the priests
of the temple were to offer a male sheep as a
burnt offering at the dwelling of Jehovah, and two
sheep on the morning and evening of the Sabbath.
The high priest had also to make an offering of corn
every morning and evening.1

Beside the sacrifice, the law of the priests required
the observance of a whole series of regulations for
purity. It is not merely bodily cleanliness which
these laws required of the Israelites, nor is it merely a
natural abhorrence of certain disgusting objects which
lies at the base of these prescriptions; it is not
merely that to the simple mind physical and moral
purity appear identical, that moral evil is conceived
as a defilement of the body ; nor are these regula-
tions merely intended to place a certain restriction
on natural states and impulses. These factors had
their weight, but beside them all a certain side of
nature and of the natural life was set apart as im-
pure and unholy. The laws of purity among the
Israelites are far less strict and comprehensive than
those of the Egyptians and the Indians ; but if we
unite them with the ritual by which transgressions of

1 Levit. vi. 12, 13; ix. 17.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 215

these rules were done away and made good, they form
a system entering somewhat deeply into the life of the
nation.

For the laity also the law required and prescribed
cleanliness of clothing. Stuffs of two kinds might not
be worn ; pomegranates must be fixed on the corners
of the robe. The field and vineyard might not be
sown with two kinds of seed ; nor could ox and ass be
yoked together before the plough.1 Certain animals
were unclean, and these might not be eaten. The
clean and permitted food was obtained from oxen,
sheep, goats, and in wild animals from deer, wild-
goats, and gazelles, and in fact from all animals which
ruminate and have cloven feet. Unclean are all flesh-
eating animals with paws, and more especially the
camel, the swine, the hare, and the coney. Of fish,
those only might be eaten which have fins and scales ;
all fish resembling snakes, like eels, might not be
eaten. Most water-fowl are unclean ; pigeons and
quails, on the other hand, were permitted food. All
creeping things, winged or not, with the exception of
locusts, are forbidden.2 Moreover, if the permitted
animals were not slain in the proper manner their
flesh was unclean ; if it had " died of itself," or was
strangled, or torn by wild beasts,3 the use of the
blood of the animal was most strictly forbidden, " for
the life of all flesh is the blood ; " even of the animals
which might be eaten the blood must be poured on the
earth and covered with earth.4 As the eating of for-

O

bidden food made a man unclean, so also did all sexual
functions of man or woman, and all diseases connected
with these functions, including lying in child-bed.
Every one was also unclean on whose body was "a

1 Numbers xv. 38 ; Levit. xix. 19. 2 Levit. xi. 1 — 44.

3 Levit. xvii. 15. 4 Levit. xvii. 14.

216 ISRAEL.

rising scab or bright spot," but above all the white
leprosy rendered the sufferer unclean.1 Finally, any
contact with the. corpse of man or beast, whether
intentional or accidental, rendered a man unclean.
The house in which a man died, with all the utensils,
was unclean ; any one who touched a grave or a human
bone was tainted.2

The priestly regulations set forth in great detail
the ceremonies, the washings and sacrifices, by which
defilements were to be removed. The unclean person
must avoid the sanctuary, and even society and contact
with others, till the time of his purification, which in
serious defilements can only begin after the lapse of a
certain time. In the more grievous cases ordinary
water did not suffice for the cleansing, but from the
ashes of a red cow without blemish, which was slain as
a sin offering and entirely burnt, the priest prepared
a special water of purification with cedar wood and
bunches of hyssop. The reception of healed lepers
required the most careful preparations and most scru-
pulous manipulations.

Among the regulations of purity is reckoned the
custom of circumcision, which was practised among the
Israelites, and retained by the law. Yet the reason
for this peculiar custom, which according to the regula-
tions of the priests was performed on the eighth day
after birth, the first day of the second week of life,3

1 Levit. xiii., xiv.

3 The spoils taken in war are also to be purified; Numbers xxxi.
20—24.

3 Levit. xii. 3. The Arabian tribes in the north of the peninsula,
who were nearly related to the Hebrews, observed this custom, and
the Phenicians also, while the Philistines did not observe it ; Herod. 2,
104. In Genesis (xxi. 4 ; xvii. 12 — 14, 25) it is expressly mentioned
that Ishmael was not circumcised till his thirteenth year, but Isaac was
circumcised at the proper time, on the eighth day. This shows that
circumcision was a very ancient custom among the Israelites, and at

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 217

seems to lie in other motives rather than in the desire
to remove a certain part of the male body which was
regarded as unclean. We saw above that according
to the old conception of the Israelites the firstborn
must be ransomed from Jehovah, that the life of all
boys, if it was to be secured, must be purchased from
Jehovah (I. 414, 448). Hence, if we may follow the
hint of an obscure narrative, it is not improbable that
circumcision of the reproductive member was a vicarious
blood-sacrifice for the life of the boy. When Moses
returned from the land of Midian to Egypt — so we
learn from the Ephraimitic text — " Jehovah met him
in the inn, and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah
took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son,
and cast it at his feet, and he departed from him." l
To the Israelites circumcision was a symbol of their
connection with the nation, of their covenant with
Jehovah and selection by him.

The most important part of the purity of the
people of Jehovah was their maintenance of his wor-
ship, the strict severance of Israel from the religion of
their neighbours and community with them. It was
now seen what influence living and mingling with the
Canaanites had exercised in the national worship, and
it was perceived what an attraction the Syrian rites
had presented for centuries to the nation, and what a
power they still had upon them. Hence even Moses
was said to have given the command to destroy the
altars and images of the Canaanites, to drive out
all the Canaanites, and make neither covenant nor

the same time indicates that among the Arabs the boys were not cir-
cumcised till later years, which may have been the case in the older
times among the Hebrews also. Of. Joshua v. 1 — 9; Joseph. " An-
tiq." 1, 12, 3.

1 Exod. iv. 24; cf. De Wette-Schrader, " Einleitung," s. 282.

218 ISRAEL.

marriage with them.1 The law forbade sacrifices to
Moloch under penalty of death ; any one who did so
was to be stoned. Those who made offerings to other
gods than Jehovah were to be "accursed" (I. 499).
Wizards were also to be stoned.2 " Ye shall not round
the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the
corners of thy beard. Ye shall not make any cuttings
in your flesh for the dead, nor print any mark upon
you. Do not prostitute thy daughter to cause her to
play the harlot." 3 All these are commands directed
against the manners, funeral customs, and religious
worship of the Canaanites. Strangers were not to be
received into the community and people of Israel ;
nor could Israelites contract marriage with women
who were not Israelites ; it is only the later law which
allows women captured in war to be taken into the
marriage bed.4 These are the " misanthropical " laws
of the Jews of which Tacitus speaks with such deep
aversion.

The law assigned a far-reaching religious influence
to the priests. They alone could turn the favour of
Jehovah towards his people by correct and effective
sacrifices, and appease his wrath ; they announced the
will of Jehovah by his oracle ; in regard to diseases
and leprosy, they exercised police functions over the
whole nation by means of the regulations for cleanli-
ness and food ; they could exclude any one at their
discretion from the sacrifices and, consequently, from
the community ; and, in fine, they were in possession of
the skill and knowledge with which the people were
unacquainted. The priesthood arranged the chronology

1 Numbers xxxiii. 50 — 56; Exod. xxiii. 29 ff; xxxiv. 12 — 16;
Vol. i. 500.

2 Levit. xviii. 21 ; xx. 2, 27 ; Exod. xxii. 18.

3 Levit. xix. 27—29. * Deut. xxi. 11—14; cf. Numbers xii. 1.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 219

and the festivals, they supervised weights and measures,1
they knew the history of the people in past ages, and
their ancient covenant with the God of the ancestors.
From their knowledge of the ordinances of Jehovah
followed the claim which the priests made to watch
over the application of these ordinances in life, the
administration of law and justice. But at first this
claim was put forward modestly. The old regulations
about the right of blood in the time-honoured observ-
ances of justice were added to the law of ritual when
this was written down (I. 385, 484) ; they were modified
here and there by the views of the priesthood, and in
some points essentially extended ; and now, like the
ordinances for the places of sacrifice, mode of worship,
and purification, they stood opposed in many regulations
to real life as ideal but hardly practicable standards.

According to the view of the priests Jehovah was the
true possessor of the land of Israel. He had given it
to his people for tenure and use. From this concep-
tion the law derived very peculiar conclusions, which
might be of essential advantage for retaining the
property of the families in their hands, for keeping
•up the family and their possessions, on which the
Hebrews laid weight, and for proprietors when in
debt. To aid the debtor against the creditor, the
poor against the rich, the labourer against him who
gave the work, the slave against his master, is in
other ways also the obvious object of the law.

As all work must cease on the seventh day, the day
of Jehovah, so must there be a similar cessation in the
seventh year, which is therefore called the Sabbath
year. In every seventh year the Israelites were to
allow the land which Jehovah had let to them to lie
fallow, in honour of the real owner. In this year the

1 Levit. xix. 35, 36.

220 ISRAEL.

land was not sowed, nor the vine-trees cut, nor the
wild beast driven from the field, every one must seek
on the fallow what had grown there without culture.
If this Sabbath of the seventh year was kept Jehovah
would send such increase on the preceding sixth year
that there should be no want.1 When this period of
seven fallow years had occurred seven times the circle
appeared to be complete, and from this point of view
the law ordained that at such a time everything
should return to the original position. Hence, when
the seventh Sabbath year was seven times repeated (in
the year of Jubilee) not only was agriculture stopped,
hut all alienated property, with the buildings and
belongings, went back to the original owner or his
heirs.2 The consequence was that properties were
never really sold, but the use of them was assigned to
others, and hence, even before the year of Jubilee, the
owner could redeem his land by paying the value of
the produce which would be yielded before the year of
Jubilee.

But the priests were far from being able to carry
out these extended requirements which proceeded from
the sanctity of the Sabbath, and from the conception
that the land of Israel belonged to Jehovah, and
every family held their property from Jehovah him-
self, and which were intended to make plain the true
nature of the property of the Israelites. It was an
ideal picture which they set up, and hardly so much as
an attempt was made to carry it out. They could
reckon with more certainty on obedience to a law
which ordained that no interest was to be taken
from the poor, and no poor man's mantle was to be
taken in pledge.3 Nevertheless, the law of debt was

1 Exod. xxiii. 10, 11 ; Levit. xxv. 20.

2 Levit. xxv. 24—31. 3 Exod. xxii. 25—27 ; Levit. xxv. 35—38.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 221

severe. If the debtor could not pay his debt before a
fixed time the creditor was allowed to pay himself
with the moveable and fixed property of the debtor ;
he could sell his wife and children, and even the
debtor himself, as slaves, or use him as a slave in his
own service.

For the legal process we find in the law no more
than the regulation " that one witness shall not bear
evidence against a man for his death," i. e. that one
witness was not sufficient to establish a serious charge,
that "injustice shall not be done in judgment, that
the person of the small shall not be disregarded, nor
the person of the great honoured ; " " according to
law thou shalt judge thy neighbour." l For every
injury done to the person or property of another, the
guilty shall make reparation. We know already the old
ordinances which require life for life, eye for eye, and
tooth for tooth (I. 485). Injury to property and
possession was to be fully compensated ; even the
injury done by his beast was to^be compensated by the
master. Theft was merely punished by restoring four
or five times the value of the stolen goods. If the
thief could not pay this compensation he was handed
over to the injured man as a slave. But any one who
steals a man in order to keep him as a slave, or to sell
him, was to be punished with death.2 If a murder
was committed, the avenger of blood, i. e. the nearest
relative and heir of the murdered man, was to pursue
the murderer and slay him, wherever he met him, as
soon as it was established by two persons that he was
really guilty. The law even forbade the avenger of
blood to accept a ransom instead of taking the life of
the guilty, because the land was desecrated by the
blood of the murdered man, " and the land is not

1 Numbers xxxv. 30 ; Levit. xix. 15. l Exod. xxi. 16.

222 ISRAEL.

cleansed from the blood spilt, save by the blood
of the murderer." An exception was allowed only
when one man slew another by accident, and with-
out any fault of his own, and not out of hostility or
hatred. In this case the slayer was to fly into one
of the six cities which were marked out as cities of
refuge.1 From the elders of the city the pursuing
avenger of blood was to demand the delivery of the
slayer, and they were to decide whether the act was
done from hatred and hostility, or was merely an acci-
dent. If the elders decided in favour of the first
alternative, they were to give up the guilty into the
hands of the avenger of blood, that he might die. In
the other case, the slayer must remain in the city of
refuge till the death of the high priest, and the
avenger was free from the guilt of bloodshed if before
that time he met him beyond the confines of the city
of refuge and slew him.2 The regulations of the
priests even went so far as to lay down a rule that if
a savage bull slew a man the bull was not only to be
stoned, and not eaten as an unclean animal, but his
master also must die, or at any rate pay a ransom, if
he knew that the animal was savage, and yet did not
control him.3

Among the people of the East the wealthier men did
not content themselves with one wife. This custom
prevailed in Israel also. The law of the priests did
not oppose a custom which had an example and
justification in the narratives of the patriarchs. The
Israelites also followed the general custom of the East,
in purchasing the wife from her father, and recom-
pensing the father for the loss of a useful piece of
property — for the two working hands which he lost

1 Exod. xxi. 12 — 14; Numbers xxxv. 31 ; Joshua xx. 7 — 9.

2 Numbers xxxv. 25—28. 3 Exod. xxi. 28—36.

THE LAW OF THE PRIESTS. 223

when he gave away his daughter from his house.
Thus Jacob obtained the daughters of Laban by a
service of 14 years. The price of a wife purchased
for marriage from the father seems to have been from
15 to 50 shekels of silver (36*. to 125s.).1 The con-
clusion of the marriage was marked by a special
festivity, after which the bride was carried by her
parents into the nuptial chamber. The prostitution of
maidens in honour of the goddess of birth, so common
among the neighbouring nations, was strictly for-
bidden by the book of the law. The daughter of a
priest who began to prostitute herself was to be burnt
with fire, because she thus " defiled not herself only,
but also her father." 2 The man who seduced a virgin
was compelled to purchase her for his wife, and even
if her father would not give her to wife he was to
pay him the usual purchase-money. Adultery was
punished by the law with even greater severity than
violations of chastity before marriage. The adulteress,
together with the man who had seduced her into a
violation of the marriage bond, were to be put to
death.3 If a man suspected his wife of unfaithfulness
without being able to prove it against her a divine
judgment was to decide the matter. The priest
was to lead man and wife before Jehovah. Then
he was to draw holy water in an earthen pitcher,
and throw dust swept from the floor of the dwelling
of Jehovah into this, and say to the woman, " If
thou hast not offended in secret against thy husband,
remain unpunished by this water of sorrow, that
bringeth the curse ; but if thou hast sinned, may this
water go into thy body and cause thy thighs to rot,

1 Exod. xxi. 32 ; Hosea iii. 2 ; cf. Deuteron. xxii. 19, 29.

2 Levit. xix. 29 ; xxi. 9. 3 Levit. xviii. 20 ; xx. 10.

224 ISRAEL.

•and may Jehovah make thee a curse and an oath
among thy people." The woman answered, " So be
it ;" and when the priest had dipped in the water a
sheet written with the words of this curse, she was
compelled to drink it.1 Thus the woman was brought
to confession, or was freed from the suspicion of her
husband.

Marriages were forbidden not only with strange
women, but also within certain degrees of relation-
ship ; in which were included not only those close
degrees, to which there is a natural abhorrence, but
also such as did not exclude marriage in other nations.
In this matter the law of the priests proceeded from
the sound view that marriage did not belong to a
natural connection already in existence, but was intended
to found a new relationship. Not only was marriage
forbidden with a mother, with any wife or concubine
of the father, with a sister, a daughter, or grand-
" daughter, a widowed daughter-in-law ; but also with

O ' O

an aunt on the father's or mother's side, with a step-
sister, or sister by marriage, with a sister-in-law, or
wife's sister so long as the wife lived.2

The husband purchased his wife as a chattel ; hence
in marriage she continued to live in entire dependence
beside her husband. The husband could not commit
adultery as against his wife ; it was the right of
another husband which was injured by the seduction
of the wife. It rested with the husband to take as
many wives as he chose beside his first wife, and as
many concubines from his handmaids and female
slaves as seemed good to him. The husband could
put away his wife if she "found no favour in his
eyes," while the wife, on her part, could not dissolve

1 Numbers v. 5 — 31. l Levit. xviii

THE LAW OF THE. PRIESTS. 225

the marriage, or demand a separation; she possessed
no legal will. Like the wife, the children stood to
the father in a relation of the most complete de-
pendence. Nor only did he sell his daughters for
marriage, he could give them as pledges, or even sell
them as slaves, but not out of the land ; l and though
the father was not allowed to sell the son as a slave,
he could turn him out of his house. Obedience and
reverence towards parents were impressed strongly on
children, even in the earliest regulations derived from
the time of Moses. The son who curses his father or
mother, or strikes them, must be put to death.2 The
first-born son is the heir of the house ; after the death
of the father he is the head of the family, and succeeds
to his rights over the younger sons and the females.
It is not clear whether the law allows any claims to
the moveable inheritance to any of the sons besides
the eldest, to whom the immoveable property passed
absolutely ; the sons of concubines and slaves had no
right of inheritance if there were sons in existence by
legitimate marriage. Daughters could only inherit if
there were no sons. The heiress could not marry
beyond the tribe, in order that the inheritance might
at least fall to the lot of a tribesman. If there were
neither sons nor daughters, the brother of the father
was the heir, and then the uncles of the father.3

The law attempts to fix and ameliorate the position
of day-labourers and slaves. " The hire of the labourer
shall not remain with thee till the morrow."4 The
number of slaves appears to have been considerable.
They were partly captives taken in war, and partly
strangers purchased in the way of trade ; partly He-

1 Exod. xxi. 7, 8. 2 Exod. xxi. 17; Levit. xx. 9.

3 Numbers xxxvi. 1 — 11 ; Tobit vii. 10; Numbers xxvii. 9.
* Levit. xix. 13.

VOL. II. *

226 ISRAEL.

brews who, when detected in thieving, could not pay
the compensation, or who could not pay their debts,
or Hebrew daughters sold by their parents. The
marriages of slaves increased their number. The law
required that slaves should rest on the Sabbath day ; 1
and even the oldest regulations restrict the right of
the master over the life of his slave by laying down
the rule that the slave shall be free if his master has
inflicted a severe wound upon him, and that the master
must be punished if he has slain his slave.2 The slave
who was a born Israelite might be ransomed by his
kindred, if they could pay the sum required.3 The
Hebrew slave was treated by his master as a hired
labourer, and hind.4 When the Hebrew slave had
served six years his master was compelled to set him
free without ransom in the seventh year. . A Hebrew
could only remain in slavery for ever when, after six
years of service, he voluntarily declared that ho wished
to remain with his master ; then, as a sign that he
permanently belonged to the house of his master, his
ear was pierced on the door-post with an awl.

1 Exod. xx. 10. 2 Exod. xxi. 20, 21, 26; Vol. i. 483.

3 Levit. xxv. 47 ff. * Levit. xxv. 39 — 11.

CHAPTER X.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL.

THE monarchy in Israel was established by the people
to check the destruction and ruin with which the land
and population were threatened by the incursions of the
neighbours on the east, by the dangerous arms of the
Philistines. The first attempt to set up a monarchy in
connection with the cities of the land was soon wrecked
and swept away, without leaving a trace behind. In
spite of- his support in the wishes of the great majority of
the Israelites, the monarchy of Saul had not succeeded
in establishing itself securely by its simple and popular
conduct. It was not till the monarchy had fortified the
royal city and palace, established a body-guard and
standing troops, magistrates and tax-gatherers, and
had entered into close relation with the priests, that
it obtained security and permanence. It had indeed
fulfilled its mission and saved Israel ; it had won
power, glory, and respect for the nation, and imparted
to it lofty impulses of the most important kind. It
had at the same time gone far beyond the intention
of its foundation. It was now a Sultanate, which, by
filling the land with Syrian trade and customs, and
allowing the growth of Syrian modes of worship,
threatened in one direction the nationality with the
same dangers which it had removed in another.

The transformation which the manner of life in

228 ISRAEL.

Israel underwent during the reigns of David and
Solomon was scT thorough that even under David a
reaction set in. If in the time before David and
Solomon the Israelites had led an unrestrained life,
they were now ruled by a severe monarchy. In the
place of the patriarchal authority of the elders and
heads of tribes, whose decisions they had formerly
sought, came the rule of royal officers, who could
exercise their power capriciously enough. If hitherto
they had lived unmolested, every man on his own plot,
beneath his vine and fig tree, they were now compelled
to pay taxes and do task- work. After the burdens Solo-
mon had laid upon the people, this reaction must have
been stronger than at the time when Absalom's rebellion
shattered the throne of his father. Moreover, Solomon's
reign, though it lasted full 40 years, did not give the
same impression of vigorous power as David's strong
arm had done before him, and the monarchy was not
so old, nor so firmly established as an institution, that
the Israelites could not remember the times which
preceded it.

No doubt the tribe of Judah could bear the new
burdens, because it enjoyed the advantages of the
new polity. The king belonged to this tribe ; the
temple and metropolis were in its territory. But the
interests of the other tribes were the more deeply
injured. Above all, the tribe of Ephraim must have
felt itself degraded. In this tribe the memory of
Joshua still lived, the remembrance of the conquest of
the land ; once it had held the foremost place, and on
its soil the ark of Jehovah had stood. Now the pre-emi-
nence was with Judah, the tribe which had long been
subject to the Philistines ; the sacred ark stood at
Jerusalem, and the ancient places of sacrifice were
neglected. Of the feeling of the tribe of Ephraim we

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 229

have indubitable evidence in an attempt at rebellion
at the beginning of the last decade of the reign of
Solomon; an attempt, it is true, which was quickly
suppressed.1

When Solomon died, in the year 953 B.C., it was
not the contests between his sons or the intrigues
of the harem which now threatened the succession.
Rehoboam, Solomon's eldest son, who was born to
him by Naamah the Ammonite, was now in his forty-
second year, and thus in the vigour of age. This
vigour he needed. At the news of Solomon's death
the people gathered to their old place of assembly at
Shechem. This self-collected assembly showed that
the majority of Israel were mindful of their right to
elect the king. The greatest circumspection and tact
were needed to avert the approaching storm. Reho-
boam saw that he must not look idly on. He must
either attempt to disperse the assembled multitude by
force and maintain the crown by arms, or he must treat
with it. Hence he set forth to Shechem, accompanied
by the counsellors of his father. A deputation of the
people met him, and said, " Thy father made our yoke
grievous ; now therefore make thou the grievous service
of thy father, and his heavy yoke which he put upon
us, lighter, and we will serve thee." Rehoboam
promised to make an answer on the third day. He
assembled his counsellors. The old men among them

1 1 Kings xi. 26 ff place the rebellion of Jeroboam in the time when
Solomon built Millo (p. 186), and give him asylum with Shishak,
king of Egypt. Solomon built Millo, the walls of Jerusalem, and the
fortifications (p. 186) when the building of the palace was finished
(1 Kings ix. 10, 15, 24). The building of the palace was completed in
970 B.C. (p. 186) ; hence the building of Millo must have begun
about this time. It can hardly have lasted more than 10 years.
Jeroboam's rebellion, therefore, and Shishak's accession are not to be
placed after, but a little before, 960 B.C. Lepsius puts Shishak's acces-
sion at 961 B.C.

