_CYRUS._
ISAIAH xli. 2, 25; xliv. 28-xlv. 13; xlvi. 11; xlviii. 14, 15.
Cyrus, the Persian, is the only man outside the covenant and people
of Israel, who is yet entitled the LORD'S Shepherd, and the LORD'S
Messiah or Christ. He is, besides, the only great personality, of
whom both the Bible and Greek literature treat at length and with
sympathy. Did we know nothing more of him than this, the heathen who
received the most sacred titles of Revelation, the one man in history
who was the cynosure of both Greece and Judah, could not fail to be
of the greatest interest to us. But apart from the way, in which he
impressed the Greek imagination and was interpreted by the Hebrew
conscience, we have an amount of historical evidence about Cyrus,
which, if it dissipates the beautiful legends told of his origin
and his end, confirms most of what is written of his character by
Herodotus and Xenophon, and all of what is described as his career
by the prophet whom we are studying. Whether of his own virtue, or
as being the leader of a new race of men at the fortunate moment of
their call, Cyrus lifted himself, from the lowest of royal stations,
to a conquest and an empire achieved by only two or three others in
the history of the world. Originally but the prince of Anshan, or
Anzan,[93]--a territory of uncertain size at the head of the Persian
Gulf,--he brought under his sway, by policy or war, the large and
vigorous nations of the Medes and Persians; he overthrew the Lydian
kingdom, and subjugated Asia Minor; he so impressed the beginnings
of Greek life, that, with all their own great men, the Greeks never
ceased to regard this Persian as the ideal king; he captured Babylon,
the throne of the ancient East, and thus effected the transfer of
empire from the Semitic to the Aryan stock. He also satisfied the
peoples, whom he had beaten, with his rule, and organised his realms
with a thoroughness unequalled over so vast an extent till the rise
of the Roman Empire.
We have scarcely any contemporary or nearly contemporary evidence
about his personality. But his achievements testify to extraordinary
genius, and his character was the admiration of all antiquity. To
Greek literature Cyrus was the Prince pre-eminent,--set forth as
the model for education in childhood, self-restraint in youth, just
and powerful government in manhood. Most of what we read of him in
Xenophon's _Cyropædia_ is, of course, romance; but the very fact,
that, like our own King Arthur, Cyrus was used as a mirror to flash
great ideals down the ages, proves that there was with him native
brilliance and width of surface as well as fortunate eminence of
position. He owed much to the virtue of his race. Rotten as the
later Persians have become, the nation in those days impressed its
enemies with its truthfulness, purity and vigour. But the man, who
not only led such a nation, and was their darling, but combined
under his sceptre, in equal discipline and contentment, so many
other and diverse peoples, so many powerful and ambitious rulers,
cannot have been merely the best specimen of his own nation's
virtue, but must have added to this, at least much of the original
qualities--humanity, breadth of mind, sweetness, patience and genius
for managing men--which his sympathetic biographer imputes to him in
so heroic a degree. It is evident that the _Cyropædia_ is ignorant of
many facts about Cyrus, and must have taken conscious liberties with
many more, but nobody--who, on the one hand, is aware of what Cyrus
effected upon the world, and who, on the other, can appreciate that
it was possible for a foreigner (who, nevertheless, had travelled
through most of the scenes of Cyrus' career) to form this rich
conception of him more than a century after his death--can doubt that
the Persian's character (due allowance being made for hero-worship)
must have been in the main as Xenophon describes it.
Yet it is very remarkable, that our Scripture states not one
moral or religious virtue as the qualification of this Gentile to
the title of _Jehovah's Messiah_. We search here in vain for any
gleam of appreciation of that character, which drew the admiring
eyes of Greece. In the whole range of our prophecy there is not a
single adjective, expressing a moral virtue, applied to Cyrus. The
_righteousness_, which so many passages associate with his name, is
attributed, not to him, but to God's calling of him, and does not
imply justice or any similar quality, but is, as we shall afterwards
see when we examine the remarkable use of this word in Second Isaiah,
a mixture of good faith and thoroughness,--all-rightness.[94] The
one passage of our prophet, in which it has been supposed by some
that Jehovah makes a religious claim to Cyrus, as if the Persian were
a monotheist--_he calleth on My name_--is, as we have seen,[95] too
uncertain, both in text and rendering, to have anything built upon
it. Indeed, no Hebrew could have justly praised this Persian's faith,
who called himself the "servant of Merodach," and in his public
proclamations to Babylonia ascribed to the Babylonian gods his power
to enter their city.[96] Cyrus was very probably the pious ruler,
described by Xenophon, but he was no monotheist. And our prophet
denies all religious sympathy between him and Jehovah, in words too
strong to be misunderstood: _I woo thee, though thou hast not known
Me.... I gird thee, though thou hast not known Me_ (ch. xlv. 4, 5).
