By Alfred Edersheim
|
||
1. The opening words of the Rabh-Shakeh’s speech, “The great king, the king of Assyria,” give one of the very titles by which the Assyrian monarchs designate themselves on the monuments. 2. I prefer this to the rendering “cracked,” by Professor Cheyne. It certainly does not mean “broken,” the distinction between the two words being clearly marked in Isaiah 42:3. The figure of “a reed” as applied to Egypt is peculiarly happy, from its reference to the Nile banks (comp. Isaiah 19:6, and generally Ezekiel 29:6, which evidently refers to 2 Kings 18:21, or else to Isaiah 36:6). “A reed” is itself an insufficient support; but this reed is besides “bruised.” When leaning on it, it will break, and the hand that rests all its weight thereon will fall upon it and be pierced. 3. In Isaiah 36:7 it is put in the singular, “if thou sayest,” probably addressed to the chief Jewish spokesman. 4. The expression 2 Kings 18:23, rendered in the A.V. “give pledges,” in the margin of the R.V. “make a wager,” neither of which gives a good sense — we would translate “And now enter into competition with my master.” In ver. 24 the word tj¾p¾ which is true Semitic (comp. Schrader, u.s. pp. 186, 187), signifies a satrap, or governor,.but at the same time also a military chief. “The least of the servants,” i.e., both numerically and as regards valor and discipline.5. The term “Jewish” for Hebrew occurs only here and in the parallel passages (2 Chronicles 32:18 and Isaiah 36:11), and in Nehemiah 13:24. 6. Lit., “make a blessing,” probably not referring so much to religious ceremonies connected with such treaties, as to the offering of gifts on such occasions, — the term, “a blessing,” being frequently used for “a present.” 7. In reference to the nations mentioned in 2 Kings 18:34,,Arpad, mentioned in the Bible (comp. also Isaiah 10:9; Jeremiah 49:23) and in the Assyrian monuments in connection with Hamath, was a considerable and powerful Syrian town with adjacent territory, probably the modern Tell Erfad, about three hours north of Aleppo. Hamath and Sepharvaim — the twain Sipar — have been previously referred to. From its conjunction with the latter place, we infer that Hena was a city in Babylonia, probably the modern Anat, four days’ journey from Bagdad, on both banks of the Euphrates. The locality of Ivvah, or Avvah (2 Kings 17:24, 31), has not been ascertained; but it was probably also a city of Babylonia. All these places were conquered by Sargon; but there is nothing inconsistent with this in the reference to them by the Rabh-Shakeh as affording evidence of the supreme power of Assyria. 8. The Talmud appeals to this passage as proof that every one who hears a blasphemy or who hears it reported, is bound to rend his garment (Moed. Q. 26a). The general direction is given in Sanh vii. 5; in the Gemara on this Mishnah (Sanh. 6oa), it is inferred from 2 Kings 2:12, where the same expression is used, but with the addition “in two pieces,” that every such rent is to be permanent. In regard to the rent for blasphemy, it is ruled that the name Jehovah must have been expressly used, whether by Jew or Gentile, but that this had no longer application after the dispersion of Israel, as otherwise a person might have his clothes full of rents. 9. This, as has been remarked, is instructive as showing the relation between the priesthood and the prophets. 10. By way of contrast, comp. Jeremiah 21:1, etc. 11. In 2 Kings 19:7 translate (as in the R.V.), “I will put a spirit in him,” i.e., by the direct agency of Jehovah, a spirit of fear would take the place of that of boastful confidence. The “tidings” (this, rather than “rumor”)refer on the one hand to the advance of the Egyptian army, which led to the retrograde movement of Sennacherib, and on the other hand to the Divine visitation which determined his return to “his own land.” In ver. 6 we mark that the expression “servants,” used for the Assyrian ambassadors, is one of contempt, like the German Burschen (lads), or Buben, and that their words are taken up as a blasphemous challenge to the LORD. 12. Tirhakah — on the Egyptian monuments, Tahark and Taharka; on the the Assyrian, Tar-ku-u, the third and last king of the twenty-fifth “Ethiopian” dynasty, although apparently not himself of Ethiopian but of Egyptian descent. In accordance with the Bible, the monuments describe him as king of Ethiopia, and as making an incursion into Palestine against Sennacherib. For an abstract of his history see Ebers, in Riehm’s Worterb. ii., pp. 1671, 1672. 