230 ISRAEL.

— so all the older text of the Books of Kings tells
us — advised compliance, and recommended him to
speak kindly to the people ; the younger, who had
grown up with the new king, and were accustomed
to flatter him, and desired unrestricted power over the
people, urged him to reject strongly such claims and
such rebellion. Rehoboam was foolish enough to
follow advice which could not but be ruinous.
Although he can hardly have said to the people the
words which the Books of Kings put in his mouth —
" My father chastised you with whips, but I will chas-
tise you with scorpions," — he rejected the demand of
the Israelites. Then a cry arose in the assembly of the
people, " We have no part in David, nor any inherit-
ance in the son of Jesse ; to your tents, O Israel ! "
When it was too late Rehoboam attempted to soothe
the enraged multitude. He sent his task-master,
Adoniram, to them, but the people slew the ill-chosen
messenger by stoning him to death. Nothing
remained for Rehoboam but to mount his chariot in
haste and fly to Jerusalem.

The grievous distress which 100 years before had
caused the nation at Gilgal to proclaim Saul king
with one consent, and which after the death of
Ishbosheth had united the tribes round David at
Hebron, had long passed away. The danger which
division had once brought upon Israel had faded into
the distance, and was forgotten in the security which
had prevailed in the last generations against the neigh-
bours on every side. Nothing was thought of but the
immediate evil and the coming oppression, if the
monarchy went further on the lines on which it was
treading. At the time of Solomon an Ephraimite named
Jeroboam, the son of Nabath (Nebat) of Zereda, who is
spoken of as " a brave man," was a second overseer

JUDAH AKD ISRAEL. 231

among the task-labourers. AP. he was skilful in the
discharge of his duties, Solomon raised him to be the
overseer of the task-work of his tribe. This office,
which made him known to all his tribe, Jeroboam must
have discharged in such a way as to gain the favour
rather than the aversion of the tribesmen. We are
told in a few words that " Jeroboam raised his hand
against Solomon," and that " Solomon sought to slay
him." Jeroboam escaped to Egypt, and found refuge
with the Pharaoh Shishak (about 960 B.C.). Immedi-
ately after Solomon's death Jeroboam received a mes-
sage from his tribesmen to return. Kehoboam's refusal
to carry on a milder form of government decided the
choice of Jeroboam as king. That choice declared suffi-
ciently the degree of aversion which the multitude bore
to the house of David and the monarchy at Jerusalem.
The chief city, the tribe of Judah, the tribe of
Simeon, so long united in close connection with Judah,
and a part of the tribe of Benjamin, whose land lay
immediately at the gates of Jerusalem, remained true
to the son of Solomon. From the tribe of Judah the
rise and dominion of David had its commencement ;
to them that dominion was now returned, and was again
confined within its early limits. The question was
whether Rehoboam could achieve what his grandfather
David had succeeded in doing — could regain the
dominion over the whole land from Judah. Rehoboam
thought, no doubt, that he could reduce by the power
of his arms the tribes which had withdrawn them-
selves from his dominion. He armed and assembled
the warriors of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. If
he soon abandoned this intention, the reason hardly
lies in the warning of the prophet Semaiah, as the
prophetic revision maintains in a passage interpolated
into the annals, — we are told at the same time that

232 ISRAEL.

there had been " a contention between Rehoboam and
Jeroboam from the first," : —but in the fact that a
mightier enemy came upon Rehoboam.

From the time when the Hebrews won their abode
in Canaan, they had not been molested in any way
from Egypt, where the rulers since the reign of Ramses
III. rested quietly by the Nile. Solomon, as we saw
(p. 180), entered into friendly relations with Egypt,
and even into affinity. But in the later years of his
reign a new dynasty ascended the throne of Egypt in
the person of Shishak, which took up a different
attitude. With him Jeroboam had found refuge
from the pursuit of Solomon. It was to Jeroboam's
interest, no less than Shishak's, that this connection
should continue after Jeroboam became king of Israel.
It is not improbable that Shishak made war upon
Rehoboam in order to secure Jeroboam in his new
dominion. Whether Jeroboam sought the help of
Egypt or not, why should not Egypt have availed
herself of the breach in the Israelitish kingdom which
had reached such a height in Syria under David
and Solomon, and forced her way even to the borders
of Egypt ? Why should she not establish the division
and the weakness of Israel ? At the same time, in
all probability, a cheap reputation for military valour
might be obtained, and the treasures of Solomon seized.
In the year 949 B.C., the fifth year of Rehoboam's reign,
the Pharaoh invaded Judah. He is said to " have
come with 1200 chariots, and 60,000 horsemen; and
the people who accompanied him from Egypt, Libya,
and Ethiopia were beyond number." Rehoboam could
not withstand the power of Shishak ; one city after
another, including Jerusalem, opened her gates to the
Pharaoh. The glory of Solomon was past and gone.

1 1 Kings xii. 22 ; xiv. 30.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 233

Shishak took away the treasures of the temple and
the royal palace, and the gold shields which Solomon
had caused to be made for the body-guard. There
was no thought of a lasting conquest and the sub-
jugation of Syria ; the object was merely to weaken,
plunder, and reduce Judah. When this object was
obtained the Pharaoh turned back to Egypt. On the
outer walls of the temple of Karnak we may see the
gigantic form of Shishak, who brandishes the weapon
of victory over a crowd of conquered enemies; 133
bearded figures are to be seen, with their hands tied
behind them, whom Ammon and Mut are leading
before Shishak. The lower part of these figures is
covered by the name-shields. They represent the
places in the kingdom of Judah, which in equal num-
ber were taken or were taxed by the Pharaoh. Of
these 133 name-shields about 100 are still legible, but
few names are found among these which correspond to
known places in Judaea. We may perhaps recognise
Jehud, Ajalon, Beth-Horon, G-ibeon, Beeroth, Simmon
in the north of Judah or in Benjamin ; Engedi and
Adullam in the east; Lachish, Adoraim, Mareshah,
Kegilah (Keilah), and some other places in the centre
of Judah. A.s there is scarcely one among these names
which can with certainty be apportioned to the king-
dom of Israel, the conclusion may naturally be drawn
that the campaign was made with a favourable regard
to Jeroboam, and was confined to Judah.1

1 O. Blau in " Zeitschr. D. M. GK" 10, 233 ff, and below. The shield
which. Champollion read Judaha Malek is read Jehud by Blau, who
refers it to Jehud, a place of the Southern Danites. Even the occur-
rence of names of towns belonging to the kingdom of Ephraim would
not exclude the possibility that Shishak' s campaign was undertaken
in favour of Jeroboam. Jeroboam acknowledged the supremacy of
Egypt in the meaning of the Pharaoh when he called on Egypt for help,
and therefore, after the manner of Egyptian monuments of victory and
inscriptions, his cities could be denoted as subject to Egypt. Hence

234 _ ISRAEL.

It was a heavy blow which had befallen the little
kingdom, and, what was still worse, Jeroboam could
avail himself of it, and the Pharaoh could repeat his
raid. Kehoboam saw that the only way to increase
the power of resistance in his kingdom and prevent its
overthrow was to strengthen the fortifications of the
metropolis, and change all the larger towns in the land
into fortresses. He carried this plan out, we are told,
so far as he could, and provided them with garrisons,
arms, supplies, and governors. Fifteen of these are
mentioned in the Chronicles. The dominion over the
Edomites, whom Saul fought with and David overcame,
and who attempted in vain to break loose under Solo-
mon, was maintained by Rehoboam.

After the brief reign of Abiam, the son of 'Kehoboam
(932 — 929 B.C.), Asa, the brother of Abiam, ascended
the throne of Judah. In his time, according to the
Chronicles, Serah, the Cushite, invaded Judah with a
great army, and forced his way as far as Maresa ; but
in the fifteenth year of his reign Asa defeated the
Cushites, and sacrificed 700 oxen and 7000 sheep out
of the booty to Jehovah at Jerusalem. The Books
of the Kings know nothing but the fact that Asa was
engaged in constant warfare with Baasha, the second
successor of Jeroboam, king of Israel (925 — 901 B.C.).1

Maketliu, as Brugscli reads (Gesch. ./Egyptens, s. 661), maybe Megiddo
or Makedu in the north of Judah ; in the first case the explanation
given holds good. Jerusalem is not found among the names which
can be read and interpreted.

1 Supra, p. 112, note. I have'remarked that assumptions there noticed
are necessary to bring the Hebrew chronology into harmony with the
Assyrian monuments and the stone of Mesha. That Ahaziah of Judah
and Joram of Israel must have been slain, at the latest, in the year
843 B.C. is a necessary consequence of the fact that Jehu paid tribute
to the Assyrians as early as the year 842 B.C. In the same way the
Assyrian monuments prove that Ahab of Israel cannot have died
before the year 853 B.C. As the Hebrew Scriptures, in the chronology
of Israel, put Ahaziah with two years, and Joram with twelve years,

JUDAH AND ISEAEL. 235

Baasha forced his way as far as Kamah, i. e. within two
leagues of Jerusalem. This place he took and fortified,
and was now enabled to press heavily on the metropolis
of Judah, by checking their trade and cutting off their
supplies. Asa's military power does not seem to have
been sufficient to relieve him from this intolerable
position. He "took all the silver and gold that
remained in the treasures of the house of Jehovah, and
in the treasures of the king's house," and sent it to
Benhadad, who was now king of Damascus in the
room of Rezon the opponent of Solomon, and urged him
to break his covenant with Baasha, and make war upon
him that he might leave Judah at peace. Benhadad
agreed to his request. He invaded Israel. As Jero-
boam had summoned Egypt against Judah, Judah was
now joined by Damascus against Israel. Baasha aban-
doned his war against Israel, and Asa caused the
wood and the stones of the fortifications to be hastily

between Ahab's death, and Jehu's accession, four years must be struck
out and deducted from the reign of Joram. To maintain the parallelism,
the same operation must be performed with the contemporary kings of
Judah., and the reign of Jehoram of Judah (for which, even if we
retain the data of the Books of Kings, six years remain at the most)
must be reduced from eight years to four. These four years in each
kingdom will be best added to the first reigns after the division, to
Jeroboam (22 + 4 = 26) and Kehoboam (17 + 4 = 21). Twelve years
must be added to the reign of Omri (p. 114, «.). The same augment-
ation must be made in the corresponding reign of Asa of Judah, or,
rather, as the chronology of Judah. from Rehoboam to Athaliah gives
three years less than that from Jeroboam to Jehu, 15 years must bo
added to Asa instead of 12, so that his reign reaches 41 + 15 = 56, and
Omri's reign 12 + 12 = 24 years. Hence Eeh.oboam.was succeeded by
Abiam not in the eighteenth, but in the twenty-second year of Jero-
boam ; Ahab ascended the throne not in the thirty-sixth, but in the
fifty-fourth year of Asa. From these assumptions are deduced the
numbers given in the text. I consider it hopeless to attempt to
reconcile the divergencies in the comparisons of the two series of kings
in the Books of Kings; e. g. that Omri should ascend the throne in the
thirty-first year of Asa, and reign 12 years, while Ahab nevertheless
ascends the throne in the thirty-eighth year of Asa.

236 ISRAEL.

carried away from Ramah, and with this material he
entrenched Gebah and Mizpeh against Israel.1

An addition in the first Book of Kings remarks
that Asa removed the harlots and the idols out of the
land, that he threw down the image of Astarte, which
his mother had set up, and burnt it in the valley of
the Kidron.2 This was a healthy reaction against the
foreign rites which had crept in in the last years of
Solomon's reign. Asa's son Jehoshaphat (873 — 848
B.C.) went further in this direction. The remainder of
the harlots were removed from the land ; he entered
into peaceful relations with Israel. The supremacy
over the Edomites was maintained, and they were
governed by viceroys of the king of Judah.3 We
find that the Edomites sent contingents to him ; and
his sway extended as far as the north-east point of
the Red Sea. Here, at Elath, as in Solomon's time,
great ships were built for the voyage to Ophir.4

The ten tribes who had set Jeroboam at their head
were the mass of the people both in numbers and
extent of territory. They might hope to carry on the
kingdom, they preserved the name of Israel ; while in
the south there was little more than one powerful tribe
separated from the rest. Shechem, the ancient metro-
polis of the tribe of Ephraim, the place at which
the crown was transferred to Jeroboam, was the re-
sidence of the new king. When Jerusalem was no
longer the chief metropolis of the kingdom, the temple
there could not any longer be the place of worship for
all the tribes. It would be nothing less then recog-
nising the supremacy of Rehoboam if the tribes con-
tinued to go up to Jerusalem to the great sacrifices

1 1 Kings xv. 16—24 ; 2 Chron. xvi. 1—10.

s 1 Kings xv. 11—14; 2 Chron. xiv. 2—5.

3 1 Kings xxii. 48 ; 2, viii. 20. * 1 Kings *yji. 49.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 237

and festivals. The places of worship for the new
kingdom must be within its own borders. Jeroboam

o

consecrated afresh the old place of sacrifice, Bethel, on
the southern border of the territory of Ephraim, the
place where Abraham had offered sacrifice, and Jacob
had rested (I. 390, 408); and on the northern boundaries
of his kingdom he consecrated the place of sacrifice at
Dan, which the Danites had once founded on taking
Laish from the Sidonians (p. 94). At both places he
set up a golden calf to Jehovah, and instituted priests ;
and, as we are told, the Israelites came like one man to
the feasts of Dan, and sacrificed at Bethel, where the
sanctuary also contained a treasury. Of other actions
of Jeroboam, we only know that he built, i. e. fortified,
Peniel in the land beyond Jordan; no doubt in order to
be able to maintain his supremacy over the Ammonites.
The severe blow which had fallen on the kingdom of
Judah by the incursion of Shishak secured him from
any serious attack on the part of Kehoboam. The
petty warfare on the borders of Judah and Israel
naturally did not cease during his reign (p. 231).

Nadab, the son of Jeroboam (927 — 925 B.C.),
marched against the Philistines in order to recover
from them Gibbethon in the land of the southern
Danites. Here in the camp at Gibbethon he was slain
by Baasha, one of the captains of his army, and the
whole race of Jeroboam was destroyed. Baasha ascend ed
the throne, which Nadab had held for two years only.
He took up his abode at^ Tirzah, a pleasantly-
situated place north of Shechem.1 The division of the
kingdom of Israel and its consequent debility could not
but appear a desirable event to the kingdom of Damas-
cus, which, though overthrown by David, was restored
by Rezon in Solomon's time (p. 179.) Attacks of Judah

1 Song of Solomon vi. 4.

23S ISRAEL.

on Israel could not be supported by Damascus, because
they might lead to a reunion, and for the same reason
Israel could not be allowed to subjugate Judah. This
seems to have been the reason which induced Benha-
dad of Damascus to accede to the request of Asa, king
of Judah, when Baasha had entrenched Ramah against
Jerusalem. Benhadad's invasion of the north of Israel,
the desolation of the district on the Upper Jordan and
the lake of Genesareth^gave relief to the oppressed king-
dom of Judah (p. 235). Baasha's son Elah was slain at
a banquet at Tirzah, after a short reign (901 — 899 B.C.),
by Zimri, one of the captains of his army, who seized
the crown. But the army of Israel, which was again
encamped at Gibbethon, on hearing of what had taken
place at Tirzah, elected Omri, their leader, king. Omri
broke up the siege of Gibbethon, marched to Tirzah,
and took the city. Zimri despaired of maintaining him-
self in the royal castle, and burnt himself in it. Yet
Omri was not master of Israel. Half of the people
joined Tibni, the son of Ginath. Omri gradually gained
the upper hand, till Tibni's death decided the matter
in his favour.

With the elevation of Omri (899—875 B.C.) a third
dynasty ascended the throne of Israel, while in Judah
the crown continued peacefully in the family of David.
Like Baasha, Omri founded a newresidence; he removed
his seat from Tirzah to Mount Shomron, and here built
the new city of that name (Samaria). Nothing is said
of the wars of Omri against Judah. To Benhadad of
Damascus he seems to have lost some towns in the land
of Gilead.2 That he ruled with address, vigour, and a
strong hand is clear from the inscription on a monu-
ment which Mesha,kingof Moab, caused to be erected in
his city of Dibon (east of the Dead Sea). This tells us

1 1 Bangs xv. 20. 2 1 Kings xx. 34.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 239

that Omri and his son after him held Moab in subjec-
tion for 40 years ; that not only was the city of Nebo
garrisoned by the Israelites, but Omri even took Meda-
bah, i. e. the region south of Nebo towards Dibon, and
occupied it, and " oppressed Moab for a long time,"
because " Camos, the god of the Moabites, was angry
at his land."1 As Mesha regained his independence after
the death of Ahab, the son of Omri, the more severe
subjection of the Moabites by Omri must have begun
in the year 893 B.C, Omri seems to have entered ioto
friendly relations with Ethbaal, king of Tyre (917 —
885 B.C.), or his successor Balezor (885 — 877 B.C.).2
Omri's authority and reputation must have been con-
siderable, since even after the overthrow of his house,
in the second half of the ninth century B.C., the kings
of Assyria speak of the king of Israel as " the son of
Omri, "and the kingdom of Israel as the "house of Omri."
Ahab, Omri's son (875 — 853 B.C.), maintained the
power which his father had won. The Books of Kings
tell us that Mesha, king of Moab, sent him yearly the
wool of 100,000 sheep and lambs,3 and Mesha him-
self tells us that Omri was followed by his son, who
also said, " I will oppress Moab ; " and Israel " dwelt at
Medabah for 40 years in the days of Omri and Ahab."
That the Ammonites also were subject to Ahab seems
a just conclusion from the inscriptions of Shalmanesar,
king of Assyria.4 With Tyre Ahab was in close con-
nection. His wife Jezebel was the daughter of Eth-
baal, king of Tyre, the aunt of Mutton, the contempo-
rary king of Tyre (p. 208). He was on friendly terms
with Judah, which began to rise again (as we saw)

1 Noldeke, " Inschrift des Mesa."

2 Infra, chap. xi. 3 2 Kings iii. 4.

4 The inscription of Kurkh enumerates in the army of the Syrians
at Karkar men from Ammon under Bahsa, the son of Kuchub (Kehob) ;
Schrader, " Keilinschriften undA. T." s. 95.

240 ISRAEL.

under the rule of Jehoshaphat. Jehorain, the son of
Jehoshaphat, was married to Athaliah, the daughter of
Ahab and Jezebel.1 On the vine-clad hills of Jezreel
Ahab built himself a palace adorned with ivory, after
the pattern of the Phenician princes.2

The rites of the neighbouring tribes, the worship of
Astarte, Carnos, and Milcom, which found their way
into the Hebrew tribes, and even to Jerusalem in the
last years of Solomon's reign, were again removed in
Judah, as we have seen (p. 235), under the reigns of
Asa and Jehoshaphat. For Israel the dedication of
the places of worship at Bethel and Dan to Jehovah,
which Jeroboam instituted, in spite of the erection
of the image of Jehovah, marked a reaction against
the rites of the Canaanites. But the connection
into which Ahab entered with T}^re brought it about
that the gods of the Phenicians were again looked
on with reverence in Israel. Induced by Jezebel, his
Tyrian wife, so we are told, Ahab caused a temple
to be erected in Samaria, which his father had built,
to Baal of Tyre, at which 450 priests maintained the
worship ; and a temple was also dedicated to Astarte,
which gave occupation to 400 priests.3

It was an ancient custom among the Hebrews, as we
have already found more than once, to inquire of Jeho-
vah what should be done. In Israel the custom of thus
making inquiry was more widely spread than in other
nations. Before any undertaking inquiry was made of
his will Jehovah's voice decided the sentence in the
judgment court. It was usual in all cases and times to
appeal to the decision of Jehovah. Question and answer
were made, as has been remarked, by the priests casting
lots before the sacred ark, the altars, and the images

1 2 Kings viii. 18. 2 1 Kings xxi. 1 ; xxii. 39 ; 2, ix. 15 ff.

3 1 Kings xvi. 31—33 ; xviii. 19; 2, iii. 2.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 241

of Jehovah. If a criminal had to be discovered, the
tribes and races came forward, and he was marked out
by the lot cast before Jehovah. We saw that Saul
inquired of Jehovah on his campaign (p. 124). David
undertook nothing without inquiring of the image of
Jehovah which he carried about with him (p. 139).
If any one wished to mark out the wisdom of any
advice, it was said, " It is as if Jehovah had
answered." But beside the priests who cast the lots,
there were men who saw into what was hidden, and
knew the future. To these soothsayers men went as
well-as to the lot before Jehovah ; they desired to know
whether there would be rain or drought, where a lost
beast was to be found ; they inquired for remedies for
disease. The soothsayers even pronounced sentences
at law, and their sentence was then as the sentence of
Jehovah. It was Jehovah who illuminated such men,
and imparted to them a keener vision, a higher know-
ledge. They believed, as the people believed of them —
and the belief was stronger as the religious feeling was
more intense — that they stood in a nearer and closer
relation to Jehovah. If they also foretold events for
reward, yet they lived in the belief that they knew
the will and the counsels of Jehovah, and in this con-
viction they gave advice and judgment ; they were not
only soothsayers, but seers. In such a conviction mere
prediction passed into prophecy, i. e. into the revelation
of the will of Jehovah by the mental certainty of the
seer. In this position we found Samuel, who, from
being a priest, had attained to a knowledge of the will
of Jehovah ; he was at once priest, soothsayer for hire,
and prophet ; i. e. he not only announced external
matters still in the future, but also announced the just
decision, the resolve pleasing to God. He gathered
disciples round him, who praised Jehovah with harp

VOL. II. R

212 ISRAEL.

and lute, and waited to see his face, and became
changed into other men (p. 117). Gad and Nathan,
with whom David and Solomon took counsel, were
men of this style and tone. With the loftier impulses
which the religious life received both on the ritual
and legal side, as well as on the side of religious
feeling under David and Solomon, with the survey of
the fortunes which Jehovah had prepared for his
people, with the expression of intense devotion in
that poetry to which David opened the way, the eleva-
tion of mind in the prophets must have been increased
and extended ; their views must have become deeper.
In the kingdom of Israel, so far as our knowledge
goes, the seers and prophets had made no protest
against the worship of Jehovah under an image. But
they came forward with decisive opposition to the
worship of Baal and Astarte, the strange gods which
Ahab and Jezebel had introduced into Samaria and
Israel. Ahab decreed persecution against them, which
strengthened instead of breaking the intensity of their
faith, their adhesion and devotion to the God of the
ancestors. They were driven to live in solitudes, deserts,
ravines, and caves. On their privations, fasts, and
lonely contemplations in the silence of the desert fol-
lowed dreams and ecstatic visions. By these the close
and favoured relation of the persecuted to the God of
Israel became an established certainty. The power
of prediction passed into the background as compared
with this awakening by Jehovah, and the duty to
strive, contend, and suffer for the worship of the God
of the nation against strange gods. If a prophet who
had lifted up his voice against the sacrifice to Baal was
compelled to fly before the king into the desert, he
was followed thither by eager associates, who had at
heart the worship and service of Jehovah. These

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 243

listened to his words and promptings; these were his dis-
ciples. The numbers of the awakened and illuminated
increased ; amid danger and in privation their religious
life became more earnest ; their zeal for Jehovah and
their hatred of the strange gods and their worshippers
became deeper as the persecution fell heavier upon them.
They became men of word and action.

Strengthened in this conflict for zealous struggles in
behalf of the ancient Lord, oppressed and persecuted
for their faithfulness to the God of Israel, their relation
to him took the shape of an inward conviction of great
force and intensity. Filled with their belief and the
revelations which Jehovah had imparted to them, they
came forward in the boldest manner to oppose the
apostate kings ; their zeal for Jehovah rose to the
wildest fanaticism, which shrunk from no means of
destroying the servants of the strange gods. To bring
into light the force of their opposition to the wicked
kings, and the power which Jehovah gives to his faith-
ful servants, tradition has adorned with many miracles
the lives of Elijah and Elisha, the men who in Ahab's
time transformed the prognostications of the seers into
a prophetic censure. Elijah is said to have ascended
to heaven in a chariot of fire, and even the corpse of
Elisha worked miracles.

At the urgent request of Jezebel, so we are told,
Ahab gave orders that the prophets of Jehovah, who
roused the people against him, should be driven out
of the land or put to death.1 Elijah retired from
Thisbe in Gilead, first to the region of Jordan, and then
to Zarephath (Sarepta) in the land of the Sidonians ; 2
and finally he found a place of refuge in the ravines of
Carmel, on the sea-shore. A girdle of skins surrounded
his loins, and a mantle of hair covered his shoulders ;

1 1 Kings xviii. 4—13, 17 ; xix. 10—14. 2 1 Kings xvii. 9, 10.

K '2

244 ISRAEL.

ravens were said to have brought bread and flesh to
the hungry prophet in the desert.1 It came to pass
that there was a long drought in Israel. In this time
of distress Elijah came forth from his hiding-place to
point out the anger of Jehovah on the king and the
people for their worship of Baal, and to proclaim relief
if they returned to the God of Israel. He requested
Ahab to gather the people and all the priests of Baal
and Astarte to Car m el, and there Jehovah would send
rain. To this request Ahab agreed. " How long will
ye halt on both knees, and go after Jehovah as well as
Baal," cried Elijah to the assembled multitude. " I alone
am left of the prophets of Jehovah, and the prophets
of Baal are 450 men. Give us then two bulls : one
to me, and one to the priests of Baal. We will
cut them in pieces and lay them on the wood,
and the God who answers with fire shall be our
God." The priests of Baal slew their bull, laid him
on the wood, and called on Baal from morning to
mid-day, and said, O Baal, hear us ! But in vain.
Meanwhile Elijah, so the narrative continues, built an
altar of 12 stones, for the 12 tribes, and made a trench
round it ; cut the bull in pieces, and laid him on the
wood of the altar, and thrice poured water over all.
When he called on Jehovah — to make it known on
that day that he was God in Israel, and Elijah was his
servant — fire fell from heaven and consumed the burnt
offering, and the wood, and the stones, and the altar.
All the people fell on their faces, and Elijah said,
Seize the prophets of Baal ; let none of them escape.
The people fell upon them ; they were brought down
from the mountain, arid Elijah slew them at the brook
Kishon. Then a little cloud was seen from Carmel
rising out of the sea, of the size of a man's hand, and

1 2 Kings i. 8; 1, xvii. 4—6.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 245

Elijah said to the king, " Harness thy chariot and haste
away, that the rain overtake thee not." The sky was
quickly covered with black clouds, and heavy rain
followed upon storms of wind. But Elijah ran before
Ahab to his palace in Jezreel.1 Of this narrative,
which belongs to the prophetic revision of the annals,
we may perhaps retain with certainty the facts that
Elijah declared a severe famine and drought in the land
to be the punishment of Jehovah for the worship of
Baal ; that the excited people slew the priests of Baal ;
that Ahab accorded to the prophets of Jehovah per-
mission to return to their homes and liberty ; and
that the worship of Jehovah in Israel, which had been
seriously threatened by those rites, regained the upper
hand and decided victory, though it could not entirely
drive out the worship of Baal.

The increase in the strength of Israel under Omri
and Ahab, the connection into which Ahab entered
with Jehoshaphat of Judah, the alliance between
the two houses, must have appeared to Benhadad
II., the king of Damascus, a serious matter for his
own position. For this or for other reasons he broke
with Ahab, and renewed the struggle which had gone
on in Omri's time between Israel and Damascus. He
invaded Israel with all his power : 32 kings were
with him — such is the no doubt greatly exagger-
ated account. Ahab fell upon the Aramaeans while
Benhadad was at a banquet, and though his army
was only 7000 strong, he obtained a great victory.
Then, as we are told in the prophetic revision of the
Books of Kings, Benhadad's servants advised him to
contend with the Israelites on the plain ; their gods
were gods of the hills, and therefore they had
gained the victory. Benhadad came in the next year

1 1 Kings xviii. 17—46.

246 ISRAEL.

with an army of Aramaeans, which filled the land.
Nevertheless Ahab again defeated them at Aphek
(eastward of Lake Merom), and so utterly overthrew
them that Benhadad sent his servants with sack-
cloth about their loins, and halters round their heads,
to Ahab to pray for mercy. This Ahab granted,
and Benhadad in turn undertook to restore the cities
which his father had taken from the father of Ahab,
i. e. from Omri.

The princes of Syria had every reason to forget their
hatred and make up their quarrels. Assurbanipal and
Shalmanesar II., kings of Assyria, had attacked and
subjugated the districts on the Euphrates, and estab-
lished fortresses there. The former forced his way as
far as the Orontes and the Amanus ; the latter had
already subjugated Cilicia. In the year 854 B.C.
Shalmanesar II. left Nineveh in the spring, crossed the
Euphrates, demanded tribute there, and then turned
towards Damascus. He came upon Benhadad (Bin-
hidri) of Damascus, to whom Ahab (Achabbu), king of
Israel, as well as the king of Hamath, and the king of
Aradus, together with some other Syrian kings, had
brought up their forces. To the army of the Syrians
Shalmanesar allowed more than 60,000 men — he
enumerates 12 princes who combined to oppose him.
Damascus furnished the strongest contingent, viz.,
20,000 men and 1200 chariots; then came Israel,
with 10,000 men and 200 chariots; and Hamath, with
10,000 men and 700 chariots. The armies met at
Karkar. The king of Assyria claims the victory; he
professes to have captured the chariots and horsemen
of the Syrians, and to have cut down their leaders.
According to one inscription 14,000 Syrians, accord-
ing to two others 20,500, were left on the field. But
Shalmanesar says nothing of the subjection of the

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 247

princes who fought against him, or of the payment of
tribute by those who are said to be vanquished, or of
conquered cities. Hence the truth is that the combined
forces of the Syrians succeeded in repulsing the attack
of the Assyrians. This was their victory, though they
may not have obtained the victory on the field.1

1 The objections which have been made against the assumption that
the king of Damascus and Achabbu, against whom and their confederates
Shalmanesar fought at Karkar, according to the monument of Kurkh
(col. 2), were Benhadad II. of Damascus of the Books of Kings and
Ahab of Israel are untenable. Shalmanesar II. marches four times
against a king of Damascus; subsequently, four years after his last war
with this king, he marches against a second king of Damascus, whose
name in the inscriptions is indubitably Chazailu. In the Books of
Kings Benhadad, Ahab's contemporary and opponent, is overthrown
by Hazael, who becomes king of Damascus in Benhadad's place. Thus
we obtain a certain basis for identifying the Benhadad overthrown
by Hazael with the prince of Damascus against whom Shalmanesar
fought four times. Hence on the reading of the name of this opponent
of Shalmanesar in the inscriptions I cannot place special weight,
especially as the Assyrian symbol for the deity in the name in
question is well known to have more than one signification. If a
further objection is made, that Ahab cannot have combined with
Damascus against Assyria, but rather with Assyria against Damas-
cus, in order to get rid of that opponent, the answer is that Ahab
had reduced Damascus before Shalmanesar's first march against the
city. Ahab had released Benhadad under a treaty (1 Kings xx. 34),
and they " were at peace three years " (1 Kings xxii. 3). Hence
at this moment Ahab was not in need of the assistance of Assyria.
That free leagues are altogether inconceivable among the Syrian
princes of that time is an assumption contradicted by numerous state-
ments in the Egyptian monuments of Tuthmosis III., of Eamses II.
and III. , and yet more numerous statements in the Assyrian inscrip-
tions. Not much weight can be allowed to the late and very general
statements of Nicolaus in Josephus. If Nicolaus (Joseph. " Antiq." 7,
5, 2) calls the opponent of David Hadad, the Books of Kings do not
mention the name of the king of Damascus against whom David
contends. If he maintains that the grandson of Benhadad I., the
third of the name, desolated Samaria, it is rather Benhadad I. of the
Books of Kings, who was not the son and grandson of a Benhadad, but
the son of Tabrimmon, and grandson of Hesjon, who first laid Samaria
waste (1 Kings xv. 18 — 20). A second Benhadad contends with
Ahab, who certainly may have been a grandson of the first, but
certainly cannot have been the grandson of the opponent of David. If
Nicolaus further tells us, that after Benhadad I. his descendants ruled

248 ISRAEL.

When the danger threatened by the attack of Assyria
passed away, the contention between Damascus and
Israel broke out again. The Hebrew Scriptures tell
us that Benhadad did not keep his promise, and did
not restore the city of Ramoth in Gilead to Ahab.
Ahab may have thought that he had the greater
ground for complaint against Damascus, as he took
upon himself the severe battle against Assyria, though
it was Damascus, and not Israel, which stood in the
direct line of danger. He united with Judah against
Damascus, and sent a request to Jehoshaphat, king of
Judah, to march out with him. Jehoshaphat answered,
" I will go forth as thou goest ; my people as thy
people ; my horses as thy horses ; " and he came with
his warriors to Samaria. Both kings sat on their
seats at the gate, in order to review the army as it
passed out; and the prophets of Jehovah, 400 in
number, prophesied good things to them, and said,
"Go forth against Ramoth in Gilead; Jehovah will
give it into your hands." One only of these prophets,
Michaiah, the son of Imlah, prophesied evil ; Ahab,
we are told, caused him to be thrown into prison till
he should return in prosperity.1 A battle took place
in the neighbourhood of Ramoth in Gilead; Ahab
was severely wounded by an arrow which passed be-

for 10 generations, and each of them along with the throne received
the name of Benhadad, this is contradicted by the Books of Kings,
not merely in the genealogy of the first Benhadad of those books, but
also in the fact that in them Benhadad II. , the contemporary of Ahab
and Jehoram, is overthrown by Hazael, who then in a long reign over
Damascus inflicts severe injury on Israel and Judah. Hazael is fol-
lowed in the Books of Bangs by Benhadad III. That ' ' Achabbu from
the land of Sir'lai " is correctly read in the inscription of Kurkh is an
ascertained fact.

1 The prophetic revision explains the overthrow of Ahab by the
fact that he had spared Benhadad in the previous war, when Jehovah
had delivered him into his hand.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 249

tween the joints of his mail ; he caused the wound to be
bound up, and returned to the fight, in order not to dis-
courage his warriors, and continued to stand upright
in his chariot, though his blood flowed to the bottom
of it, till the evening, when he died. When the
soldiers heard of the death of the king the army
dispersed in every direction. Jehoshaphat, king of
Judah. escaped (853 B.C.).

The death of such a brave warrior as Ahab was a
heavy blowr to the kingdom of Israel. We are not
told by what sacrifices Ahaziah, the son of Ahab and
Jezebel, had to purchase peace ; we only know that the
Moabites revolted from Israel on the news of the
death of Ahab, and that Mesh a no longer paid the
tribute which he and his father had paid to Omri and
Ahab. In any case it was a great relief for Israel
when Shalmanesar, king of Assyria, in the years 851
and 850 B.C., turned his arms against Hamath and
Damascus.1 In this way Ahaziah's younger brother,
Joram, who succeeded him after a short reign (851 — •
843 B.C.), was able to attempt to subjugate the Moab-
ites anew. He called on Jehoshaphat, king of Judah,
to go out with him, and Jehoshaphat said, " I am as
thou art ; my horses as thy horses," and raised not
only the warriors of Judah, but those of Edom also.
The attack was made from the land of the kingdom
of Judah and Edom on the southern border of the
Moabites. The Moabites were defeated, their cities
destroyed, their fields laid waste, their wells filled up.
Mesha threw himself into the fortress of Kir Harosheth,
which is probably the later Kerak, to the south of the
Arnon, not far from the east shore of the Dead Sea.
The slingers of both kings surrounded the fortress, and
cast stones against the walls. " And when the king of

1 Ninth, and tenth year of Shalmanesar II.

250 ISRAEL.

Moab saw that the battle was too strong for him,"
and he had attempted in vain to break out, " he took
his firstborn son, who would be king in his place, and
sacrificed him as a burnt offering on the wall. And
there was a great anger against Israel, and they
returned from him, and went back into their own
land" (849 B.C.).

Notwithstanding this fortunate beginning, the cam-
paign against Moab, as is allowed even by the Books of
Kings, was finally wrecked. This termination agrees
with the statements of Mesha on the monument of
Dibon. " Forty years," it says, " Israel dwelt in
Medabah ; Camos gave it back in my days. And
the king of Israel built Ataroth, and I fought against
the stronghold and took it, and took all the men
captive, and brought them as a pleasing spectacle to
Camos and Moab. And Camos said to me, Go and
take Nebo from Israel ; and I went in the night and
fought against it from daybreak to mid-day ; and I
took it. It was devoted to destruction to Ashtor-
Camos (I. 373) ; and I took from thence the furniture
of Jehovah, and dragged them before Camos. And
the king of Israel built Jahaz, and placed himself
therein, in his contest against me, and Camos drove
him out before me. I took from Moab 200 men, all
the chiefs, and led them out to Jahaz, and took it, in
order to unite it to Dibon. I built Karho,1 the gates,
the towers, and the royal palace. I built Aroer, and
made the road over the Arnon. I built Beth Bamoth,
which was destroyed. I built Bazor, and Beth Dib-
lathaim, and Beth Baal-Meon. And Camos said to
me, Go down to fight against Horonaim." Here our
fragments of the inscription break off. We see that

* According to Noldeke, "Inschrift des Mesa," the upper city of
Dibon.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 2:>1

Ahab's successors, Ahaziah and Joram, attempted to
force Moab to submission by planting fortresses in
the land ; that they attempted to subjugate the
Moabites from Ataroth, Nebo, and Jahaz. When
this mode of warfare did not succeed, and the fortresses
were destroyed, the great campaign was undertaken
which in the end came to disaster, unless we were to
place this campaign before the time when Joram built
those fortresses.

It was impossible for Joram to entertain any further
hopes of the subjugation of Moab when Benhadad,
after escaping from the attack of Shalmanesar, turned
upon him. The Israelites were unable to keep the
field, and Joram was shut up in Samaria. The supplies
failed, and the famine is said to have been so grievous
in the city that an ass's head sold for 80 shekels, and
the fourth part of a cab of dove's dung for five shekels,
and mothers even laid their hands upon their own
children. But Elisha, the favourite disciple of Elijah,
is said to have urged them to hold out, and promised
present help from Jehovah. Suddenly, in a single
night, the army of the Aramaeans disappeared. They
feared, so the prophetic revision of the annals relates,
that the kings of the Hethites and the kings of Egypt
had set out to the aid of Joram. As Shalmanesar of
Assyria tells us that he marched in the year 846 B.C.
with 120,000 men against Benhadad of Damascus
and Irchulina of Hamath, we may assume that it was
the approach of the Assyrians which induced Benhadad
to raise the siege of Samaria, in order to meet the
Assyrians with all his own forces and those of Hamath.
Here again Shalraariesar announces a victory obtained
over Benhadad and Irchulina of Hamath, and twelve
princes, and again the victory is without results.

It was not to the power of Shalmanesar, but to

2.V2 ISRAEL.

Elisha, the prophet of Israel, that Benhadad of Damascus
succumbed. For what reason we know not, Elisha
left Israel and went to Damascus. Benhadad lay sick.
He sent his chosen servant Hazael with costly presents
to Elisha to inquire if he would recover. Elisha
answered, Say to him, thou shalt recover; but
Jehovah has shown me that he will die. Hazael
announced the message, and on the next day smothered
the king, and placed himself on the throne of Damascus
(844 B.C.). The new king at once resumed the war
with Israel, and, as it would appear, not without the
instigation of Elisha.1

Jehoshaphat of Judah had died a few years previously
(848 B c.). The crown passed to his son Jehoram, the
brother-in-law of Joram. The Edomites, who had con-
tinued to follow Jehoshaphat into the field against
Moab, revolted from him, and slew the Judaeans who had
settled in Edom, — these settlers may have been most
numerous in the harbour city of Elath, — and placed
themselves under a king.2 Jehoram attempted to
reduce them in vain ; the fortune of war was against
him ; he was surrounded by the Edomites, and
was compelled to force his way with his chariots of
war by night through the army of the Edomites.
The Philistines also pressed upon Jehoram, and carried
away, even from Jerusalem, captives and precious
things.3 Jehoram's reign continued for four years. Yet
the misfortunes of Judah do not seem to have been
very heavy. Jehoram's son Ahaziah, the nephew of
Joram of Israel, who came to the throne in the year
844 B.C., was soon after his accession in a position to
aid his uncle against the men of Damascus. Both

1 1 Kings xix. 15; 2, viii. 7—15.

2 Joeliv. 19; Amos i 11, 12.

» 2 Chron. xxi. 16 — 18 ; Amos i. 6 ; cf. infra, p. 260, n. 2.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 253

kings encamped at Ramoth Gilead, in order to main-
tain the city against Hazael.1 In the conflict Joram
was wounded ; he returned to Jezreel to be healed,
and soon after Ahaziah left the camp at Ramoth in
order to visit his uncle in his sickness.

To Elisha this seemed the most favourable moment
for overthrowing the king of Israel, and he urged
Jehu, the foremost captain in the Israelite army, to
revolt against the wounded king. He sent one of his
disciples to Ramoth with instructions to pour oil upon
Jehu, with the words, " Jehovah says, I anoint thee to
be king over Israel." The chiefs were sitting together
at Ramoth when the messenger of Elisha entered. " I
have a message for Jehu," he said ; and poured the oil
upon him with the words, " Jehovah, the God of Israel,
anoints thee to be king over his people, and says, thou
shalt destroy the house of thy master. I will avenge
the blood of my prophets on Jezebel. The house of
Ahab shall be destroyed, and I will cut off from
Ahab what pisseth against the wall, and dogs shall eat
Jezebel in Jezreel, and none shall bury her." The
youth had scarcely uttered these words when he
returned in haste. The chiefs and the servants asked
in wonder, " Wherefore came this madman ? " But when
Jehu declared to them what had taken place, they
hastily took off their mantles, and spread them before
Jehu's feet ; they blew trumpets and cried, " Jehu is
king."

Jehu at once set out with a host to Jezreel, that no
tidings might precede him. The watchmen of the
tower told the king that a troop was coming in great
haste, and apparently led by Jehu. Thinking that
Jehu was bringing news of the army, the wounded
Joram went to meet him with his guest, Ahaziah, king

1 2 Kings ix. 14.

254 ISRAEL.

of Judah. " Is it peace ? " cried Joram to Jehu. " What
peace," he replied, " while the whoredoms of thy mother
Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many ? " In terror
Joram cried out, " There is treachery, 0 Ahaziah,"
and turned his horses to escape by flight. But Jehu
smote him with an arrow in the back through the
shoulders, so that the point reached the heart. Joram
fell dead from the chariot. Ahaziah escaped. From
the window of her palace at Jezreel Jezebel saw the
death of the king, her second son. By this her own
fate was decided. But her courage failed not. As
Jehu approached she called to him from the window,
" Had Zimri peace, who slew his master ? " Jehu
made no answer, but called out, " Who is on my
side ? " Two or three eunuchs answered, " We are."
Then Jehu commanded, " Throw the queen down."
They threw the widow of Ahab out of the window, so
that her blood was sprinkled on the wall and oil
Jehu's horses, and the ruthless murderer drove over
the corpse. She had survived Ahab ten years. Jehu
went into the palace, ate and drank, and sent a
message to the elders of the tribes and the captains of
the fortresses : " If ye are on my side and obey my
voice, slay the sons of Ahab who are with you, and
send their heads to Jezreel." The elders feared the
murderer to whom Joram and Jezebel had succumbed,
and did as he bade them. Seventy sons and grand-
sons of Ahab were slaughtered ; their heads were
thrown in two heaps before the palace at Jezreel by
Jehu's orders. Then he spoke in scorn to the people,
" I have slain one ; but who slew all these ? " Still
unsatisfied with blood, he caused all the kindred of the
royal house, all the councillors, friends, and priests of
Joram to be slain (843 B.C.).

Jehu had caused the king of Judah to be closely

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 255

pursued on that day. At Jibleam the arrows of the
pursuers reached Ahaziah ; wounded to the death, he
came to Megiddo, and there he died. Thus the prospect
was opened to Jehu of becoming master of the king-
dom of Judah also. With this object in view, he
caused the brothers and relatives of the murdered
Ahaziah to be massacred, so far as he could take
them ; in all they were 42 men.1 But meanwhile
the mother of the murdered Ahaziah, Athaliah, heard
in Judah of the death of her son in Israel, and seized
the reins of government there. She determined to
retain them against every one ; and on her side also
destroyed all who stood in her way. She did not
spare even her own grandsons, the sons of Ahaziah ;
it was with difficulty that the king's sister succeeded
in saving Joash, the infant son of her brother.2

The prophets of Israel took no offence at the cruel-
ties of Jehu, to which they had given the first impulse ;
according to the revision of the annals, they even pro-
claimed to him the word of Jehovah. " Because thou
hast done what is right and good in my eyes, and hast
executed upon the house of Ahab all that was in my
heart, thy descendants shall sit upon the throne of
Israel."3 Jehu on his part was no less anxious to show
his gratitude to the men to whom he owed his exalta-
tion. He summoned the priests of Baal, and announced
to them in craft, " Ahab served Baal a little, but Jehu
shall serve him much ; " and caused a great sacrifice to
be made to Baal ; all who remained absent should not
live. Thus he collected all the servants and priests of
Baal in the temple of the god at Samaria. The sacri-
fice began ; Jehu came in person to take part in the

1 2 Kings x. 12—14. 3 2 Kings xi. 1—3.

3 2 Kings x. 30. ' ' To the fourth generation ' ' may have been added
by the revision post eventum.

2.56 ISRAEL. •»

solemnity ; when on a sudden 80 soldiers entered the
temple and massacred them all. The two pillars
before the temple were burnt, the image of Baal was
thrown down, the temple was destroyed, and the place
purified.1

A hundred and ten years had elapsed since the
revolt of the ten tribes from the house of David and
the division of Israel. During this time the two king-
doms had been at war, and had summoned strangers
into the land against each other ; even the connec-
tion into which they had entered in the last thirty
years, and the close relations existing between Ahab
and Joram of Israel and Jehoshaphat, Jehoram and
Ahaziah of Judah had not been able to give more than
a transitory firmness and solidity to the two kingdoms.
In the kingdom of Judah the crown continued in the
house of David; in Israel neither Jeroboam's nor Baasha's
race had taken root. And now the house of Omri also
was overthrown and destroyed by a ruthless murderer.
With Jehu a third warrior had gained the crown of
Israel by a violent hand, and a fourth dynasty sat
upon the throne of Jeroboam.

It wns a favourable circumstance for the new king
of Israel that Shalmanesar II. of Assyria again made
war upon Damascus. On the mountains opposite
to the range of Lebanon, so Shalmanesar tells us,
he defeated Hazael of the land of Aram, i. e. of
Damascus, in the year 842 B.C. ; he slew 16,000 of
his warriors, and took 1121 war-chariots. After this
he besieged him in Damascus, and destroyed his forti-
fications. Jehu could hardly think, as Ahab had done
before him, of joining Damascus in resisting Assyria ;
his object was rather to establish the throne he had
usurped by submission to and support from Assyria.