13. The mention of the places enumerated in 2 Kings 19:12, confirms the view expressed in a previous note, that the boasted conquests were not those of the present reign, but looked back upon the past. Thus Gozan was a district in Mesopotamia on the river Chabor, whence Sargon had transported colonists to Samaria. Not far from Gozan was the town of Haran, the Roman and Greek Carrhae, one of the earliest Assyrian possessions, mentioned even in the 12th cent. B.C. (comp. Genesis 11:31, etc.). Rezeph was another Mesopotamian town, frequently mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions as Rasaappa, or Rasappa. Thelasar (in Ass. Til-Assuri, either “the Assyrian hill,” or, “the hill of Asur”)seems to have been one of the cities of “the Sons of Eden,” a tribe inhabiting a district on both banks of the middle Euphrates. It is probable that either Shalmaneser or Sargon had changed the original name of the city to Telassar (comp. the Eden of Ezekiel 27:23; perhaps also the Beth-Eden of Amos i. 5). 14. As Thenius reminds us, there is monumental evidence of the cutting in pieces of the image of a god after the taking and sacking of a city. 15. See Bahr ad loc. 16. Comp. the expression “Shaken her head,” in ver. 21, with Job 16:4; Psalm 22:7; 109:25; Jeremiah 18:16. 17. The expression does not contain any allusion to a knowledge of prophetic utterances on the part of Sennacherib, nor is it ironical. 18. Mark the gradation in ver. 26, and note similar figures in Psalm 37:2; 129:6; Isaiah 40:6-8. 19. From the Mesopotamian sculptures, it appears that in the case of distinguished prisoners, literally a ring was passed, in Assyria, through the lower lip, and in Babylonia through the nose, to which a thong or rope was attached, by which the prisoner was led (comp. Rawlinson ad loc. in the Speaker’s Commentary). 20. Generally “the sign” is sought in the prediction of what would happen in those years, of which various — more or less unsatisfactory — explanations are given. We would lay the emphasis on the verb “ye shall eat,” as a promise of sufficient support. 21. The text seems to imply that it was the night after Isaiah’s prediction; but this is by no means clear. Josephus (Ant. x. 1, 5) and the Rabbis suppose the judgment to have overtaken the army that lay before Jerusalem. This is also the view of Friedrich Delitzsch in Herzog’s Real Ency. vol. xiii., p. 386. In 2 Chronicles 32:21, and in Isaiah 37:36, the words, “in that night,” are omitted. This seems of itself to indicate that all the 185,000 had not died in that one night. 22. See the previous note. Much larger numbers than these are recorded to have perished by pestilence in one place. 23. That some extraordinary event had determined the retreat of Sennacherib appears also from the Egyptian legendary account preserved by Herodotus (II. 141). It describes how, on his advance into Egypt — perhaps mixing. up the campaign of Sargon with that of Sennacherib (Schrader in Riehm’s Worterb., II., p. 1366a) — Sennacherib had been forced to fly through a disablement of his army, field-mice having in one night gnawed through the quivers, bowstrings, and shield-straps of his soldiers. 24. For further details, we refer to the articles, “Ninive” and “Sanherib,” in Riehm’s Handworterb. d. Bibl. A1terth. 25. But Delitzsch refers this Psalm to the deliverance of Judah in the time of Jehoshaphat (2 Chronicles 20). 26. Comp. Delitzsch on these Psalms. In the LXX. Psalm 76 (Sept., lxxv.), and also originally Psalm 75 also bore the inscription, pro<v to<n ÆAssu>rion In the Apocr. the references are in Ecclus. 48:18-22; 1 Macc. 7:41; 2 Macc. 8:19.27. 2 Kings 19:37 must not be understood as chronologically following immediately upon ver. 36. It is merely the Scriptural conclusion of this whole narrative. In truth, ver. 37 (see next note) contains a brief summary of events, separated by some period of time. But it is the sublime characteristic of the prophetic view-point of sacred history to pass over intervening events as of no importance, and to connect the fulfillment with the prediction as in unbroken succession. 28. “Nisroch” — evidently an Assyrian god — has not yet been identified. Probably it depends upon some corruption of the name, which is differently written in the LXX. and by Josephus. On Adrammelech (here the name of a person), see our remarks on 2 Kings 17:31. Sharezer is apparently a defective form, the full name having been Nirgal-sar-usur —- “Nergal protect the king.” Strangely, Abydenus (Euseb. Armen. Chron, ed. Mai, p. 25) has preserved to us the first part of the name, Nergilus, and the Bible its second part. According to the account just referred to, Sennacherib was killed by his son Adramelus, and succeeded for a short time by Nergilus (comp. Schrader, u.s., p. 330, and note), who was overcome and slain by Esarhaddon, who ascended the throne. The latter is confirmed by the Assyrian inscriptions. Professor Sayce (Fresh Light from the A. Mon.., p. 127) attributes the murder of Sennacherib to jealousy of Esarhaddon on the part of the two elder brothers, for which he finds a motive in the will of Sennacherib, which bestowed great treasures on Esarhaddon. “The land of Ararat” was south of the mountains of that name, and forms part of Armenia. There was at that time war between Assyria and Armenia. |