1 2 Kings x. 18—27.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 257

In this year, as Shalmanesar tells us, he sent tribute
like Sidon and Tyre. On an obelisk in his palace at
Chalah, on which Shalmanesar caused the aiinals of his
victories to be written and a picture to be made of the
offering of the tribute from five nations, we see him
standing with two eunuchs behind him, one of whom
holds an umbrella, while two others lead before him the
deputies of Jehu. The first Israelite prostrates himself
and kisses the ground before the feet of Shalmanesar;
seven other Israelites bring jars with handles, cups,
sacks, goblets, and staves. They are bearded, with long
hair, with shoes on their feet, and round caps on their
heads, the points of which fall slightly backwards.
The under garment reaches almost to the ancles ; the
upper garment falls in two parts evenly before and
behind from the shoulders to the hem of the under
garment. The inscription underneath runs : " The
tribute of Jehu (Jahua), the son of Omri (Chumri) :
bars of gold, bars of silver, cups of gold, ladles and
goblets of gold, golden pitchers, lead, and spears:
this I received." l

Though Jehu submitted to the Assyrians, the power
and spirit of Hazael was not broken by his defeat or
by the siege of Damascus. Shalmanesar speaks of a
new campaign against the cities of Hazael in the year
839 B.C. He does not tell us that he has reduced
Damascus, he merely remarks that Sidon, Tyre, and
Byblus have paid tribute ; and again, under the year
835 B.C. he merely notes in general terms that he has
received the tribute of all the princes of the land of
Chatti (Syria). Hazael remained powerful enough to
take from Jehu, who, though a bloody and resolute
murderer, was a bad ruler, all the territory on the east
of the Jordan which Ahab and Joram had defended

1 E. Schrader, " Keilinschriften und A. T." s. 105.

VOL. II. S

253 ISRAEL.

with such vigour.1 Under Jehoahaz, the son of Jehu
(815—798 B.C.), the power of Israel sank lower and
lower. Hazael, and after him his son, Benhadad III.,
pressed heavily upon him. Jehoahaz was compelled to
purchase peace by further concessions ; 2 his whole
fighting force was reduced to 10 chariots of war, 50
horsemen, and 10,000 foot-soldiers, while Ahab had
led 200 chariots into the field.

The devastation caused by Damascus in Israel was
terrible. The Books of Kings represent Elisha as saying
to Hazael, " The fortresses of Israel thou shalt set on
fire, their young men thou shalt slay with the sword,
their children thou shalt cut in pieces, and rip up their
women with child ; " 3 and in the prophet Amos we are
told that the Damascenes had thrashed Israel with
sledges of iron. In the prophecies of Amos, Jehovah
says : " Therefore I will send fire into the house of
Hazael, to consume the palaces of Benhadad, and break
the bars of Damascus, and destroy the inhabitants of
the valley of idols." 4

The Assyrians brought relief to the kingdom of Israel.
In the Books of the Kings we are told, " Jehovah gave
Israel a saviour, so that they went out from under the
hand of the Aramaeans (Syrians), and they dwelt in
their tents as yesterday and the day before." 5 It
was Bin-nirar III., king of Asshur, who threatened
Damascus and Syria. In the year 803 B.C. the canon
of the Assyrians notices a campaign of this king
against Syria, and in his inscriptions he mentions that
he had conquered Mariah, king of Damascus (who
must have been the successor of Benhadad III.), and
laid heavy tribute upon him.6 Though Israel (the
house of Omri), as well as Sidon, the Philistines, and

1 2 Kings x. 32. » 2 Kings xiii. 25.

3 2 Kings viii. 12. * Amos i. 3.

6 2 Kings xiii. 5. • See below, p. 32fi.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 259

Edomites, had now to pay tribute to the conqueror of
Damascus, yet in the last years of the reign of Jehoa-
haz the land was able to breathe again, and Joash, the
grandson of Jehu (798 — 790 B.C.1), was able to retake
from the enfeebled Damascus the cities which his
father had lost,2 and make the weight of his arms felt
by the kingdom of Judah.

In Judah, as has been mentioned, Jehoram's widow,
Athaliah, the mother of the murdered Ahaziah, had
seized the throne (843 B.C.). She is the only female
sovereign in the history of Israel. Athaliah was the
daughter of Ahab of Israel and Jezebel of Tyre ; like
her mother, she is said to have favoured the worship
of Baal. As the prophets of Israel had prepared the
ruin of the house of Omri in Israel, the high priest of
the temple at Jerusalem, Jehoiadah, now undertook to
overthrow the daughter of this house in Judah. Aha-
ziah's sister had saved a son of Ahaziah, Joash, while
still an infant, from his grandmother (p. 255). He
grew up in concealment in the temple at Jerusalem,
and was now seven years old. This boy the priest
determined to place upon the throne. He won the cap-
tains of the body-guard, showed them the young Joash
in the temple, and imparted his plan for a revolt. On a
Sabbath the body-guard and the Levites formed a circle
in the court of the temple. Jehoiadah brought the boy
out of the temple and placed the crown upon his head ;
he was anointed, and the soldiers proclaimed him
king to the sound of trumpets. The people agreed.
Athaliah hastened with the cry of treason into the
temple. But at Jehoiadah's command she was seized
by the body-guard, taken from the temple precincts, and

1 Of this date and the time of Amaziah I shall treat in the first
chapter of Book IV.
" 2 Kings xiii. 25.

S 2

260 ISRAEL.

slain in the royal palace. Then the boy was brought
thither by the Levites and solemnly placed upon the
throne. "And all the people of the land rejoiced,
and the city was at rest," say the Books of Kings
(837 B.C.).

The victory of the priesthood had the same result for
Judah as the resistance of Elijah and the prophets
against Ahab, and the overthrow of his house, had intro-
duced in Israel, i. e. the suppression of the worship of
Baal. The temple of Baal at Jerusalem was destroyed ;
the high priest of it, Mathan by name, was slain.
Yet the number of the worshippers in Jerusalem must
have been so considerable, and their courage so little
broken, that it was thought necessary to protect
the temple of Jehovah by setting a guard to
prevent their attacks.1 Jehoiadah continued to act
as regent for the young king, and the prophecies
of Joel, which have come down to us from this
period,2 prove that under this regency the worship
of Jehovah became dominant, that the festivals and
sacrifices were held regularly in the temple at Jeru-
salem, and that the ordinances of the priests were in
full force. When Joash became ruler he carried on the
restoration of the temple, which had fallen into decay,
even more eagerly than the priesthood. His labours
were interrupted. It was the time when Israel could
not defend themselves against Damascus. Marching

o o

through Israel, Hazael invaded Judah, and besieged
Jerusalem. Joash was compelled to ransom himself
with all that his fathers, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, and
Ahaziah, had consecrated to Jehovah, and what he

1 2 Kings xi. 3—20.

* They fall about 830 B.C. The minority of the king is clear, and
the verses iv. 4 ff. points to the incursion of the Philistines into Judah,
mentioned p. 252.

JUDAH AND ISRAEL. 261

himself had dedicated in the temple, and with the
treasures of the royal palace.1

Like his father and his grandmother, Joash died by
a violent death. Two of his servants murdered him
(797 B.C.) ; but his son Amaziah kept the throne, and
caused the murderers of his father to be executed. He
commenced a war, for what reason we know not, with
Israel, who was now fighting with success against
Damascus. Joash of Israel defeated him at Bethshe-
mesh ; Amaziah was taken prisoner and his army
dispersed. The king of Israel occupied Jerusalem,
plundered the temple and the palace, and did not set
the king of Judah free till the walls of Jerusalem were
thrown down for a space of 400 cubits from the gate
of Ephraim, i. e. the western gate of the outer city to
the corner gate, at the north-west corner of Jerusalem,
and the Judeeans had given hostages to keep the peace
for the future. Against the Edomites Amaziah con-
tended with more success. He defeated them in the
Valley of Salt ; 10,000 Edomites are said to have been
left on the field on that day. The result of the victory
was the renewal of the dependence of Edom on Judah,
though not as yet throughout the whole extent of
the land. Amaziah also fell before a conspiracy. It
was in vain that he escaped from the conspirators
from Jerusalem to Lachish ; they followed him and
slew him there. But the people placed his son Uzziah
(Azariah), though only 16 years old, on the throne of
Judah (792 B.C.).2

1 2 Kings xii. 17, 18. The occurrence is recorded after the twenty-
third year of Joash, and the twenty-third year was 815 B.C.

2 The subjugation of Edom can only have taken place after the year
803 B.C., i. e. after the march of Bin-nirar II. to the sea-coast. Bin-
nirar enumerates Edom among the tribute-paying tribes of Syria. On
this and on the date of Uzziah's accession, cf. Book IV. chap. 2.

CHAPTER XI.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS.

THE voyages of the Phenicians on the Mediterra-
nean; their colonies on the coasts and islands of that
sea; their settlements in Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, the
islands of the ^Egean, Samothrace, and Thasos, on the
coasts of Hellas, on Malta, Sicily, and Sardinia ; their
establishments on the northern edge of Africa in the
course of the thirteenth and twelfth centuries B.C.; their
discovery of the Atlantic about the year 1 100 B.C., have
been traced by us already. Of the internal conditions
and the constitution of the cities whose ships traversed
the Mediterranean in every direction, and now found
so many native harbours on the coasts and islands, we
have hardly any information. We only know that
monarchy existed from an ancient period in Sidon and
Tyre, in Byblus, Berytus, and Aradus; and we are
restricted to the assumption that this monarchy arose
out of the patriarchal headship of the elders of the
tribes. These tribes had long ago changed into civic
communities, and their members must have consisted
of merchant-lords, ship-owners, and warehousemen, of
numerous labourers, artisans, sailors, and slaves. The
accounts of the Hebrews exhibit the cities of the Philis-
tines, the southern neighbours of the Phenicians on
the Syrian coast, united by a league in the eleventh
century B c. The kings of the five cities of the

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 263

Philistines combine for consultation, form binding
resolutions, and take the field in common. We find
nothing like this in the cities of the Phenicians. Not
till a far later date, when the Phenicians had lost their
independence, were federal forms of government pre-
valent among them.

The campaigns of the Pharaohs, Tuthmosis III.,
Sethos, and Eamses II., did not leave the cities of
the Phenicians untouched (I. 342). After the reign
of Ramses III., i. e. after the year 1300 B.C., Syria
was not attacked from the Nile ; but the overthrow
of the kingdom of the Hittites about this period, and the
subjugation of the Amorites by the Israelites, forced
the old population to the coast (about 1250 B.C.).
One hundred and fifty years later a new opponent
of Syria showed himself, not from the south, but from
the east. Tiglath Pilesar I., king of Assyria (1130 —
1100 B.C.), forced his way over the Euphrates, and
reached the great sea of the western land (p. 42).
His successes in these regions, even if he set foot on
Lebanon, could at most have reached only the northern
towns of the Phenicians ; in any case they were of a
merely transitory nature.

The oldest city of the Phenicians was Sidon; her
daughter-city, Tyre, was also founded at a very an-
cient period. We found that the inscriptions of Sethos
I. mentioned it among the cities reduced by him. The
power and importance of Tyre must have gradually
increased with the beginning of a more lively naviga-
tion between the cities and the colonies; about the
year 1100 B.C. her navigation and influence appears
to have surpassed those of the mother-city. If Old
Hippo in Africa was founded from Sidon, Tyrian ships
sailed through the Straits of Gibraltar, discovered the
land of silver, and founded Gades beyond the pillars.

264 PHOENICIA.

Accordingly we also find that Tyre, and not Sidon, was
mistress of the island of Cyprus.

According to the statements of the Greeks, a king
of the name of Sobaal or Sethlon ruled in Sidon at the
time of the Trojan war, i. e. before the year 1100 B.C. ;x
about the same time a king of the name of Abelbaal
reigned in Berytus.2 From a fragment of Menander
of Ephesus, preserved to . us by Josephus, it follows
that after the middle of the eleventh century B.C.
Abibaal was reigning in Tyre. A sardonyx, now at
Florence, exhibits a man with a high crown on his
head and a staff in his hand ; in front of him is a
star with four rays ; the inscription in old Phenician
letters runs, " Of Abibaal." Did this stone belong to
king Abibaal ? 3

Hiram, the son of this king, ascended the throne of
Tyre while yet a youth, in 1001 B.C. He is said to
have again subjugated to his dominion the Kittians,
i. e. the inhabitants of Citium, or the cities of Cyprus
generally, who refused to pay tribute. What reasons
and what views of advantage in trade induced Hiram
to enter into relations with David in the last years of
his reign, and unite these relations even more closely
with Solomon, the successor of David, has been re-
counted above. It was this understanding which not
only opened Israel completely to the trade of the
Phenicians, but also procured to the latter secure and
new roads through Israel to the Euphrates and Egypt,
and made it possible for them to discover and use the
road by sea to South Arabia. Thus, a good century
after the founding of Gades, the commerce of the

o

Phenicians reached the widest extension which it
ever obtained. We saw that the Phenicians about the

1 Eustath. ad " Odysseam," 4, 617. * Vol. i. p. 352.

3 De Luynes, "Essai sur la numismatique des satrapies," p. G9.

THE CITIES. OF THE PHENICIANS. 265

year 990 B.C. went by ship from Elatb past South
Arabia to the Somali coast, and reached Ophir, i. e.
apparently the land of the Abhira (i. e. herdsmen)
on the mouths of the Indus.1 The other advan-
tages which accrued to Hiram from his connection
with Israel were not slight. Solomon paid him,
as has been said, 20,000 Kor of wheat and 20,000
Bath of oil yearly for 20 years in return for wood
and choice quarry stones, and finally, in order to dis-
charge his debt, had to give up 20 Israelitish towns
on his borders.

Hiram had to dispose of very considerable re-
sources : his receipts must have been far in excess of
Solomon's. Of the silver of Tarshish which the ships
brought from Gades to Tyre, of the gold imported by
the trade to Ophir, of the profits of the maritime trade
with the land of incense, a considerable percentage must
have come into the treasury of the king, and he enjoyed
in addition the payments of Solomon. In any case he
had at his command means sufficient to enlarge, adorn,
and fortify his city. Ancient Tyre lay on the sea-
shore ; with the growth of navigation and trade, the
population passed over from the actual city to an island
off the coast, which offered excellent harbours. On a
rock near this island lay that temple of Baal Melkarth,
the god of Tyre, to which the priests ascribed a high
antiquity ; they told Herodotus that it was built in the
year 2750 B.C. (I. 345). Hiram caused this island to
be enlarged by moles to the north and west towards
the mainland, and protected these extensions by bul-
warks. The circuit of the island was now 22 stades, i. e.
more than two and a half miles ; the arm of the sea, which
separates the island from the mainland, now measured

1 Above, p. 188.

266 PHOENICIA.

only 2400 feet (three stades) .l The whole island was sur-
rounded with strong walls of masonry, which ran out
sharply into the sea, and were washed by its waves, so
that no room remained for the besieger to set foot and
plant his scaling-ladders there. On the side of the
island towards the mainland, where the docks were,
these walls were the highest. Alexander of Macedon
found them 150 feet high. The two harbours lay on the
eastern side of the island — on the north-east and the
south-east; on the north-east was the Sidonian har-
bour (which even now is the harbour of Sur) ; and on
the south-east the Egyptian harbour. If the former
was secured and closed by huge dams, the latter also
was not without its protecting works, as huge blocks
in the sea appear to show, though the dams here were
no longer in perfect preservation even in Strabo's
time. On the south shore of the island, eastward of
the Egyptian harbour, lay the royal citadel ; on the
north-west side a temple of Baal Samim, the Age-
norion of the Greeks. The rock which supported the
temple of Melkarth appears to have been situated
close to the city on the west.2 This, like the temple
of Astarte, was adorned and enlarged or restored by
Hiram. For the roof he caused cedars of Lebanon to
be felled. In the ancient shrine of the protecting
deity of the city, the temple of Melkarth, he dedi-
cated a great pillar of gold, which Herodotus saw
there 500 years later beside an erect smaragdus,

1 Curt. 4, 8. Pliny (" Hist. Nat." 5, 17) puts the distance from the
mainland at 700 paces (double paces).

2 On coins of Tyre of a later time we find two rocks, which indicate
the position of the city. Ezekiel (xxvi. 4, 5) threatens that she shall
be a naked rock in the sea for the spreading of nets. Joseph, "c. Apion,"
8, 5, 3; Diod. 17, 46; Arrian, 2, 21, 23. Kenan's view (" Mission de
rhenicie," p. 546 ff.) on the Agenorion has been adopted ; some others
of his results appear to be uncertain.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIAXS. 267

which was so large that it gave light by night. This
was perhaps a symbol of the light not overcome by
the darkness.1

Hiram died after a reign of 34 years, in the fifty-
third year of his life. His son Baleazar, who sat on the
throne for seven years (967 — 960 B.C.), was succeeded
by his son Abdastartus (i. e. servant of Astarte), who,
after a reign of nine years (960 — 951 B.C.), fell before
a conspiracy headed by the sons of his nurse. Abdas-
tartus was murdered, and the eldest of the sons of his
nurse maintained his dominion over Tyre for 12 years
(951 — 939 B.C.). Then the legitimate dynasty returned
to the throne. Of the brothers of the murdered Abdas-
tartus, Astartus was the first to reign (939 — 927 B.C.),
and after him Astarymus (927 — 918 B.C.), who was
murdered by a fourth brother, Pheles. But Pheles
could not long enjoy the fruits of his crime. He had
only been eight months on the throne when he was
slain by the priest of Astarte, Ethbaal (Ithobaal).
With Pheles the race of Abibaal comes to an end
(917 B.C.).

Ethbaal ascended the throne of Tyre, and was able
to establish himself upon it. He is said to have
built or fortified Bothrys in Lebanon, perhaps as a
protection against the growing forces of Damascus.2
In Israel, during Ethbaal's reign, as we have seen,
Omri at the head of the army made himself master of
the throne in 899 B.C., just as Ethbaal had usurped the
throne of Tyre. Both were in a similar position.
Both had to establish their authority and found their
dynasty. Ethbaal's daughter was married to Ahab,
the son of Omri. What wTere the results of this
connection for Israel and Judah we have seen already.

1 Vol. i. 367; Menander in Joseph. " c. Apion." 1, 17, 18.
9 Joseph. "Antiq." 8, 13, 2.

268 PHOENICIA.

To what a distance the power of Tyre extended in
another direction is clear from the fact that Ethbaal
founded Auza in the interior of Africa, to the south of
the already ancient colony of Ityke (p. 82).1 After
a reign of 32 years Ethbaal was succeeded by his son
Balezor (885 — 877 B.c.).2 After eight years Balezor
left two sons, Mutton and Sicharbaal, both under age.
Yet the throne remained in the house of Ethbaal, and
continued to do so even when Mutton died in the
year 853 B.C., and again left a son nine years old,
Pygmalion, and a daughter Elissa, a few years older,
whom he had married to his brother Sicharbaal, the
priest of the temple of Melkarth.3 Mutton had in-
tended that Elissa and Pygmalion should reign
together, and thus the power really passed into the
hands of Sicharbaal, the husband of Elissa. When
Pygmalion reached his sixteenth year the people trans-
ferred to him the sovereignty of Tyre, and he put
Sicharbaal, his uncle, to death, either because he
feared his influence as the chief priest of the tutelary
god of the city, or because, as we are told, he coveted
his treasures (846 B.C.).4

Elissa fled from Tyre before her brother, as we
are told, with others who would not submit to the
tyranny of Pygmalion.5 The exiles (we may perhaps
suppose that they were members of old families, as it
was apparently the people who had transferred the

1 Joseph, loc. tit.

2 In order to bring the reigns of Josephus into harmony with his
total, the total, which is given twice, must be retained. Hence
nothing remains but to replace, as Movers has already done, the three
and six years given by Josephus for Balezor and Mutton by the
eight and 25 years given by Syncellus.

3 On the identity of the names Acerbas, Sichaeus, Sicharbas, Sichar-
baal, Serv. "ad ^neid," 1, 343 ; Movers, "Phoeniz." 2, 1, 355.

4 Justin, 18, 4.

* Timaeus, fragm. 23, ed. Miiller; Appian, "Rom. Hist." 8, 1.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 269

throne to Pygmalion) are said to have first landed at
Cyprus, then to have sailed to the westward, and to
have landed on the coast of Africa, in the neighbour-
hood of Ityke, the old colony of the Phenicians, and
there to have bought as much land of the Libyans as
could be covered by the skin of an ox. By dividing
this into very thin strips they obtained a piece of land
sufficient to enable them to build a fortress. This new
dwelling-place, or the city which grew up round this
fortress, the wanderers called, in reference to their old
home, Karthada (Karta hadasha), i. e. " the new city,"
the Karchedon of the Greeks, the Carthage of the
Komans. The legend of the purchase of the soil
may have arisen from the fact that the settlers for
a long time paid tribute to the ancient population, the
Maxyans, for their soil. The ox-hide and all that is
further told us of the fortunes of Elissa, her resistance
to the suit of the Libyan prince larbas,1 her self-
immolation in order to escape from this suit (Virgil
made despised love the motive for this immolation), is
due to the transference of certain traits from the
myths of the horned moon-goddess, to whom the cow
is sacred, the wandering Astarte, who also bore the
name of Dido, and of certain customs in the worship
of the goddess to Carthage ; these also have had in-
fluence on the narrative of the flight of Elissa.2

The new settlement was intended to become an
important centre for the colonies of the Phenicians
in the West. The situation was peculiarly fortunate.
Where the north coast of Africa approaches Sicily
most nearly, the mountain range which runs along this
coast, and forms the edge of the table-land in the
interior, sinks down in gentle declivities, which thus

1 Timaeus, fragm. 23, ed. Miiller.

» Vol. i. 371 ; Movers, "Phoeniz." 1, 609 ft.

270 P1KENICIA.

form water-courses of considerable length, to a fer-
tile hill country still covered with olive-gardens and
orange-forests. From the north the sea penetrates
deeply into the land between the " beautiful promon-
tory " (Has Sidi Ali) and the promontory of Hermes
(Ras Addar). On the western side of this bay a ridge
of land runs out, which possesses excellent springs of
water. Not far from the shore a rock rises steeply to
the height of about 200 feet. On this was planted
the new citadel, Byrsa, on which the wanderers
erected a temple to their god Esmun (I. 377). This
citadel, which is said to have been about 2000 paces
(double paces) in the circuit,1 was also the city round
which at a later time grew up the lower city, at first
on the south-east toward the shore, and then on the
north-west toward the sea. The harbour lay to the
south-east, under the citadel. Some miles to the north
of the new settlement, on the mouth of the Bagradas
(Medsherda), at the north-west corner of the bay, was
Ityke, the ancient colony of the Phenicians, which had
been in existence for more than two centuries when
the new settlers landed on the shore of the bay ; and
not far to the south on the shore was Adrymes
(Hadrumetum), another city of their countrymen,
which Sallust mentions among the oldest colonies of
the Phenicians.2 The Carthaginians never forgot their
affection for the ancient Ityke, by whose assistance, no
doubt, their own settlement had been supported.3

1 Oros. 4, 22 ; Strabo, p. 832. 2 Sail. "Jug." 19.

3 The various statements about the year of the foundation of Car-
thage are collected in Miiller, " Geograph. Grseci min.'' 1, xix. It is
impossible to fix the foundation more accurately than about the middle
of the ninth century B.C. We may place it in the year 846 B.C. if we
rest on the 143f years of Josephus from the building of the temple
(according to our own date 990 B.C.), and the round sum given by
Appian — that 700 years elapsed from the founding by Dido to the
destruction of the city ; " Rom. Hist." 8, 132.

THE CITIES OF THE PIIENICIANS. 271

The fragment which Josephus has preserved from
the annals of the kings of Tyre ends with the acces-
sion of Pygmalion and the flight of Elissa. More
than two centuries had passed since the campaign
of Tiglath Pilesar I. to the Mediterranean, during
which the cities of the Phenicians had suffered nothing

o

from the arms and expeditions of the Assyrians. But
when Balezor and Mutton, the son and grandson of
Ethbaal, ruled over Tyre (885 — 853 B.C.), Assurbanipal
of Assyria (883 — 859 B.C.) began to force his way to the
west over the Euphrates. When he had reduced the
sovereign of Karchemish to obedience by repeated
campaigns, and had built fortresses on both banks of
the Euphrates, he advanced in the year 876 B.C. to the
Orontes, captured the marches of Lebanus (Labnana),
and received tribute from the king of Tyre, i. e. from
Mutton, from the kings of Sidon, of Byblus, and Aradus.
According to the inscriptions, the tribute consisted of
bars of silver, gold, and lead. Assurbanipal's successor,
Shalmanesar II. of Assyria (859 — 823 B.C.), pushed on
even more energetically to the west. After forcing
Cilicia to submit, he attacked Hamath, and in the
year 854, as we have seen, he defeated at Karkar the
united kings of Hamath, Damascus, and Israel, who
were also joined by Matinbaal, the king of Aradus.
But Shalmanesar was compelled to undertake three
other campaigns to Damascus (850, 849, and 846 B.C.)
before he succeeded, in the year 842 B.C., in making
Damascus tributary. As has been remarked, Israel
did not any longer attempt the decision of arms,
and sought to gain the favour of Assyria-; like Tyre
and Sidon, Jehu sent tribute to Shalmanesar. This
payment of tribute was repeated perforce by Tyre,
Sidon, and Byblus, in the years 839 and 835 B.C., in
which Shalmanesar 's armies again appeared in Syria.

272 PH(ENICIA.

Moreover, the inscriptions of Bin-nirar, king of Assyria
(810 — 781 B.C.), tell us that Damascus, Tyre, Sidon,
Israel, Edom, and the land of the Philistines had paid
him tribute. It is obvious that the cities of the
Phenicians would have been as a rule most willing to
pay it. When Assyria had definitely extended her
dominion as far as the Euphrates, it was in the power
of the Assyrian king to stop the way for the merchants
of those cities to Mesopotamia and Babylon, and thus
to inflict very considerable damage on the trade of the
Phenicians, which was for the most part a carrying
trade between the East and West. What were the
sums paid in tribute, even if considerable, when
compared with such serious disadvantages ?

Hitherto we have been able to observe monarchy in
the patriarchal form of the head of the tribe, in the
god-like position of the Pharaohs of Egypt, in the
forms of a military principate, who ruled with despotic
power over wide kingdoms, or in diminished copies of
this original. It would be interesting to trace out
and ascertain the changes which it had now to undergo
at the head of powerful trading and commercial cities
such as the Phenicians were. We have already seen
that the principate of these cities was of great anti-
quity, that it remained in existence through all the
periods of Phenician history, that it was rooted deeply
enough to outlive even the independence of the cities.
All more detailed accounts are wanting, and even induc-
tions or comparisons with the constitution of Carthage
in later times carry us little further. Not to mention the
very insufficient accounts which we possess of this con-
stitution, it was only to the oldest settlements of the
Phenicians in Cyprus that the monarchy passed, at
least it was only in these that it was able to maintain
itself. The examination of these institutions of Carthage

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 273

is adapted to show us in contrast on the one hand to
the tribal princes of the Arabians, and on the other to
the monarchy of Elam, Babel, and Asshur — what
forms the feeling and character of a Semitic com-
munity, in which the burghers had reached the full
development of their powers, were able to give to their
state, which at the same time was supreme over a wide
region ; but for the constitution of the Phenician
cities scarcely any conclusions can be drawn from
it.

Of the internal condition of the Phenician cities, the
fragment of the history of Tyre in Josephus only
enables us to ascertain that there was no lack of strife
and bloodshed in the palaces of the kings, and that
the priests of the tutelary deity must have been of
importance and influence beside the king. But it fol-
lows from the nature of things that these city-kings
could not have held sway with the same complete
power as the military princes of the great kingdoms of
the East. The development of independence among the
burghers must have placed far closer limitations upon
the will of the kings in these cities than was the case
elsewhere in the East. The more lively the trade and
industry of the cities, the more strongly must the
great merchants and manufacturers have maintained
against the kings the consideration and advancement
of their own interests. For the maintenance of order
and peace, of law and property in the cities they
looked to the king, but they had also to make import-
ant demands before the throne, and were combined
against it by community of interests. They were
compelled to advance these independently if the
king refused his consent. Isaiah tells us that the
merchants of Tyre were princes. Ezekiel speaks of
the grey-haired men, the " elders " of the city of

VOL. II. T

274 PHOENICIA.

Byblus.1 Of the later period we know with greater
certainty that there was a council beside the kings,
the membership in which may have belonged primarily
to the chiefs of the old families, but also in part to the
hereditary priests. Inscriptions of the cities belong-
ing to Grecian times present the title " elders."2 The
families in the Phenician cities which could carry back
their genealogy to the forefathers of the tribes which
possessed land and influence before the fall of the Hit-
tites, the incursions of the Hebrews, and the spread of
trade had brought a mass of strangers into the city walls,
would appear to have had the first claim to a share in
the government ; the heads of these families may at
first have formed the council which stood beside the
king. Yet it lies in the nature of great manufacturing
and trading cities that the management of interests of
this kind cannot be confined to the elders of the family
or remain among the privileges of birth. Hence we
may assume that the great trading firms and mer-
chants could not long be excluded from these councils.
In the fourth century B.C. the council of Sidon seems
to have consisted of 500 or 600 elders.3 Owing to
the treasures of East and West which poured together
into the cities of the Phenicians, life became luxurious
within their walls. Men's efforts were directed to gain
and acquisition ; the merchants would naturally desire
to enjoy their wealth. The lower classes of the closely-
compressed population no doubt followed the example
set them by the higher. From the multitude of retail
dealers and artizans, the number of pilots and mariners
who returned home eager for enjoyment after long
voyages, men whose passions would be unbridled, a

1 Ezekiel xxvii. 9.

2 Renan, " Mission de Ph6nicie," p. 199.

3 Diod. 16, 41, 45 ; fragm. 23, ed. Bipont ; cf. Justin, 18, 6.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 275

turbulent population must have grown up, in spite of
the numerous colonies into which the ambitious as
well as the poor might emigrate or be sent with the
certain prospect of a better position. We saw above
that the people of Tyre are said to ha.ve transferred
the rule to Pygmalion. For the later period it is certain
that even the people had a share in the government.1

The hereditary monarchy passed, so far as we can
see, from the mother-cities to the oldest colonies only,
i. e. the cities in Cyprus. In the other colonies the chief
officers were magistrates, usually two in number.2
They were called Sufetes, i. e. judges. In Carthage
these two yearly officers, in whose hands lay the
supreme administration of justice, and the executive,
formed with 30 elders the governing body of the city.
It seems that these 30 men were the representatives
of as many original combinations of families into
which the old -houses of the city were incorporated.
The connection of the colonies and mother-cities, both
in general and more especially where the colony could
dispense with the protection of the mother-city, were
far more mercantile and religious than political. The
colonies worshipped the deities of the mother-cities,
and gave them a share in their booty. We also find
that descendants of priests who had emigrated from
the mother-city stood at the head of the temples of
the colonies. In Carthage, where the priests of
Melkarth wore the purple robe, the office was hered-
itary in the family of Bithyas, who is said to have left
Tyre with Elissa.3

We are acquainted with the gods of the Phenician
cities, and the mode in which they worshipped them ;

1 Joseph. "Antiq." 14, 12,4, 5; Curt. 4, 15.

2 Liv. 28, 37; Movers, "PhxenLz." 2, 1, 490 ff, 529 ff.

3 Servius, " ad .ffineid." 1, 738.

T 2

276 PHOENICIA.

with El and Baal-Samim, Baal-Melkarth and Baal-
Moloch, Adonis, Astarte and Ashera, with the rites
of continence and mutilation, of sensual excess and
prostitution, of sacrifice and fire-festival, which were
intended to win their favour and grace. We observed
that the protecting deities of the separate states had
even before the days of Hiram been united in the
system of the seven great gods, the Cabiri, at whose
head was placed an eighth, Esmun, the supreme deity.
We saw that in this system special meanings were
ascribed to them in reference to the protection of
peace and law, of industry and navigation ; and we
cannot doubt that with the riches which accumulated
in the walls of the cities, with the luxury of life which
these riches permitted, the lascivious and sensual side
of the worship must have increased and extended.

The life led by the kings of the old Phenician cities
is described as rich and splendid. We have already
assumed that the princes of the Phenician cities had a
rich share in the returns of trade, and indeed the fact
can be proved from the Hebrew Scriptures for Hiram,
king of Tyre. Ezekiel tells us, " The king of Tyre sits
like a god in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas ;
he dwells as in Eden, in the garden of God. Precious
stones are the covering of his palaces : the ruby, the
topaz, the diamond, the chrysolite, the onyx, and the
jasper, the sapphire, the carbuncle, the emerald, and
gold ; the workmanship of his ring-cases he bears upon
him." l " His garments," we are told in a song of the
Hebrews, " smell of myrrh, aloes, and cassia ; in ivory
palaces the sound of harps gladdens him. At his right
hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir, in a garment
of wrought gold : on broidered carpets she shall be

1 Ezekiel xxviii. 2—17.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 277

brought to him ; the young maidens, her companions,
follow her." '

Hosea calls Tyre " a plantation in a pleasant
meadow."2 Of the city itself Ezekiel says, "The
architects have made her beauty perfect. All her
planks (wainscot) were of cypress, and her masts of
cedar of Lebanon ; the rudders are of oaks of Bashan,
the benches of ivory, set in costly wood from the island
of Cyprus. For sails Tyre spreads out byssus and
gay woofs ; blue and red purple from the islands of
Elisa formed their coverlets." 3 In the description of
Strabo, more "than 500 years later, Tyre appears less
magnificent. The houses of the city were very high,
higher than at Rome ; the city still wealthy, owing to
the trade in her two harbours and her purple factories,
but the number of these made the city unpleasant.
Strabo does not mention any considerable building in
the city. Of Aradus he says, " The smallness of the
rock on which the city lies, seven stades only in circuit,
and the number of inhabitants caused every house to
have many stories. Drinking-water had to be obtained
from the mainland ; on the island there were only
wells and cisterns."4

Scarcely any striking remains of the ancient build-
ings of Phoenicia have come down to our time. The
ancient temples enumerated in the treatise on the Syrian
goddess have perished without a trace ; the temple of
Melkarth of Tyre, the great temple of Astarte at
Sidon, the temple of Bilit (Ashera) at Byblus,5 al-
though they were certainly not of a character easy to

1 Psalm xlv. 9 — 15. Though it is doubtful whether there is any
reference here to Tyre, the court-life of the Israelites was imitated from
the Phenicians.

3 Hosea ix. 13. 3 Ezekiel xxvii. 4 — 7.

4 Strabo, pp. 754, 756.

6 Lucian, " De Syria dea," 3 — 5.

278 PHCENIC1A.

destroy. That the Phenicians were acquainted from
very ancient periods with the erection of strong
masonry was proved above. Not only have we the
legend of the Greeks, that Cadmus taught them the
art of masonry and built the famous walls of Thebes ;
we saw how Israel, about the year 1000 B.C., provided
herself with masons, stone-cutters, and materials from
Tyre. Hence we may also assume that the archi-
tecture of the temple and the royal palaces of Solomon
described in the Books of Kings corresponded to the
architecture of the Phenicians. The temples and
palaces of the Phenicians consisted, therefore, of walls
of large materials, roofed with beams of cedar ; in
the interior the materials were no doubt covered, as
at Jerusalem, with planks of wood and ornaments of
brass, "so that the stone was nowhere seen" (p. 183).
Ezekiel has already told us that the planks of the roofs
of the royal palace at Tyre were overlaid with gold and
precious stones ; and the Books of Kings showed us
that even the floors were adorned with gold. All the
remains of walls in Phoenicia that can be referred to
an ancient period exhibit a style of building confined
to the stone of the mountain range which hems the
coast, and desirous of imitating the nature of the rocks.
Blocks of large dimensions were used by preference ; at
first they were worked as little as possible, and fitted to
each other, and the interstices between the great blocks
were filled with smaller stones. Of this kind are the
fragments of the walls which surround the rock on
which the city of Aradus stood. Gigantic blocks,
visible even now here and there, formed the dams of
the harbours of Aradus, Sidon, Tyre, and Japho.1 It
was a step in advance that the blocks, while retaining
the form in which they were quarried, were smoothed

1 Kenan, " Mission de Phenicir," p. 39 ff, 362.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 279

at the joints in order to be fitted together more firmly,
and a further step still that the blocks were hewn into
squares, though at first the outer surfaces of the
squares were not smoothed. So far as remains allow
us to see, the detached structures were of a simple and
massive character, in shape like cubes of vast dimen-
sions ; the walls, as is shown by the city wall of
Aradus, were joined without mortar, and in the oldest
times the buildings appear to have been roofed with
monoliths. Cedar beams were not sought after till
larger spaces had to be covered. Beside old water-
basins hewn in the rock, and oil or wine presses of
the same character, we have no remains of ancient
Phenician temples but those on the site of Marathus
(now Amrit), a city of the tribe of the Arvadites, to
the south of Aradus, and in the neighbourhood of
Byblus.1 The bases of the walls which enclose the
courts and water-basins of the temple of Marathus
can still be traced, as well as the huge stones which
formed the three cellae, the innermost shrines of this
temple. On either side of a back wall formed of similar
materials heavy blocks protrude, and are roofed over,
together with this wall, by a great monolith, which
protected the sacred stone or the image of the deity.2
This heavy style of the city walls, dams, temples,
and royal castles did not prevent the Phenicians, any
more than the Egyptians, from building the upper
stories of the dwelling-houses of their cities in light
wood-work.

By far the most important remains of ancient
Phoenicia are the rock-tombs, wjbich are found in great
numbers and extent opposite to the islands of Tyre
and Aradus, as well as at Sidon, Byblus, and among

1 Ceccaldi, " Le Monument de Sarba," Revue Archeolog. 1878.
3 Renan, " Mission de Phenicie," p. 60 ff.

•280 PHOENICIA.

the ruins of the other cities on the spurs of Lebanon ;
and which at Tyre especially spread out into wide
burial-places, and several stories of tombs, one upon
the other. In the same style we find to the west of
the ruins of Carthage long walls of rocks hollowed out
into thousands of tombs, and furnished with arched
niches for the reception of the dead.1 In the oldest
period the Phenicians must have placed their dead in
natural cavities of rock, and perhaps they erected a
stone before them as a memorial. In Genesis Abra-
ham buries Sarah in the cave of Machpelah, and Jacob
sets up a stone on the grave of Rachel.2 Afterwards
the natural hollows were extended, and whole cavities
dug out artificially for tombs. The tomb of David and
the tombs of his successors were hewn in the rocks of
the gorge which separated the city from the height
of Zion (p. 177). The oldest of the artificial tombs in
Phoenicia are doubtless those which consist of cubical
chambers with horizontal hewn roofs. Round one
or two large chambers lower oblong depressions are
driven further in the rocks to receive the corpses.
The entrance into these ancient chambers are formed
by downward perpendicular shafts, at the bottom of
which on two sides are openings into the chambers
secured by slabs of stone laid before them. Shafts of
this kind must be meant when the Hebrews say in a
figure of the dead, "The mouth of the well has eaten
him up." Later than the tombs of this description are
those the entrance to which is on the level ground (which
was then closed by a stone), which have roofs hewn in
low arches, and side niches for the corpses. The arched
chambers approached by steps leading downward, the
walls of which are decorated after Grecian patterns on

1 BeuM, " Nachgrabungen zu Karthago," s. 98 £f (translation).
* Gen. xxxv. 20.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENIGIANS. 281

the stone, or on stucco, must originate from the time
of the predominance of Greek art, i. e. of the days of
Hellenism. The oldest style of burial was the placing
of the corpse in the cavity, the grave-chamber, and after-
wards in the depression at the side of this. At a later
time apparently the enclosure of the corpse in a narrow
coffin of clay became common here, as in Babylonia.
Coffins of lead have also been found in the rock-tombs
of Phoenicia. But beside these, heavy oblong stone-
coffins with a pimple slab of stone as a lid were in use
in ancient times ; along with flat lids, lids raised in a
low triangle are also found ; later still, and latest of
all, are coffins and sarcophagi adorned with acroteria
and other ornaments of the Greek style.1

In the flat limestone rocks which run at a moderate
elevation in the neighbourhood of Sidon, and contain
the vast necropolis of that city, there is a cavern,
now called Mogharet Ablun, i. e. the cave of Apollo.
Beside the entrance, in a depression covered by a
structure attached to the rock-wall (the rock-tombs
were supplemented and extended by structures at-
tached to the wall), was found a coffin of blackish blue
stone, the form of which indicates the shape of the
buried person after the manner of the mummy-coffins
of Egypt, and displays in colossal relief the mask of
the dead in Egyptian style, with an Egyptian covering
for the head and beard on the chin ; the band round
the neck ends behind in two hawk's heads. The
inscription in Phenician letters teaches us that this
coffin contained Esmunazar, king of Sidou. Similar
sarcophagi in stone, in part expressing the form even
more accurately, seven or eight in number, have been
discovered in other chambers of the burial-place of
Sidon, and in the burial-places of Byblus and Anta-

1 Kenan, loc. cit. 412 ff.

282 PHCENICIA.

radus, but only in cubical, i. e. in more ancient cham-
bers. Marble coffins of this kind have also been
found in the Phenician colonies of Soloeis and Panor-
mus in Sicily, and of the same shape in burnt earth in
Malta and Gozzo. The Phenicians, therefore, came to
imitate the coffins of the Egyptians. Similar imita-
tion of Egyptian burial is proved by the gold plates
found in Phenician chambers, which are like those
with which we find the mouth closed in Egyptian
mummies, and the discovery of golden masks in
Phenician chambers,1 which correspond to the gilding
of the masks of the face of the innermost Egyptian
coffins which immediately surround the linen covering.
As the face-mask of the external coffin imitated the
face of the dead in stone or in coloured wood, so also
ought the inner gilded face to preserve the features
of the dead. This imitation of the Egyptian style of
burial among the Phenicians must go back to a great
antiquity. It is true that Esmunazar of Sidon did not
rule till the second half of the fifth or the beginning of
the fourth century B.C.2 Yet the shape and style of his
coffin reminds us of older Egyptian patterns ; it is most
like the stone coffins of Egypt which have come down
from the beginning of the sixth century. And if the
ancient tombs opened at Mycenae behind the lion's gate
belong to Carians influenced by Phenician civilisation
(p. 74), if golden masks are here found on the face of
the dead, the Phenicians must have borrowed this cus-
tom from the Egyptians as early as the thirteenth
century, if not even earlier.

The remains which have come down to us of the
sculpture, jars, and utensils of Phoenicia exhibit the
double influence which the art and industry of the

1 In Cyprus also a mask of this kind has been found.

9 Von Gutschmid, in ''Fleckeisens Jahrbucher," 1875, s. 579.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 283

Phenicians underwent even at an early period. Agree-
ably to the close relations into which the Phenicians
entered, on the one hand with Babel and Asshur, and on
the other with Egypt, the effects of these two ancient
civilisations meet each other on the coast of Syria.
The arts of the kindred land of the Euphrates, the
relations of which to Phoenicia were at the same time
the older, naturally made themselves felt first. When
Tuthmosis III. collected tribute in Syria at the begin-
ning of the sixteenth century, the Babylonian weight
was already in use there ; the jars which were brought
to this king as the tribute of Syria are carefully
worked, but as yet adorned with very simple and recur-
ring patterns of lines. On the other hand, the ornaments
found in the tombs of My cense, gold-plates, frontlets,
and armlets, exhibit ornaments like those figured on
the monuments of Assyria ; and the objects found in
the rock -tombs on Hymettus, at Spata, point even
more definitely to Babylonian patterns : winged fabu-
lous animals and battles of beasts (a lion attacking a
bull or an antelope a) are formed in the manner of the
Eastern Semites, which brings the form of the muscles
into prominence. We may assume that the influence
of Egypt began with the times of the Tuthmosis and
Amenophis, and their supremacy in Syria, and slowly
gathered strength. The heavy style of Phenician build-
ings would not be made lighter or more free by the archi-
tecture of Egypt, which also arose out of building in
rock. The temples of Phoenicia adopted Egyptian sym-
bols for their ornaments ; the monoliths of the roofs of
those three cellae at Marathus exhibit the winged sun's-
disk, the emblem at the entrance of Egyptian temples ;
the chests for the dead and masks for the mummies
of the Egyptians were imitated in the rock-tombs of

1 AOHNAION tr' y' wivaS; A. 7, B 8.

284 PHOENICIA.

Phoenicia. If the weaving of the Phenicians at first
copied the ancient Babylonian patterns, they began
under the stronger influence of Egypt to adorn their
pottery and metal-work after Egyptian patterns. But
they also combined the Babylonian and Egyptian
elements in their art.1 The oldest memorial of this
combination is perhaps retained in that winged sphinx,
which belongs to the time of the dominion of the shep-
herds in Egypt. In the graves on Hymettus pictures
in relief of female winged sphinxes are found with
clothed breasts and peculiar wings, in a treatment ob-
viously already conventional. In Phoenicia itself are
found reliefs of similar sphinxes, old men with a human
face on either side of the tree of life, which meet us
oftentimes in the monuments of Assyria. This combina-
tion, this use of Babylonian and Egyptian types and
forms side by side, is seen most clearly on a large
bowl found at Curium near Amathus, in Cyprus, and
wrought with great care and skill.2 It follows that
the art of the Phenicians was essentially imitative and
intended to furnish objects for trade. Of round works
of sculpture we have only dwarfish deities (I. 378), the
typical form of which was naturally retained, and a
few lions coarsely wrought in the style of the plastic
art of Babylon and Assyria.3 The relation in which
the lion stood to the god Melkarth naturally made the
delineation of the lion a favourite object of Phenician
art.

Phoenicia, though the home of alphabetical writing,
has left us no more than two or three inscriptions, and
Carthage has not left us a great number. Not that there
was any lack of inscriptions in Phoenicia in ancient

1 Helbig, " Cenni sopra 1'arte fenicia," p. 17 ff.

2 Ceccaldi, "Les fouilles de Curium," Eevue Archeolog. 1877.

3 Renan, loc. at. pp. 175, 181, 397.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 285

days. We have heard already of ancient inscriptions
at Rhodes, Thebes, and G-ades. Job wishes that " his
words might be graven on rocks for ever with an iron
chisel and lead." l The inscriptions of Phoenicia have
perished because they were engraved like those in-
scriptions of Gades, on plates of brass. Beside the
inscription on the coffin of Esmunazar, king of Sid on,
already mentioned, of a date about 400 B.C., only two
or three smaller inscriptions have been preserved,
which do not go beyond the second century B.C. In
this inscription Esmunazar speaks in person ; he calls
himself the son of Tabnit, king of the Sidonians,
son of Esmunazar, king of the Sidonians. With his
mother, Amastarte, the priestess of Astarte, he had
erected temples to Baal, Astarte, and Esmun. He
beseeches the favour of the gods for himself and his
land ; he prays that Dor and Japho may always
remain under Sidon ; he declares that he wishes to
rest in the grave which he has built and in this coffin.
No one is to open the tomb or plunder it, or remove
or damage this stone coffin. If any man attempts it
the gods will destroy him with his seed ; he is not to
be buried, and after death will find no rest among the
shades.2

There is scarcely any side of civilisation, any forms of
technical art, the invention of which was not ascribed
by the Greeks to the Phenicians. They were nearly
all made known to the Greeks through the Phenicians;
more especially the building of walls and fortresses,
mining, the alphabet, astronomy, numbers, mathe-
matics, navigation, together with a great variety of
applications of technical skill. If the discovery of

1 Job xix. 23.

2 Kodiger, "Z. D. M. Q-." 9, 647; Schlottmann, "Inschrift Esmun-
azars; " Halevy, "Melanges," pp. 9, 34; Oppert, " Kecords of the Past,"
9, 109.

286 PHOENICIA.

alphabetic writing belongs to the Phenicians, the
Babylonians were the instructors of the Phenicians
in astronomy as well as in fixing measures and
weights (I. 305). Yet this is no reason for contest-
ing the statement of Strabo that the Sidonians were
" eager inquirers into the knowledge of the stars and
of numbers, to which they were led by navigation
by night and the art of calculation." l In the same
way the technical discoveries ascribed by the Greeks
to the Phenicians were not all made in their cities ;
they carried on with vigour and skill what grew up
independently among them as well as what they learnt
from others. The making of glass was undoubtedly
older in Egypt than in Phoenicia (I. 224). Egypt also
practised work in metals before Phoenicia. Snefru
and Chufu made themselves masters of the copper
mines of the peninsula of Sinai before the year 3000
B.C. (I. 95), while the Phenicians can hardly have
occupied the copper island off their coast (Cyprus)
before the middle of the thirteenth century B.C. Ar-
tistic weaving and embroidery were certainly practised
at a more ancient date in Babylonia than in the
cities of the Phenicians. But all these branches of in-
dustry were carried on with success by the Phenicians.
Sidon furnished excellent works in glass, which were
accounted the best even down to a late period of
antiquity. The dunes on the coast between Acco
and Tyre, where is the mouth of the glass-river (Sihor
Libnath),2 provided the Phenician manufacturers with
the earth necessary for the manufacture of glass. It
was maintained that the most beautiful glass was

1 Strabo, p. 757.

2 Joshua xix. 26. Strabo, p. 758. Tacitus says, " On the shore of
Judsea the Belus falls into the sea : the sand collected at the mouth of
this river, when mixed with saltpetre, is melted into glass. The
strip of shore is of moderate extent, but inexhaustible ; " " Hist. 5, 7

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 287

cast in Sarepta (Zarpath, i. e. melting), a city on the
coast between Sidon and Tyre.1

The purple dyeing, i. e. the colouring of woofs by the
liquor from fish, was discovered by the Phenicians.
They were unsurpassed in this art ; it outlived by
many centuries the power and splendour of their cities.
Trumpet and purple fish were found in great numbers
on their coasts, and the liquor from these provided
excellent dye. The liquor of the purple-fish, which
comes from a vessel in the throat, is dark-red in the
small fish, and black in the larger fish ; the liquor of
the trumpet-fish is scarlet. The fish were pounded
and the dye extracted by decoction. By mixing,
weakening, or thickening this material, and by adding
this or that ingredient, various colours were obtained,
through all the shades of crimson and violet down to
the darkest black, in which fine woollen stuffs and
linen from Egypt were dipped. The stuffs soaked in
these colours are the purple cloths of antiquity, and
were distinguished by the bright sheen of the colours.
The Tyrian double-dyed cloth, which had the colour
of curdled blood, and the violet amethyst purple were
considered the most beautiful.2 Three hundred pounds
of the raw material were usually required to dye 50
pounds of wool.3 When the purple stuff's began to be
sought after, the fish collected on the coasts of Tyre,
Sidon, and Sarepta were no longer sufficient. We
saw how the ships of the Phenicians went from coast
to coast in order to get fresh materials for the dye,
and found them in great numbers on the shores of
Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, Cythera, and Thera ; in the
bays of Laconia and Argos, and in the straits of

1 Pliny, « Hist. Nat." 5, 17.

2 Adolph Schmidt, " Forschungen auf dem Gebiete des Alterthums,"
s. 69. 3 Schmidt, foe. cit. 129 ff.

288 PHCENICIA.

Eubcea. Purple-fish were also collected on the greater
Syrtis, in Sicily, the Balearic Isles, and coasts of
Tarshish.1 Even at a later period, when the art of
dyeing with the purple-fish was understood and
practised at many places in the Mediterranean Sea, the
Tyrian purple still maintained its pre-eminence and
fame. "Tyre," says Strabo, "overcame her misfor-
tunes, and always recovered herself by means of her
navigation, in which the Phenicians were superior to all
others, and her purples. The Tyrian purple is the most
beautiful ; the fish are caught close at hand, and
every other requirement for the dyeing is there in
abundance." 2 A hundred years later Pliny adds " that
the ancient glory of Tyre survived now only in her
fish and her purples."3 The consumption and expense
of purple in antiquity was very great, especially in
Hither Asia. At first the Phenician kings wore the
purple robe as the sign of their rank ; then it became
the adornment of the princes of the East, the priests,
the women of high rank, and upper classes. In the
temples and palaces the purple served for curtains and
cloths, robes and veils for the images and shrines.
The kings of Babylon and Assyria, and after them the
kings of Persia, collected stores of purple stuffs in their
palaces. Plutarch puts the value of the amount of
purple found by Alexander at Susa at 5000 talents.4
In the West also the purple robe soon became the
distinguishing garb of royalty and rank. Yet the
Greeks and Romans of the better times, owing to the
costliness of the material, contented themselves with
the possession of borders or stripes of purple.

The weaving and embroidery of the Phenicians

1 Herod. 4, 151; Pliny, "Hist. Nat." 9, 60; Strabo, pp. 145, 835.
« Strabo, p. 757. 3 Pliny, "Hist. Nat." 5, 17.

• Plut. " Alex." c. 36.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 289

apparently followed Assyrian and Babylonian patterns.
They must also have made and exported ceramic ware
and earthen vessels in large numbers at an ancient
period, as is proved by the tributes brought to Tuth-
mosis III., the discoveries in Cyprus, Khodes, Thera,
and at Hissarlik. In the preparation of perfumes Sidon
and Tyre were not equal to the Babylonians. It is
true that their manufacturers supplied susinum and
cyprimim of excellent quality, but they could not
attain to the cinnamon or the nard ointment, nor to
the royal ointment of the Babylonians.1

In mining the Phenicians were masters. In regard
to the Phenician skill in this art, the Book of Job says,
" The earth, from which comes nourishment, is turned
up ; he lays his hand upon the flint ; far from the deal-
ings of men he makes his descending shaft. No bird of
prey knows the path ; the eye of the vulture discovers
it not ; the wild beasts do not tread it. Through the
rocks paths are made ; he searches out the darkness and
the night. Then his eye beholds all precious things.
The stone of the rocks is the place of the sapphire
and gold-dust. Iron is taken out of the mountains ;
stones are melted into brass, the drop of water is
stopped, and the hidden is brought to light."2 The
Phenicians dug mines for copper, first on Lebanon and
then in Cyprus. We saw that they afterwards, in the
second half of the thirteenth century, opened out the
gold treasures of Thasos in the Thracian Sea. Hero-
dotus, who had seen their abandoned mines there (they
lay on the south coast of Thasos), informed us that the
Phenicians had entirely " turned over a whole moun-
tain." Yet even in the fifth century B.C. the mines of

1 Movers, "Phceniz." 3, 103.

2 Job xxviii. 1—11. In this description the author could only have
Phenician mines in his eye.

VOL. II. U

29J PHOENICIA.

Thasos produced a yearly income of from two to three
hundred talents. In Spain the Phenicians opened
their mines in the silver mountain, i. e. in the Sierra
Morena, above the lower course of the Baetis (the
Guadalquivir) ;l their ships went up the stream as
far as Sephela (perhaps Hispalis, Seville). The richest
silver-mines lay above Sephela at Ilipa (Niebla) ; the
best gold and copper mines were at Cotini, in the
region of Gades.2 Diodorus assures us that all the
mines in Iberia had been opened by Phenicians and
Carthaginians, and not one by the Romans. In the
more ancient times the workmen here brought up in
three days an Euboic talent of silver, and their wages
were fixed at a fourth part of the returns. The mines
in Iberia were carried down many stades in depth and
length, with pits, shafts, and sloping paths crossing
each other ; for the veins of gold and silver were more
productive at a greater depth. The water in the mines
was taken out by Egyptian spiral pumps. Strabo
observes that the gold ore when brought up was
melted over a slow fire, and purified by vitriolated
earth. The smelting-ovens for the silver were built
high, in order that the vapour from the ore, which was
injurious and even deadly, might pass into the air.3

The Phenicians also understood how to work skil-
fully the metals supplied by their mines. At the
founding of Gades, which we had to place about the
year 1100 B.C., iron pillars with inscriptions are men-
tioned which the settlers put up in the temple of
Melkarth (p. 82). The brass work which the melter,
Hiram of Tyre, executed for Solomon (p. 182) is evidence

1 Miillenhoff, " Deutsche Altertumskunde," 1, 120 ff.

2 Strabo, p. 142. Kotini = the Oleastrum of the Eomans ; Pliny,
"Hist. Nat." 3, 3. Ptolem. 2, 4, 14.

3 Strabo, pp. 175, 176, 120; Pliny, "Hist. Nat." 7, 57.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 291

of long practice in melting brass, and of skill in
bringing into shape large masses of melted metal.
The Homeric poems speak of Sidon as " rich in brass,"
and " skilful ; " they tell us of large beaten bowls of
brass and silver of Sidonian workmanship, "rich in
invention." Even at a later period the goblets of
Sidon were in request. Not only metal implements
and vessels of brass and copper, molten and beaten,
were furnished by the Phenicians ; they must also
have manufactured armour in large quantities, if we
may draw any conclusion about armour from the tribute
imposed on the Syrians by Tuthmosis III. It is easily
intelligible of what value it must have been for the
nations of the West to come into the possession of
splendid armour and good weapons. Besides these are
the ornaments found in great numbers, and of high
antiquity, in the tombs of Spata and Mycenae, and
in the excavations at Hissarlik. In Homer, Phenician
ships bring necklaces of gold and amber to the Greeks.
At a later time the ornaments of the Phenicians and
their alabaster boxes were sought after ; the carved
work in ivory and wood, with which they also adorned
the prows and banks of oars of their ships, is praised
by Ezekiel. They also knew how to set and cut precious
stones ; some seals have come down to us in part from
an ancient date.1

In ship-building the Phenicians were confessedly
superior ; they are said to have discovered navigation.2
The ancient forests of cedar and cypress which rose
immediately above their shores supplied the best

1 Ezekiel xxvii. 5, 6 ; Levy, " Siegel und Gemmen." If the first
text of the Pentateuch represents the names of the tribes of the
people as engraved upon the precious stones in the shield on the breast
of the high priest (Exod. xxv. 7 ; xxviii. 9 ff, supra, 207), the author
had, no doubt, the work of Phenician artists in his eye.

2 Pliny, " Hist. Nat." 5, 13.

u2

292 PHOENICIA.

wood, which resisted decay for an extraordinary
length of time even in salt water. Much as the
Phenicians used these forests in the course of a thou-
sand years for building their ships, their palaces, and
temples, as well as for exportation, they provided even
in the third century B.C. a material which for extent,
size, and beauty won the admiration of the Greeks.1
The oldest ship of the Phenicians which continued
through all time in use as a trading- vessel was the
gaulos, a vessel with high prow and stern, both of
which were similarly rounded. It was propelled by
a large sail and by rowers, from 20 "to 30 in number.
Besides the gaulos, there was the long and narrow fifty-
oar, which served for a merchantman and pirate-ship
as well as for a ship of war, and after the discovery of
the silver land the large and armed merchantman, the
ship of Tarshish. Isaiah enumerates the ship of
Tarshish among the costly structures of men.2 Ezekiel
compares Tyre to a proud ship of the sea. We know
that the great transport-ships and merchantmen of the
Phenicians and Carthaginians could take about 500
men on board. The Byblians were considered the best
ship-builders. The keels of the ships, like the masts,
were made of cedar ; the oars were of oak, supplied by
the oak forests of the table-land of Bashan. The
mariners of Sidon and Aradus were considered the
best rowers. The Greeks praise the strict and careful
order on board a Phenician ship, the happy use of
the smallest spaces, the accuracy in distributing and
placing the lading, the experience, wisdom, activity,
and safety of the Phenician pilots and officers.3 Others
commend the great sail and oar power of the Phenician
ships. They could sail even against the wind, and
make fortunate voyages in the stormy season of the

1 Diodor. 19, 58. 3 Isaiah ii. 16. 3 Xen. "CEcon." 8, 12.

THE CITIES OF THE PHENICIANS. 293

year. While the Greeks steered by the Great Bear,
which, if a more visible, was a far more uncertain
guide, the Phenicians had at an early time discovered
a less conspicuous but more trustworthy guide in the
polar star, which the Greeks call the " Phenician star."
The Greeks themselves allow that this circumstance
rendered the voyages of the Phenicians more accurate
and secure. On an average the Phenician ships,
which as a rule did not set out before the end of
February, and returned at the end of October, accom-
plished 120 miles in 24 hours ; but ships that were
excellently built and equipped, and sufficiently manned,
ran about 150 miles.1 In the fifteenth century the
galleys of Venice could run from 50 to 100 miles in
the Mediterranean in the 24 hours. The excellence of
the Phenician navy survived the independence of the
cities. Inclination towards, and pleasure in navigation,
as well as skill in it, were always to be found among
the populations of those cities. The Phenician ships
were by far the best in the fleets of the Persian kings.

1 Movers, "Phceniz." 3, 182 ff, 191 ff.

CHAPTER XII.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS.

WE found above at what an early period the migratory
tribes of Arabia came into intercourse with the region
of the Euphrates, and the valley of the Nile, how
in both these places they. purchased corn, implements,
and weapons in return for their horses and camels,
their skins and their wool, and the prisoners taken in
their feuds. It was this exchange trade of the Arabian
tribes which in the first instance brought about the
intercourse of Syria with Babylonia and Egypt. Egypt
like Babylonia required oil and wine for their popula-
tion ; metals, skins, and wool for their manufactures ;
wrood for the building of houses and ships. For the
Syrians and cities of the Phenicians the intercourse
with the Arabians, and the lands of the Euphrates and
Tigris, was facilitated by the fact that nations related to
them in race and language dwelt as far as the border-
mountains of Armenia and Iran and the southern
coast of Arabia, and their trade with Egypt was
facilitated in the same manner when Semitic tribes
between 2000 and 1500 B.C. obtained the supremacy in
Egypt and maintained it for more than three centuries.
From the fact that Babylonian weights and measures
were in use in Syria in the sixteenth century B.C., we
may conclude that there must have been close trade
relations between Syria and Babylonia from the year
2000 B.C. ; and in the same manner in consequence of

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS. 295

the conquest of Egypt by the shepherds more active
relations must have commenced between Syria and
the land of the Nile, at a period not much later. The
supremacy which Egypt afterwards obtained over
Syria under the Tuthmosis and Amenophis must have
rather advanced than destroyed this ; thus Sethos,
towards the year 1400, used his successes against the
Cheta, i. e. the Hittites, to have cedars felled on Lebanon.
We may assume that even before this time, after the
rise of the kingdom of the Hittites, i. e. after the middle
of the fifteenth century, the cities of the Phenicians
were no longer content to exchange the products of
Syria, wine, oil, and brass, the manufactures of their
own growing industry, purple stuffs and weapons,
with the manufactures of Egypt, linen cloths, and
papyrus tissues, glass and engraved stones, ornaments
and drugs, on the one hand, and on the other hand
with the manufactures of Babylon, cloths, ointments,
and embroidered stuffs : they also carried Egyptian
fabrics to Babylon, and Babylonian fabrics to Egypt.
The trade of Phoenicia with Egypt and Babylonia
was no longer restricted to the exchange of Phenician-
Syrian products and fabrics with those of Egypt
and Babylon : it was at the same time a middle
trade between those two most ancient seats of cultiva-
tion, between Egypt and Babylonia. It cannot have
been any detriment to this trade of the Phenicians
that a second centre of civic life sprang up subse-
quently on the central Tigris in the growing power of
Assyria. In the ruins of Chalah (p. 34) Egyptian
works of art have been dug up in no inconsiderable
numbers. Herodotus begins his work with the ob-
servation that the Phenicians at an early period
endeavoured to export and exchange Egyptian and
Assyrian (i. e. Babylonian and Assyrian) wares.

296 PHCENICIA.

The sea lay open to the cities of the Phenicians for
their intercourse with Egypt ; for this route they were
independent of the good will or aversion of the tribes and
princes, who ruled in the south of Canaan ; moreover
the wood of Lebanon could not be carried by land to
Egypt. We may certainly assume that the navigation
of the Phenicians was enabled to obtain its earliest
practice for further journeys by these voyages to that
mouth of the Nile, which the Egyptians opened to
foreign ships (I. 227). The free and secure use of the
routes of the caravans to the Euphrates, and from this
river to the Syrian coast, must have been obtained
from the rulers of Syria, the princes of Hamath and
Damascus, the migratory tribes of the Syrian desert,
the princes whose dominions lay on the Euphrates ;
and would hardly be obtained without heavy pay-
ments. So much the more desirable was it, if the
cities could enter into special relations with one or
other of these princes, such as David and Solomon,
who not only opened Israel to them, but also provided
the routes with caravanserais and warehouses (p. 187).
The trade-road to the Euphrates led from Sidon past
Dan (Laish) in Israel to Damascus, hence northwards
past Biblah and Emesa (Hems) to Hamath, from
Hamath to Bambyke (Hierapolis) in the neighbourhood
of the Euphrates, and then crossed over the river to
Harran (I. 320). From Harran the caravans went
down along the Belik to the Euphrates, then in the
valley of the Euphrates to Babylon, or went eastwards
past Nisibis (Nisib) to the Tigris. A shorter road to the
Euphrates ran past Damascus and the oasis of Tadmor,
and reached the river at Thipsach (Thapsacus) at the
farthest bend to the west.1

We have already seen at what an early period the

1 Supra, p. 187. Movers, " Phoeniz." 2, 3, 244 ff.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS. 297

trade with the land of frankincense, i. e. with South
Arabia, grew up for Egypt, owing to the mutual
intercourse of the Arabian tribes (I. 226). The first
attempt of Egypt to open a communication by sea
with South Arabia falls about the year 2300 B.C. At a
period not later, other Arabian tribes must have
carried the incense and spices of South Arabia to
Elam, Ur and Nipur, and Babylon. Syria must have
received the products of South Arabia first through
Babylon, then by means of direct communication with
the Arabs, and lastly by the special caravans of the
Phenicians. We hear of two trade-roads to that land.
One led past Damascus to the oasis of Duma (Dumat
el Dshandal), and from thence through the interior of
Arabia to the south ; the other ran through Israel past
Ashtaroth Karnaim, through the territories of the Am-
monites, Moabites, and Edomites, to Elath, and thence
led along the coast of the Arabian Gulf to the Sabaeans
(I. 320). From the Sabseans and the Chatramites even
before the year 1500 B.C. the caravans brought not
spices only and incense, but also the products of the
Somali coast. The Sabseans traversed the Arabian
Gulf and carried home the products of the coast of
East Africa; the southwest coast of Arabia was no
longer a place for producing and exporting frankin-
cense and spices ; it became the trading-place of the
Somali coast, and before the year 1000 B.C. was also
the trading-place for the products of India, which
ships of the Indians carried to the shore of the
Sabeeans and Chatramites (I. 322). It must have
been a considerable increase in the extent of the
Phenician trade and the gains obtained from it,
when the Phenicians were able to make such a fruitful
use of their connection with South Arabia that it fell
into their hands to provide Egypt, with her products,

298 PHCENICIA.

and perhaps even Babylonia also. Their caravan trade
with South Arabia must have been lively, and the
impulse to extend it strong, as they induced king
Solomon to allow them to attempt a connection by sea
from Elath with South Arabia. By the foundation
and success of the trade to Ophir, and the most remote
places of the East which they reached, their commerce
obtained its widest extent, and brought in the richest
returns. With incense and balsam, there came to Tyre
cinnamon and cassia, sandal-wood and ivory, gold and
pearls from India, and the silk tissues of the distant
East.1

The commerce of the Phenician cities comprised
Egypt, Babylonia, and Assyria, it touched Mesopotamia
and Armenia, the lands of the Moschi and Tibarenes,
the silver and copper mines of the Chalybes on the
Black Sea.2 When on the opening of the communica-
tion by the Red Sea with South Arabia and the coun-
tries beyond, it gained the widest extent to the south
and east, it had for a whole century past traversed the
entire length of the Mediterranean to the Straits of
Gibraltar. We saw above how the Phenicians steered
to Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete, to the ^gean Sea, to the
coasts of Hellas, in order to barter or dig up minerals,
to collect purple-fish for their coloured stuffs, and how
after the middle of the thirteenth centuiy they began
to plant settlements on these coasts. The request for
minerals must have been so strongly felt in their own
cities, in Egypt and the lands of the Euphrates, in the
course of the twelfth century, that the ships of the
Phenicians went farther and farther to the west in
search of them, that Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica were
reached and then colonised by them. At the same

1 Movers, loc. dt. 2, 3, 265 ff.

9 Vol. i. p. 538. Ezekiel xxvii. 14 ; xxxviii. 6.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIAN3. 299

time Ityke and Old Hippo were built on the coast
of Africa. These supplied saltpetre, alum, and salt,
skins of lions and panthers, horns of buffalos, ostrich
eggs and feathers, slaves and ivory to the mother-
cities. After this, about the year 1100 B.C., Grades
was built on the shore of the Atlantic Ocean. The
trade of the Phenicians now brought not only the
products of Syria and the manufactures of their cities
to Egypt and Babylonia ; it was not merely a middle
trade between those two lands, nor merely an independ-
ent trade and middle trade between South Arabia and
the civilised countries ; it mediated now between the
East and the West, the products and manufactures of
the near and distant East, and the natural products of
the near and distant West, between the ancient civilis-
ation of the East and the young life of the nations of
the West. It was above all the metals of the West, the
gold of the Thracian, the copper of the Italian islands,
the silver of Tartessus, which the ships of the Phenicians
carried into the harbours of the mother-cities : the
nations of the West received in return weapons, and
metal vases, ornaments, variegated cloths, and purple
garments. The works of Babylonian and Egyptian
style, the works which are found in the tombs of Caere,
Clusium, Alsium, at Corneto and Praeneste, adorned
in types at once Egyptian and Babylonian- Assyrian,
like the implements and ornaments found in the
tombs of Spata and Mycenae, can only have come into
the possession of the Etruscans, Latins, and Lucanians
from intercourse with the Phenicians, the Phenician
colonies of Sicily, or from the trade with Carthage.1

From Gades the Phenicians succeeded in forcing
their way farther to the Atlantic Ocean. Phenician
colonies were founded on the west coast of Africa.

1 Helbig, "Annali del Inst. AicV 1876, pp. 57, 117, 247 ff.

300 PHOENICIA.

Lixus, the oldest and most important of these (Lach-
ash, now El Araish), at the mouth of the river of the
same name (now Wadi el Ghos), is said to have been the
seat of a famous sanctuary of Melkarth.1 Strabo is of
opinion that these colonies of the Phenicians beyond
the pillars of Hercules were built soon after the Trojan
war, i. e. about the year 1100 B.C.2 Diodorus told
us already how Phenician ships, steering to the coast
of Libya in order to explore the sea beyond the pillars
were carried away by a storm far into the ocean, and dis-
covered a large island opposite Libya, which, from the
pleasantness of the air and the abundance of blessings,
seemed fitted to be the dwelling of the gods rather
than men (p. 82). We can hardly doubt, therefore,
that the Phenicians visited Madeira and the Canary
Islands.

Tin was early known to the ancient world, and
was indispensable for the alloy of copper, but it could
only be found mixed with copper in the mines of the
Chalybes and Tibarenes (the Tabal of the Assyrians,
the Tubal of the Hebrews), whose name is found in
Genesis in Tubal-cain, the first smith, the father of
them that work in brass and iron (I. 539). Besides
these, there were tin mines only in the lofty Hin-
dukush, in the north-west of Iberia, and in the south-
west of England.3 Herodotus observes : Tin and
amber come from the extreme western ends of Europe.
He could not learn from any eye-witness whether there
was a sea there, though he had taken much trouble in
the matter. Pliny tells us : Midacritus first brought

1 Pliny, " Hist. Nat." s. 1 ; 19, 22. Cf. Movers, loc. cit. 2, 2, 537 ff.

2 Strabo, p. 48; cf. p. 150.

* The German tin-mines were not opened till the middle ages ; those
of farther India in the last century; Miillenhoff, "Deutsche Alter-
tumskunde," s. 24.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS. 301

tin from the island Kassiteris, i. e. the tin-island.1 It
was the Phenicians who obtained tin, and they did not
obtain it from Iberia only: their ships sailed through the
Bay of Biscay, they became acquainted with the shore of
Brittany, which appears to have been known to them
as (Estrymnis ; they discovered the tin islands, i. e.
the Channel Islands, the coast of Cornwall, and even
the island of Albion.2 The tin-islands or Kassiterides
of the Greeks are the islands of the north-west ocean,
known to the Phenicians, who procured tin from them.

The Homeric poems often mention amber, which,
worked into ornaments, Phenician ships brought to
the Greeks. Ornaments of amber are met with in
the oldest tombs of Cumae, in the tombs at the Lion's
Gate at Mycenae.8 Hence the Phenicians must have
been in possession of amber as early as the eleventh
century B.C. Amber was found not only on the shores
of the Baltic, but also on the coast of the North Sea,
between the mouth of the Rhine and the Elbe. We
may therefore draw the conclusion that in the eleventh
and tenth centuries B.C. they must have advanced far
enough in the Channel towards the mouth of the Rhine,
or beyond it, to obtain amber by exchange or collect
it themselves, unless we assume an extensive inter-
course between the Celts and Germans.4

The starting-point, harbour, and emporium for the
trade in the West and the voyages beyond the pillars
of Melkarth in the Atlantic Ocean was Gades. Long
after the naval power of the Phenicians and Carthage

1 Herod. 3, 115; Pliny, "Hist. Nat." 7, 57.

2 At a later time we meet with tlie name Prettanian islands. Ynis
Prydein, i. e. island of Prydein, was the name given by the Welsh to
their land ; Miillenhoff, loc. cit. s. 88 ff, 93 ff .

3 Helbig, " Commercio dell ambra," p. 10, n. 4. On the amber in the
tombs east of the Apennines, pp. 15, 16.

* Miillenhoff, loc. cit. s. 223.

302 PIKENICIA.

had perished, Gades remained a great, rich, and flour-
ishing city of trade. Strabo describes it thus : " Situ-
ated on a small island not much more than a hundred
stades in length, and scarce a stade in breadth, without
any possessions on the mainland or the islands, this
city sends out the most and largest ships, and seems
to yield to no other city, except Rome, in the number
of the inhabitants. But the greater part do not live
in the city, but on ships." l

In the tenth century B.C. the navigation and trade
of the Phenicians extended from the coasts of the
Arabian Sea, from the Somali coast, and perhaps from
the mouths of the Indus as far as the coast of Britain ;
from the coasts of Mauritania on the Atlantic to the
Tigris, from Armenia to the Sabaeans. Stretching
out far in every direction, they had as yet suffered
reverses in one region only, in the basin of the ^Egean
Sea. Their trade and intercourse was not indeed de-
stroyed, but their mines, their colonies on the islands
of this sea and the coasts of Hellas, were lost. Before
Hiram ascended the throne of Tyre, the Phenicians,
after teaching Babylonian weights and measures, the
building of fortresses and walls, and mining to the
Greeks, and bringing them their alphabet (p. 57), were
compelled to retire before the increasing strength of
the Greek cantons, not only from the coasts of Hellas,
but also from the islands of the ^Egean. The trade,
however, with the Hellenes continued as before, in
lively vigour, so far as the Homeric descriptions can
be accepted as evidence. The most valuable possessions
in the treasuries of the Greek princes are Sidonian
works of art. Phenician ships often show themselves
in Greek waters. When one of these merchantmen is
anchored, the wares are set out in the ship, or under

1 Strabo, p. 168.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS. 303

tents on the shore, or the Phenicians offer them for
sale in the nearest place. A Phenician vessel laden
with all kinds of ornaments lands on an island ; after
the Phenicians have sold many wares they offer to
the queen a necklace of gold and amber, and at the
same time they carry off her son, and sell him on
another island. A Phenician freights a ship to Libya,
and persuades a Greek to go with him as overseer of the
lading : he intended to sell him there as a slave. Along
with these notices in the Homeric poems on the trade
of the Phenicians, an account has also come down to
us from an Eastern source. The prophet Joel, who
prophesied about the year 830 B.C., says, in regard to
the invasion of the Philistines in Judah, which took
place about the year 845 B.C., and brought them to the
walls of Jerusalem (p. 252) ; Tyre and Sidon, and all
the regions of the land of the Philistines, have stolen
the silver and gold of Jehovah, and carried the costly
things into their temples ; the sons of Judah and
Jerusalem they sold to the sons of Javan (the Greeks),
in order to remove them far from their land.1

For the colonies which the Phenicians had to give
up on the Greek coasts and islands, they found a rich
compensation in the strengthening and increase of
their colonies on the west of the Mediterranean, on
Sardinia, where they built Caralis (Cagliari) on the
southern shore, on Corsica, on the north coast of
Africa, where Carthage arose about the middle of the
ninth century (p. 269), and on the shores of Iberia. But
another loss which befell them in the East could not be
made good so easily. After king Jehoshaphat's death
(848 B.C.), even before the invasion of the Philistines,

1 Joeliii. 4 ff. On the date of Joel, supra, p. 260, n. 2. De Wette-
Schrader, " Einleitung," s. 454. According to the data established
above, the minority of Joash falls between 837 and 825 B.C.

304 PH(ENICIA.

the kingdom of Judah, as we saw (p. 252), lost the
sovereignty over the Edomites. Hence the harbour-
city of Elath was lost to the Phenicians also, and the
Ophir trade at an end, a century and a half after
it began. Though 50 years later, when Judah under
Amaziah and Uzziah had reconquered the Edomites,
and Elath was rebuilt, this navigation, as it seems,
was again set in motion, this restoration was of no lono-

O * o

continuance. After the middle of the eighth century
the Phenicians were finally limited for their trade with
the Sabaeans to the caravan routes through Arabia.

A still more serious source of danger was the ap-
proach of the Assyrian power to the Syrian coast.
In the course of the ninth century (from 876 B.C.),
as has been remarked above, Assyrian armies repeat-
edly showed themselves in Syria, and their departure
had repeatedly to be purchased by tribute. As this
pressure increased, and the Assyrian rulers insisted on
pushing forward the borders of their kingdom towards
Syria as far as the shores of the Mediterranean, as
the cities of the Phenicians became subject to a power
the centre of which lay in the distant interior, the
trade not to the East but to the West came into
question, and it was doubtful whether the cities,
when embodied in a great land-power, could retain
Cyprus in subjection, and keep up the trade with
Egypt, and the connection with their colonies in the
West. The doubt became greater when, after the
beginning of the eighth century B.C., a dangerous
opposition rose in the Mediterranean, and a still
more serious competition against the Phenicians. Not
content with driving the Phenicians out of the ^Egean
Sea, with obtaining possession of the islands and the
west coast of Asia Minor, the Hellenes spread farther
and farther to the west. Already they had got

THE TRADE OF THE PHES1CIAN3. 305

Ehodes into their hands ; they were already settled off
the coast of Syria, on the island of Cyprus, among
the ancient cities of the Phenicians. Still more
vigorous was the growth of their settlements to the
west of the Mediterranean. After founding Cyme
(Cumae) on the coast of Lower Italy, they built in
Sicily, after the middle of the eighth century, in
quick succession, Naxus (738 B.C.), Syracuse (735 B.C.),
Catana (730 B.C.), and Megara (728 B.C.), to which
were quickly added Rhegium, Sybaris, Croton, and
Tarentum in Lower Italy (720—708 B.C.). Were the
cities of the Phenicians in Sicily, Rus Melkarth, Motye,
Panormus, Soloeis, and Eryx (p. 79), in a position to
hold the balance against these rivals and their naviga-

o o

tion ? The injurious effects of the competition of a
rival power by sea for the trade of the Phenicians
must have increased when, in the seventh century, the
cities of the Greeks in Sicily increased in number, and
Egypt was opened to them about the middle of this
century; when, in the year 630 B.C., the first Greek
city, Gyrene, rose on the shore of Africa, and about
the same time the Greeks entered into direct trade
connections with Tartessus ; when at the close of this
century a Greek city was built on the shore of the
Ligystian Sea, at the mouth of the Rhone, and soon
after the settlements of the Greeks in Sicily and in
the west of the Mediterranean began to multiply.
While in this manner the field of Phenician trade
was limited by the constant advance of the Greeks,
the mother-cities, from the same period, the middle of
the eighth century, had to feel the whole weight of
the development of Assyrian power. And when this
pressure ceased, in the second half of the seventh
century, it was followed by the still more burden-
some oppression of the Babylonian empire.

VOL. II. X

306 PIKENICIA.

Yet in spite of all hindrances and losses, a prophet
of the Hebrews after the middle of the eighth century
could say of Tyre, that " she built herself strongholds,
and heaped up silver as the dust, and fine gold as the
mire of the streets." 1 And Ezekiel at the beginning
of the sixth century describes the trade of Tyre in
the following manner : " Thou who dwellest at the
entrance of the sea, who art the trader of the nations
to many islands ! On mighty waters thy rowers carry
thee ; thy trade goes out over all seas ; thou satisfiest
many nations ; thou hast enriched the kings of the
earth by the multitude of thy goods and wares. Thou
art become mighty in the midst of the sea. All ships
of the sea and their sailors were in thee to purchase
thy wares. Persians and Libyans and Lydians serve
in thee ; they are thy warriors ; they hang shield and
helmet on thy walls : thy own warriors stand round
on the walls, and brave men are on all thy towers.
Syria is thy merchant, because of the number of the
wares of thy skill ; they make thy fairs with emeralds,
purple, and broidered work, and fine linen, and coral,
and agate. Damascus is thy merchant in the mul-
titude of the wares of thy making, in the wine of
Helbon, and white wool. Judah and the land of
Israel were thy merchants; they traded in thy market
wheat and pastry and honey. They of the house of
Togarmah (Armenia) traded in thy fairs with horses
and mules. Haran, Canneh, and Asshur, and Childmad
were thy merchants in costly robes, in blue cloths
and embroidered work, and chests of cedar-wood full
of damasks bound with cords, in thy place of mer-
chandise. Dedan (the Dedanites 2) is thy merchant
in horse - cloths for riding. Wedan brings tissues

1 The older Zechariah ix. 3, and De "Wette-Sclirader, " Einleitung,'
B. 480. 2 Vol. i. p. 314.

THE TRADE OF THE PHENICIANS. 307

to thy markets : forged iron, cassia, and calamus
were brought to thy markets. Arabia and all the
princes of Kedar are ready for thee with lambs, rams,
and goats. The merchants of Sabsea and Ramah 1
traffic with thee ; they occupied in thy fairs with the
chief of all spices, and with all precious stones and
gold. Javan (the Greeks), Tubal, and Mesech (the
Tibarenes and Moschi) are thy merchants; they
trade with silver, iron, tin, and lead. Many islands
are at hand to thee for trade ; they brought thee for
payment horns of ivory arid ebony. The ships of
Tarshish are thy caravans in thy trade : so art thou
replenished and mighty in the midst of the sea." 2

1 Yol. i. p. 314. 2 Ezekiel xxvii.

x2

CHAPTER XIIT.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA.

THE campaigns which Tiglath Pilesar, king of Asshur,
undertook towards the West about the end of the
twelfth century, and which carried him to the Upper
Euphrates and into Northern Syria, remained with-
out lasting result. The position which Tiglath Pilesar
then had won on the Euphrates was not main-
tained by his successors in any one instance. More
than 200 years after Tiglath Pilesar we find Tiglath
Adar II. (889 — 883 B.C.) again in conflict with the
same opponents who had given his forefather such
trouble — with the mountaineers of the land of Nairi,
the district between the highland valley of Albak on the
Greater Zab and the Zibene-Su, the eastern source of
the Tigris. The son and successor of this Tiglath Adar,
Assumasirpal, was the first whom we see again under-
taking more distant campaigns ; the successful results
of which are the basis of a considerable extension of
the Assyrian power.

Assumasirpal also chiefly directed his arms against
the mountain-land in the north. On his first cam-
paign he fought on the borders of Urarti, i. e. of the
land of Ararat, the region of the Upper Araxes. In
the second year of his reign (881 B.C.) he marched out
of the city of Nineveh, crossed the Tigris, and imposed
tribute on the land of Kummukh (Gumathene, p. 41),
and the Moschi, in asses, oxen, sheep, and goats. In the
third year he caused his image to be hewn in the place

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 309

where Tiglath Pilesar and Tiglath Adar his fathers had
chosen to set up their images ; he tells us that his own
was engraved beside the others. l Only the image of
Tiglath Pilesar I. is preserved at Karkar. Assurnasirpal
received tribute from the princes of the land of Nairi —
bars of gold and silver, iron, oxen and sheep ; arid
placed a viceroy over the land of Nairi. But the sub-
jugation was not yet complete ; Assurnasirpal related
that on a later campaign he destroyed 250 places in
the land of Nairi.2 He tells us further, that on his
tenth campaign he reduced the land of Kirchi, took
the city of Amida (now Diarbekr), and plundered it.3
Below this city, on the bank of the Tigris at Kurkh
(Karch), there is a stone tablet which represents him
after the pattern of Tiglath Pilesar at Karkar (p. 40.)

Between these conflicts in the north lie campaigns
to the south and west. In the year 879 B.C. he
marched out, as he tells us, from Chalah. On the
other bank of the Tigris he collected a heavy tribute,
then he marched to the Euphrates, took the city of
Suri in the land of Sukhi, and caused his image to be
set up in this city. Fifty horsemen and the warriors
of Nebu-Baladan, king of Babylon (Kardunias), had
fallen into his hand, and the land of the Chaldaeans
had been seized with fear of his weapons.4 We must
conclude therefore that the king of Babylon had sent
auxiliary troops to the prince of the land of Sukhi
(whom the inscriptions call Sadudu). In the following
year he occupied the region at the confluence of the
Chaboras with the Euphrates, crossed the Euphrates
on rafts, and conquered the inhabitants of the lands of
Sukhi, Laki, and Khindaui, which had marched out with
6000 men to meet him. On the banks of the Euphrates

1 Menant, " Ann." pp. 71, 72, 73. 2 Menant, loc. cit. p. 82.
3 Menant, loc. cit. pp. 90, 91. 4 Menant, loc. cit. p. 84.

310 ASSYRIA.

he then founded two cities ; that on the further
bank bore the name of " Dur-Assurnasirpal," and that
on the nearer bank the name of " Nibarti-Assur."
During this time he pretends to have slain 50 Am si (p.
43) on the Euphrates, and captured 20 ; to have slain
20 eagles and captured 20.1 Then he turned against
Karchemish, in the land of the Chatti (p. 43). In the
year 876 B.C. he collected tribute in the regions of
Bit Bakhian and Bit Adin in the neighbourhood of
Karchemish, and afterwards laid upon Sangar, king of
Karchemish, a tribute of 20 talents of silver, and 100
talents of iron. From Karchemish Assurnasirpal
marched against the land of Labnana, i. e. the land
of Lebanon. King Lubarna in the land of the Chatti
submitted, and had to pay even heavier tribute than
the king of Karchemish. Assurnasirpal reached the
Orontes (Arantu), took the marches of Lebanon,
marched to the great sea of the western land, offered
sacrifice to the gods, and received the tribute of the
princes of the sea-coasts, the prince of Tyre (Ssurru),
of Sidon (Ssidunu), of Byblus (Gubli), and the city of
Arvada (Aradus), "which is in the sea" (p. 277) —
bars of silver, gold, and lead ; — " they embraced his
feet." Then the king marched against the mountains
of Chamani (Amanus) ; here he causes cedars and
pines to be felled for the temples of his gods, and the
narrative of his exploits to be written on the rocks,
and worshipped at Nineveh before the goddess Istar.2
According to the evidence of these inscriptions,
Assurnasirpal established the supremacy of Assyria in
the region of the sources of the Tigris. But even he
does not appear to have gone much further than
Tiglath Pilesar before him, for he also fought once on
the borders of Armenia, i. e. of the land of Ararat, and

1 Menant, p. 86. 2 E. Schrader, "K A. T." s. 66, 67.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 311

on the other hand forced his way as far as the upper
course of the Eastern Euphrates. Against Babylon
he undertook, so far as we can see, no offensive war ;
he was content to drive out of the field the auxiliaries
which Nebu-Baladan of Babylon sent to a prince on
the middle Euphrates without pursuing the advantage
further. The most important results which he obtained
were in the west. He gained the land of the Chaboras,
and fixed himself firmly on the Euphrates above the
mouth of that river. To secure the crossing he built
a fortress on either side, and then forced his way from
here to the mountain land of the Amanus, to the
Orontes and Lebanon. For the first time the cities of
the Phenicians paid tribute to the king on the banks
of the Tigris ; Arvad (Aradus), Gebal (Byblus), Sidon,
and Tyre, where at this time, as we saw (p. 267),
Mutton, the son of Ethbaal, was king.

Shalmanesar I.,who reigned over Assyria about the
year 1300 B.C., built, as we have remarked above, the
city of Chalah (Nimrud), on the eastern bank of the
Tigris above the confluence of the Greater Zab. The
remains of the outer walls show that this city formed
a tolerably regular square, and that the western wall
ran down to the ancient course of the Tigris, which
can still be traced. In the south-western corner of
the city, on a terrace of unburnt bricks, rose the
palaces of the kings and the chief temples. They
were shut off towards the city by a separate wall.
Nearly in the middle of this terrace on the river-side
we may trace the foundation- works of a great building,
called by our explorers the north-west palace. In the
remains of this structure, on two surfaces on the
upper and lower sides of a large stone, which forms
the floor of a niche in a large room, is engraved an
inscription of Assurnasirpal, and a second on a

312 ASSYRIA.

memorial stone of 12 to 13 feet high. Inscriptions on
the slabs of the reliefs with which the halls of the
building were adorned repeat the text of these inscrip-
tions in an abbreviated manner. They tell us that the
ancient city of Chalah, which Shalmanesar the Great
founded, was desolate and in ruins ; Assurnasirpal
built it up afresh from the ground j1 he led a canal
from the Greater Zab, and gave it the name of Pati-
kanik ; 2 traces and remains are left, which show us
that the course of the canal from the Greater Zab
led directly north to the city. Cedars, pines, and
cypresses of Mount Chamani (Amanus) had he caused
to be felled for the temples of Adar, Sin, and Samas,
his lords.3 He built temples at Chalah for Adar, Bilit,
Sin, and Bin. He made* the image of the god Adar,
and set it up to his great divinity in the city of Chalah,
and in the piety of his heart dedicated the sacred bull
to this great divinity. For the habitation of his king-
dom, and the seat of his monarchy, he founded and
completed a palace. Whosoever reigns after him in
the succession of days may he preserve this palace in
Chalah, the witness of his glory, from ruin ; may he not
surrender it to rebels, may he not overthrow his pillars,
his roof, his beams, or change it for another structure,
or alter his inscriptions, the narrative of his glory.
" Then will Asshur the lord and the great god exalt
him, and give him all lands of the earth, extend his
dominion over the four quarters of the world, and pour
abundance, purity, and peace over his kingdom." 4

The palace of Assurnasirpal at Chalah was a build-
ing about 360 feet in length and 300 feet in breadth.
Two great portals guarded by winged lions with
bearded human heads, the images or symbols of the
god Nergal, led from the north to a long and propor-

1 Schra-ler, Joe. c.it. s. 20, 21. 2 "Becords of the Past," 3, 79.

3 Menant, Joe. fit. p. 89. 4 Menant, p. 93.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 313

tionately narrow portico of 154 feet in length and 35
feet in breadth. In the south wall of this portico a
broad door, by which stand two winged human-headed
bulls, images of the god Adar, and hewn out of yellow
limestone, opens into a hall 100 feet long and 25
broad. On the east and south sides also of the central
court (the west side is entirely destroyed) lie two
longer halls, and a considerable number of larger and
smaller chambers. The height of the rooms appears to
have been from 1 6 to 1 8 feet.1 The walls of the northern
portico were covered with slabs of alabaster to a height
of 10 or 12 feet, on which were reliefs of the martial
exploits of the king, his battles, his sieges, his hunting
— he claims to have killed no fewer than 370 mighty
lions, and to have taken 75 alive. The reliefs on the
slabs of the second hall, which abuts on this, exhibit
colossal forms with eagle heads. Above the slabs the
masonry of the walls was concealed by tiles coloured
and glazed, or by painted arabesques. Beside the
fragments of this building a statue of the builder,
Assurnasirpal, was discovered. On a simple base of
square stone stands a figure in an attitude of serious
repose, in a long robe, without any covering to the
head, with long hair and strong beard, holding a sort
of sickle in the right hand, and a short staff in the
left.2 On the breast we read, " Assurnasirpal, the
great king, the mighty king, the king of the nations,
the king of Asshur, the son of Tiglath Adar, king of
Asshur, the son of Bin-nirar, king of Asshur. Victori-
ous from the Tigris to the land of Labnana (Lebanon),
to the great sea, he subjugated all lands from the rising
to the setting of the sun."3 An image in relief at the
entrance of the west of the two temples which this
king built, to the north of his palace, on the terrace of

1 G. Eawlinson, " Monarch." 22, 94.

1 G. Rawlinson, " Monarch." 1*, 310. 3 Menant, for. cif. p. H7.

314 ASSYRIA.

Chalah (at the entrance to the first are two colossal
winged lions with the throats open, and at the
entrance of the second two wingless lions), exhibits
the king with the Kidaris on his head, and his hand
upraised ; before the base of the relief stands a small
sacrificial altar.1 We have already mentioned the
image of Assurnasirpal which he had engraved near
Kurkh, and which is preserved there. According to
inscriptions lately discovered, and not yet published,
Assurnasirpal built a palace at Niniveh also, and
restored the ancient temple of Istar, which Samsi-Bin
formerly erected there (p. 31).a

The reign of Assurnasirpal gave the impulse to a
warlike movement which continued in force long after
his time, and extended the power of Assyria in every
direction. His son, Shalmanesar II., who ascended
the throne in 859 B.C., followed in the path of his
father. In the first years of his reign he fought against
Khubuskia, which, as we find from the inscriptions,
was a district lying on the Greater Zab, against a
prince of the land of Nairi (p. 41), against the prince
of Ararat (Urarti), Arami, and received the tribute of
the land of Kummukh (p. 41). He crosses the
r'ver Arzania — either the Arsanias (Murad-Su), the
Eastern Euphrates, or the Arzen-Su (Nicephorius),
which falls into the Tigris before it bends to the
south — and takes the city of Arzaska in Urarti, i. e.
perhaps Arsissa, on Lake Van,3 These wars in the
north were followed by battles on the Euphrates. He
conquers the city of Pethor on this side of the
Euphrates, and the city of Mutunu on the farther side,
which Tiglath Pilesar had won, but Assur-rab-amar

1 G. Bawlinson, "Monarch." I2, 319 ; 2*, 97.

2 G-. Smith, " Discov." pp. 91, 141, 252.

3 Sayce, " Records of the Past," pp. 94, 95.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. "315

had restored by a treaty to the king of Aram, and
settled Assyrians in both places. Then he fought
against a prince of the name of Akhuni, who resided
at Tul Barsip on the Euphrates. Shalmanesar takes
this city, transplants the inhabitants to Assyria, and
calls it Kar-Salmanassar. He receives the tribute
of Sangar, prince of Karchemish, against whom his
father had fought, and finally took Akhuni himself
prisoner.1 Then he advances towards Chamani (to
the Amanus), crosses the Arantu (Orontes) ; Pikhirim
of the land of Chilaku (i. e. of Cilicia) is conquered
by him.2

The next object of the arms of Shalmanesar was
Syria, which he had merely touched on the north in
passing by on the campaign against Cilicia. On a
memorial stone which he set up at Kurkh, on the Upper
Tigris, where we already found the image of Assur-
nasirpal, — the stone is now in the British Museum, —
Shalmanesar tells us that in the year 854 B.C. he
left Nineveh, marched to Kar-Salmanassar, and there
received the tribute of Sangar of Karchemish, Kutaspi
of Kummukh, and others. "From the Euphrates I
marched forth, and advanced against the city of Hal-
wan. They avoided a battle and embraced my feet.
I received gold and silver from them as their tribute.
I made rich offerings to Bin, the god of Hal wan. From
Hal wan I set forth and marched against two cities of

o

Irchulina of Hamath. Argana, his royal city, I took ;
his prisoners, the goods and treasures of his palace, I
carried away ; I threw fire upon his palaces. From
Argana I marched forth to Karkar. I destroyed
Karkar and laid it waste and burnt it with fire.
Twelve hundred chariots, 1200 horsemen, 20,000 men

1 According to the inscription of Kurkh in the year 856 ; according
to the obelisk 854 B.C. 3 Menant, " Ann." p. 107.

316 ASSYRIA.

of Benhadad of Damascus ; l 700 chariots, 700 horse-
men, 10,000 men of Irchulina of Hamath ; 200
(?2000) chariots, 10,000 men of Ahab of Israel; 500
men of the Guaeer ; 1000 men of the land of Musri ; 10
chariots, 10,000 men of the land of Irkanat ; 200 men
of Matinbaal of Aradus (Arvada) ; 200 men of the land
of Usanat; 30 chariots and 10,000 men of Adonibai
of Sizan ; 1000 camels of Gindibuh of Arba ; — hun-
dred men of Bahsa of Ammon ; these twelve princes
rendered aid to each other, and marched out against
me to contend with me in battle. Aided by the sublime
assistance which Asshur my lord gave to me, I fought
with them. From the city of Karkar as far as the city of
Gilzana 2 (?) I made havoc of them. Fourteen thousand
of their troops I slew ; like the god Bin I caused the
storm to descend upon them ; during the battle I took
their chariots, their horses, their horsemen, and their
yoke-horses from them.3 On the obelisk of black
basalt found in the ruins of Chalah, Shalmanesar says
quite briefly, " In my sixth campaign I went against
the cities on the banks of Balikh (Belik) and crossed
the Euphrates. Benhadad of Damascus, and Irchulina
of Hamath, and the kings of the land of Chatti and
the sea came down to battle with me. I conquered
them ; I overcame 20,500 of their warriors with my
arms." The same statement is repeated in a third
inscription, that of the bulls.4

The kings of Syria were defeated, but by no means
subdued. Shalmanesar says nothing of their subjuga-

1 Bin-hidri is read by E. Schrader and others. Bimmon-hidri by
Sayce. As the god Bin was also called Eimmon, the ideogram of the
name may be read one way or the other. The Books of the Kings call
the contemporary of Ahab, Benhadad. For farther information, see
p. 247, note. * Sayce, " Eecords," 3, 100.

3 E. Schrader, " Keilinschriften und A. T." s. 94 ff., 101, 102;
Menant, loc. cit. pp. 99, 113. 4 Menant, "Ann." p. 115.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 317

tion aud tribute (p. 246). The arms of Assyria were
next turned in another direction. An illegitimate
brother, Marduk-Belusati, had rebelled against Marduk-
zikir-iskun, the son and successor of Nebu-Baladan of
Babylon. Shalmanesar supported the first. During
the second campaign against Marduk - Belusati the
united troops of Marduk-zikir-iskun and Shalmanesar,
or the latter alone, succeeded in defeating the rebels ;
Marduk-Belusati was captured and put to death with
his adherents. Shalmanesar sacrificed at Babylon,
Borsippa, and Kutha. He claims to have imposed
tribute on the chiefs of the land of Kaldi (Chaldsea),
and to have spread his fame to the sea.1

After this decisive success in Babylonia, Shalmanesar
resumed the war against Damascus. For two years
in succession he marched out against Benhadad of
Damascus. In the year 851 he defeats Benhadad of
Damascus, the king of Hamath, together with 12
kings from the shores of the sea.2 Then the king
tells us further : " For the ninth time (850 B.C.) I
crossed the Euphrates. I conquered cities without
number ; I marched against the cities of the land of
Chatti and of Hamath ; I conquered 89 (79) cities.
Benhadad of Damascus, 12 kings of the Chatti (Syrians),
mutually confided in their power. I put them to
flight." And further : " In the fourteenth year of my
reign (846 B.C.) I counted my distant and innumer-
able lands. With 120,000 men of my soldiers I
crossed the Euphrates. Meanwhile Benhadad of Da-
mascus, and Irchulina of Hamath, with the 12 kings of
the upper and lower sea, armed their numerous troops
to march against me. I offered them battle, put them
to flight, seized their chariots and their horsemen, and

1 Vol. i. 257. Menant, " Babyl." p. 135.

1 Inscriptions on the bulls in Menant, "Ann." p. 114.

318 ASSYRIA.

and marched against the cities of Hazael of Damascus,
took from them their baggage. In order to save their
lives, they rose up and fled." l This victory also was
without result. In vain Shalmanesar had marched
four times against Damascus ; in vain he led out on
the last campaign 120,000 men against Syria. Not till
some years afterwards, when Hazael, as we saw above
(p. 252), killed Beiihadad and acquired the throne of
Damascus in his place, can Shalmanesar speak of a
decisive campaign in Syria. " In the eighteenth year
of my reign (842 B.C.) I crossed the Euphrates for
the sixteenth time. Hazael (Chazailu) from the land of
Aram trusted in the might of his troops, collected his
numerous armies, and made the mountains of Sanir,2
the summits of the mountains facing the range of
Lebanon, his fortress. I fought with him and over-
threw him ; 16,000 of his warriors I conquered with
my weapons; 1121 of his chariots, 410 of his horse-
men, together with his treasures, I took from him. To
save his life he fled away. I pursued him. I besieged
him in Damascus, his royal city ; I destroyed his forti-
fications. I marched to the mountains of Hauran ; I
destroyed cities without number, laid them waste, and
burned them with fire : I led forth their prisoners
without number. I marched to the mountains of the
land of Bahliras, which lies hard by the sea : I set up
my royal image there. At that time I received the
tribute of the Tyriau and Sidouian land, of Jehu
(Jahua), the son of Omri (Chumri), i. e. of Jehu, king of
Israel." 3 Though Sidon, Tyre, and Israel paid tribute,
the resistance of the Damascenes was still unbroken.
Shalmanesar further informs us that (in the year 839
B.c.) he crossed the Euphrates for the twenty-first time,

1 E. Schrader, loc. cit. s. 103; above, p. 251.

8 Communication from E. Schrader ; cf . Deuteron. iii. 9.

3 E. Schrader, "K A. T." s. 106, 107.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 319

But he does not say that he reduced them ; he only
asserts that he received the tribute of Tyre, Sidon, and
Byblus, and then assures us, quite briefly, in the
account, of his twenty-fifth campaigD (835 B.C.), that
he received " the tribute of all the princes of Syria " (of
the land of Chatti).1

In the very first years of his reign Shalmanesar had
contended against the prince Arami of Ararat, and
against the land of Nairi, between the Eastern Tigris
and the Greater Zab. The obedience of these regions
was not gained. In the year 853 Shalmanesar again
marched to the sources of the Tigris, erected his statue
there, and laid tribute on the land of Nairi.2 Twenty
years later he sent the commander-in- chief of his army,
Dayan-Assur, against the land of Ararat, at the head
of which Siduri now stood, and not Arami. Dayan-
Assur crossed the river Arzania (p. 314) and defeated
Siduri (833 B.C.). On a farther campaign (in 830 B.C.)
Dayan-Assur crosses the Greater Zab, invades the terri-
tory of Khubuskia (p. 314), fights against prince Udaki
of Van, i. e. of the Armenian land round Lake Van,
and from this descends into the land of the Parsua,
which Shalmanesar himself had trodden seven years
before. Here Dayan-Assur collected fresh tribute.
On a third campaign (829 B.C.) Dayan-Assur received
tribute from the land of Khubuskia, then invaded
Ararat, and there plundered and burned 50 places.

Meanwhile Shalmanesar himself marched in the years
838 and 837 B.C. against the land of Tabal, i. e.
against the Tibarenes, on the north-west offshoot of the
Armenian mountains, advanced as far as the mines of
the Tibarenes, and laid tribute on their 24 princes.3 In

1 Of. above, p. 257.

2 Inscription of the obelisk and the bulls in Menant, " Ann." 99, 114.

3 Menant, loc. cit. p. 101.

320 ASSYRIA.

the next year he turns to the south-east, marches over
the Lesser Zab, against the lands of Namri and Karkhar,
which we must therefore suppose to have been between
the Lesser Zab and the Adhim and Diala, on the spurs
of the Zagrus. Yanzu, king of Namri, was taken
captive, and carried to Assyria. Shalmanesar left the
land of Namri, imposed tribute on the 27 princes of the
land of Parsua, and turned to the plains of the land
of Amadai, i. e. against Media (835 B.C.).1 Two years
afterwards. Shalmanesar climbed, for the ninth time,
the heights of Amanus (Chamani), then he laid waste
the land of Kirchi (831 B.C.), then marched once more
against the land of Namri, there laid waste 250 places,
and advanced beyond Chalvan (Chalonitis, Holwan).2
On the obelisk of black basalt, dug up at Chalah in
the remains of the palace of Shalmanesar II. (the
central palace of the explorers), we find beside the
account of the deeds of the king five sculptures in
relief, which exhibit payments of tribute. Of the
picture which represents the payment of Jehu, of the
kingdom of Israel, we have spoken at length above (p.
257). Above this, which is the second picture, on the
highest or first, is delineated the payment from the land
of Kirzan. The title tells us : " Tribute imposed on Sua
of the land of Kirzan : 3 gold, silver, copper, lead,
staves, horses, camels with two humps." As on the
second strip the king is represented receiving the
tribute of Israel ; so on this strip also we see the
leader of those who pay tribute prostrate on the ground
before him; behind the leader are led a horse and two
camels with double humps ; then follow people carry-
ing staves and kettles. The superscription of the third
relief says : " Tribute imposed on the land of Mushri :

1 Menant, p. 101. * Menant, p. 104.

8 Sayce reads Guzan.

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 321

camels with two humps, the ox of the river Sakeya."
On the picture we see two camels with double humps,
a hump-backed buffalo, a rhinoceros, an antelope, an
elephant, four large apes, which are led, and one little
one, which is carried. The superscription of the fourth
relief says : " Tribute imposed upon Marduk-palassar of
the land of Sukhi : l silver, gold, golden buckets, Amsi-
horns, staves, Birmi-robes, stuffs." The relief itself de-
picts a lion, a deer, which is clutched by a second lion,
two men with kettles on their heads, two men who carry
a pole, on which are suspended materials for robes,
four men with hooked buckets or hooked scrips, two
men with large horns on their shoulders, two men
with staves, arid lastly a man carrying a bag. The
superscription of the fifth relief says, " Tribute imposed
on Garparunda of the land of Patinai : silver, gold,
lead, copper, objects made of copper, Amsi-horns, hard
wood." 2 Under this we see a man raising his hands
in entreaty, a man with a bowl with high cups on
his head, two men with hooked buckets, carrying horns
on their shoulders, one man with staves ; after these
two Assyrian officers, a man in a position of entreaty,
two men with hooked buckets and horns, a man with
two goblets, two men with hooked buckets and sacks
on their shoulders, two men, of whom one holds a
kettle, and the other carries a kettle on his head.

Assurnasirpal had already fought against the land
of Sukhi. As he marches to the Euphrates in order to
attack Sadudu, prince of Sukhi, as the king of Babylon •
sends auxiliaries to Sadudu at that time, and the land
of Chaldeea is seized with terror after the conquest of
the land of Sukhi, we must look for Sukhi on the

1 According to a communication from E. Schrader, Marduk-habal-
assur ought to be read, not Marduk-habal-iddin.

2 Oppert, "Memoires de 1'Acad. d. inscript." 1869, 1, 513; Sayce,
" Records of the Past," 5, 42.

VOL. n. T

3*J ASSYRIA.

Middle Euphrates, below the mouth of the Chaboras.
The tribute which, according to that inscription, Shal-
manesar imposed on the prince of Sukhi, who has a name
which may be compared with the names of the kings
of Babylon, — gold, silver, robes, and stuffs, — does not
contradict this assumption. Shalmanesar fought against
the Patinai in the first year of his reign, according to
the inscription of Kurkh. Shapalulme, the prince of
the Patinai at that time, combined with Sangar of
Karchemish and Akhuni of Tul-Barsip. Like these,
the Patinai were vanquished, their cities were taken,
14,600 prisoners were carried away, and they were
compelled to pay tribute. As Shalmanesar in order
to reach the Patinai marches against them from Mount
Amanus,1 we must look for their abode on the Upper
Euphrates, to the north of Karchemish, between the
Euphrates and the Orontes. The tribute imposed on
Garparunda of Patinai — gold, silver, copper, Amsihorns,
hard wood — is not against this supposition. The land
of Kirzan or Guzan we can only attempt to fix by the
tribute paid — camels with double humps. This kind of
camel is found on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea
and Tartary, and we are therefore led to place Kirzan
on the southern shore of the Caspian. The land of
Mushri, the tribute of which consists of hump-backed
buffaloes, i. e. Yaks (an animal belonging to the same
district, Bactria and Tibet), camels with double humps,
elephants, and rhinoceroses, and apes, must therefore
be sought in eastern Iran, on the borders of the district
of the Indus, whether it be that Shalmanesar really
penetrated so far, or that the terror of his name moved
East Iranian countries to send tribute to the warrior
prince of Nineveh and Chalah.

Like his father, Shalmanesar resided at Chalah. On

1 Sayce, " Records of the Past," 3, 88, 89, 90, 91, 99.

THJS RISE OF ASSYRIA. 323

the terrace of this city, to the south-east of the palace
of his father, he built a dwelling-place for himself, and
in this set up the obelisk, the inscriptions on which
give a brief account of each year of his reign. In the
ruins of this house two bulls also have been discovered,
which are covered with inscriptions, which, together
with the inscription of Kurkh on the Tigris, supplement
or extend the statements of the obelisk. More consider-
able remains have come down to us of another building
of Shalmanesar. Assurnasirpal had erected at Chalah
two temples to the north of his palace. To the larger
(western) of these two temples on the north-west corner
of the terrace Shalmanesar added a tower, the ruins of
which in the form of a pyramidal hill still overtop
the uniform heap of the ruined palaces. On the
foundation of the natural rock of the bank of the
Tigris lies a square substructure (each of the sides
measures over 150 feet) of 20 feet in height, built of
brick and cased with stone. On this base rises a
tower of several diminishing stories. In the first of
these stories, immediately upon the platform, is a pas-
sage 100 feet long, 12 feet high, and 6 feet in breadth,
which divides the storey exactly in the middle from
east to west.

Two centuries after the fall of the Assyrian kingdom,
Xenophon, marching up the Tigris with the 10,000,
reached the ruins of Chalah. After crossing the
Zapatus, i.e. the Greater Zab, he came to a large
deserted city on the Tigris, the name of which sounded
to him like Larissa (Chalah) ; it was surrounded by a
wall about seven and a-half miles long. This wall had
a substructure of stone masonry about 20 feet high ;
on this it rose, 25 feet in thickness, and built of
bricks, to the height of 100 feet. Beside the city was
a pyramid of stone, a plethron (100 feet) broad and

Y 2

324 ASSYRIA.

two plethra high ; to these many of the neighbouring
hamlets fled for refuge.1 Shalmanesar's tower was
broken, and by the fall of the upper parts had become
changed into a pyramid. The sides of the tower
Xenophon put at almost half their real size ; the
height of the ruins is still about 140 feet. That
Shalmanesar also stayed at Nineveh is proved by the
inscriptions ; that he possessed a palace in the ancient
city of Asshur is proved by the stamp of the tiles at
Kileh Shergat.2

In a reign of 36 years Shalmanesar II. had gained
important successes. In the north he had advanced
as far as Lake Van, and the valley of the Araxes, the
Tibarenes in the north-west, and the Cilicians in
the west had felt the weight of his arms. He had
directed his most stubborn efforts against the princes
on the crossings over the Euphrates towards Syria, and
towards the region of Mount Amanus and Syria itself.
Damascus and Hamath were forced to pay tribute
after a series of campaigns ; Byblus, Sidon, and Tyre
repeatedly paid tribute, and Israel after it had received
a new master in Jehu. By Shalmanesar's successful
interference in the contest for the crown in the civil
war in Babylon, the supremacy of Asshur over Babel
was at length obtained. The regions of the Zagrus
had to pay tribute to Shalmanesar. He first trod the
land of Media, and his successes were felt beyond
Media as far as the southern shore of the Caspian Sea
and East Iran.

In spite of the unwearied activity of Shalmanesar,
in spite of his ceaseless campaigns and the important
results gained by his weapons, his reign ended amid
domestic troubles, caused by a rebellion of the native
land. Shalmanesar's son and successor, Samsi-Bin III.
(823 — 810 B.C.), tells us in an inscription found in the

1 " Anab." 3, 4, 7—9. 8 Menant, loc. cit. p. 96.

THE RISE OP ASSYRIA. 325

remains of his palace, which he built in the south-east
corner of the terrace of Chalah, that his brother Assur-
daninpal set on foot a conspiracy against his father
Shalmanesar, and that the land of Asshur, both the Upper
and Lower, joined the rebellion. He enumerates 27
cities, among them Asshur itself, the ancient metropolis,
and Arbela, which joined Assurdaninpal ; but " with the
help of the great gods " Samsi-Bin reduced them again
to his power. Then he tells us of his campaigns in the
north and east. In his first campaign the whole land of
Nairi was subjugated — all the princes, 24 in number,
are mentioned ; the land of Van also paid tribute. The
Assyrian dominion, asserts the king, stretched from the
land of Nairi to the city of Kar-Salmanassar, opposite
Karchemish (p. 31 5). Then he fought against the land of
Giratbunda (apparently a region on the Caspian Sea, per-
haps Gerabawend), took the king prisoner, and set up
his own image in Sibar, the capital of Giratbunda,1 and
afterwards directed his arms against the land of Accad
(Babylonia). When he had slain 13,000 men and
taken 3000 prisoners, king Marduk-Balatirib marched
out against him with the warriors of Chaldsea and

Q

Elam, of the lands of Namri (p. 320) and Aram. He
defeated them near Dur-Kurzu, their capital : 5000
were left on the field, 2000 taken prisoners; 200
chariots of war and ensigns of the king remained in
the hands of the Assyrians (819 B.C.). At this point
the inscription breaks off ; elsewhere we hear nothing
of further successes against Babylonia, we only learn
that Samsi-Bin in the eleventh and twelfth years of
his reign (812 and 811 B.C.) again marched to Chal-
dsea and Babylon,2 and we can only conclude from

1 The reading is uncertain.

2 Oppert, " Empires," pp. 127, 128 ; G. Bawlinson, "Monarch." 2Z, p.
115, n. 8 ; Menant, loc. cit. p. 124.

326 ASSYRIA.

the fact that the king of Babylon received help not
only from Narari and Aram, but also from Elam, that
the Assyrians under Samsi-Bin continued to advance,
and that their power must by this time have appeared
alarming to the Elamites also.

Bin-nirar III. (810 — 781 B.C.), the son and successor
of Samsi-Bin, raised the Assyrian power still higher,
Twice he marched out against the Armenian land on
the shore of Lake Van ; eight times he made campaigns
in the land of the rivers, i. e. Mesopotamia. In the
fifth year of his reign he went out against the city of
Arpad in Syria ; in the eighth against the " sea-coast,"
i. e. no doubt against the coast of Syria. The begin-
ning of an inscription remains from which we can see
the extent of the lands over which he ruled, or which
he had compelled to pay tribute. " I took into my
possession," so this fragment tells us, " from the land
of Siluna, which lies at the rising of the sun, onwards ;
viz., the land of Kib, of Ellip, Karkas, Arazias, Misu,
Madai (Media), Giratbunda throughout its whole extent,
Munna, Parsua, Allabria, Abdadana, the land of Nairi
throughout its whole extent, the land of Andiu, which
is remote, the mountain range of Bilchu throughout its
whole extent to the great sea which lies in the east, i. e.
as far as the Caspian Sea. I made subject to myself
from the Euphrates onwards : the land of Chatti
(Aram), the western land (mat acharri] throughout its
whole extent, Tyre, Sidon, the land of Omri (Israel)
and Edom, the land of Palashtav (Philisteea) as far as
the great sea to the setting of the sun. I imposed
upon them payment of tribute. I also marched
against the land of Imirisu (the kingdom of Damascus),
aorainst Mariah, the kingr of the land of Imirisu. I

O *•-*

actually shut him up in Damascus, the city of his
kingdom ; great terror of Asshur came upon him ; he
embraced my feet, lie became a subject ; 2300 talents of

THE RISE OF ASSYRIA. 327

silver, 20 talents of gold, 3000 talents of copper, 5000
talents of iron, robes, carven images, his wealth and
his treasures without number, I received in his palace
at Damascus where he dwelt.1 I subjugated all the
kings of the land of Chaldsea, and laid tribute upon
them ; I offered sacrifice at Babylon, Borsippa, and
Kutha, the dwellings of the gods Be], Nebo, and
Nergal."2

According to this king Bin-nirar not only main-
tained the predominance over Babylon which his
grandfather had gained, but extended it : his authority
reached from Media, perhaps from the shores of the
Caspian Sea, to the shore of the Mediterranean as far
as Damascus and Israel and Edom, as far as Sidon and
Tyre and the cities of the Philistines. The Cilicians
and Tibarenes who paid tribute to Shalmanesar are not
mentioned by Bin - nirar in his description of his
empire. So far as we can see, the centre of the kingdom
was meanwhile extended and more firmly organised.
Among the magistrates with whose names the Assyrians
denote the years, at the time of Shalmanesar and his
immediate successors the names of the commander-in-
chief and three court officers are regularly followed by
the names of the overseers of the districts of Rezeph
(Resapha on the Euphrates), of Nisib (Nisibis on the
Mygdonius, the eastern affluent of the Chaboras), of
Arapha, i. e. the mountain-land of Arrapachitis ( Albak) ;
hence we may conclude that these districts were more
closely connected or incorporated with the native land,
and governed immediately by viceroys of the king. How
uncertain the power and supremacy of Assyria was at
a greater distance is on the other hand equally clear
from the fact that Bin-nirar had to make no fewer than
eight campaigns in the land of the streams, i. e. between

* E. Schrader, Joe. cit. B. Ill, 112.

* Menant, loc. cit. p. 127; cf. G. Eawlinson, 2", 117.

328 ASSYRIA.

the Tigris and the Euphrates ; that he marched four
times against the land of Khubuskia in the neighbour-
hood of Armenia, and twice against the district of Lake
Van, against which his father and grandfather had so
often contended.

Bin-nirar III. also built himself a separate palace at
Chalah, on the western edge of the terrace of the royal
dwellings, to the south of the palace of his great grand-
father Assurnasirpal. In the ruins of the temple
which he dedicated to Nebo have been found six
standing images of this deity, two of which bear
upon the pedestal those inscriptions which informed
us that the wife of Bin-nirar III. was named Sammura-
mat (p. 45). On a written tablet dated from the year
of Musallim-Adar (i. e. from the year 793 B.C.), the
eighteenth year of Bin-nirar, on which is still legible
the fragment of a royal decree, we also find the double
impress of his seal — a royal figure which holds a lion.
A second document from the time of the reign of this
prince, from the twenty-sixth year of his reign (782
B.C.), registers the sale of a female slave at the price of
ten and a half minae, and gives the name of the ten
witnesses to the transaction.1 The preservation of this
document is the more important inasmuch as a notice
in Phenician letters is written beside it. Hence we
may conclude that even in the days of Bin-nirar III.
the alphabetic writing was known as far as this point
in the East, though the cuneiform alphabet was
retained beside it, not only at that time, but down to
100 B.C., and indeed, to all appearance, down to the
first century of our reckoning.2

1 Oppert et Menant, " Documents juridiques," pp. 146 — 148.
* G. Smith, "Discov." p. 389 ; Oppert et Menant, loc. cit. p. 342.

END OF VOL. II.

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA T

D57

D91&E

v.2