On what, then, is the Divine election of CYRUS grounded by our
prophet, if not upon his character and his faith? Simply and barely
upon God's sovereignty and will. That is the impressive lesson of
the passage: _I am Jehovah, Maker of everything; that stretch forth
the heavens alone, and spread the earth by Myself ... that say of
Koresh, My shepherd, and all My pleasure he shall accomplish_ (xliv.
24, 28). Cyrus is Jehovah's, because all things are Jehovah's; of
whatsoever character or faith they be, they are His and for His uses.
_I am Jehovah, and there is none else: Former of light and Creator
of darkness, Maker of peace and Creator of evil; I, Jehovah, Maker
of all these._ God's sovereignty could not be more broadly stated.
All things, irrespective of their character, are from Him and for
His ends. But what end is dearer to the Almighty, what has He more
plainly declared, than that His people[97] shall be settled again in
their own land? For this He will use the fittest force. The return of
Israel to Palestine is a political event, requiring political power;
and the greatest political power of the day is Cyrus. Therefore,
by His prophet, the Almighty declares Cyrus to be His people's
deliverer, His own anointed. _Thus saith Jehovah to His Messiah, to
Koresh: ... That thou mayest know that I am Jehovah, Caller of thee
by thy name, God of Israel, for the sake of My servant Jacob and
Israel My chosen. And I have called thee by thy name. I have wooed
thee, though thou hast not known Me_ (xlv. 1, 3, 4).
Now to this designation of Cyrus, as the Messiah, great objections
rose from Israel. We can understand them. People, who have fallen
from a glorious past, cling passionately to its precedents. All
the ancient promises of a deliverer for Israel represented him as
springing from the house of David. The deliverance, too, was to have
come by miracle, or by the impression of the people's own holiness
upon their oppressors. The LORD Himself was to have made bare His arm
and Israel to go forth in the pride of His favour, as in the days of
Egypt and the Red Sea. But this deliverer, who was announced, was
alien to the commonwealth of Israel; and not by some miracle was the
people's exodus promised, but as the effect of his imperial word--a
minor incident in his policy! The precedents and the pride of Israel
called out against such a scheme of salvation, and the murmurs of the
people rose against the word of God.
Sternly replies the Almighty: _Woe to him that striveth with his
Moulder, a potsherd among the potsherds of the ground! Saith clay to
its moulder, What doest thou? or thy work_ of thee, _No hands hath he?
Woe to him that saith to a father, What begettest thou? or to a woman,
With what travailest thou? Thus saith Jehovah, Holy of Israel and his
Moulder: The things that are coming ask of Me; concerning My sons, and
concerning the work of My hands, command ye Me! I have made Earth,_[98]
_and created man upon her: I, My hands, have stretched Heaven, and all
its host have I ordered._ In that universal providence, this Cyrus is
but an incident. _I have stirred him up in righteousness, and all his
ways shall I make level. He_--emphatic--_shall build My City, and My
Captivity he shall send off--not for price and not for reward, saith
Jehovah of Hosts_ (xlv. 9-13).
To this bare fiat, the passages referring to Cyrus in ch. xlvi. and ch.
xlviii. add scarcely anything. _I am God, and there is none like Me....
Who say, My counsel shall stand, and all My pleasure will I perform.
Who call from the sunrise a Bird-of-prey, from a land far-off the Man
of My counsel. Yea, I have spoken, yea, I will bring it to pass. I have
formed, yea, will do it_ (xlvi. 9, 10, 11). _Bird-of-prey_ here has
been thought to have reference to the eagle, which was the standard of
Cyrus. But it refers to Cyrus himself. What God sees in this man to
fulfil His purpose is swift, resistless force. Not his character, but
his swoop is useful for the Almighty's end. Again: _Be gathered, all of
you, and hearken; who among them hath published these things? Jehovah
hath loved him: he will do His pleasure on Babel, and his arm_ shall
be on _the Chaldeans. I, I have spoken; yea, I have called him: I have
brought him, and will cause his way to prosper,_ or, _I will pioneer
his way_ (xlviii. 14, 15). This verb _to cause to prosper_ is one often
used by our prophet, but nowhere more appropriately to its original
meaning, than here, where it is used of _a way_. The word signifies _to
cut through_; then _to ford a river_--there is no word for bridge in
Hebrew; then _to go on well, prosper_.[99]
In all these passages, then, there is no word about character. Cyrus
is neither chosen for his character nor said to be endowed with one.
But that he is there, and that he does so much, is due simply to
this, that God has chosen him. And what he is endowed with is force,
push, swiftness, irresistibleness. He is, in short, not a character,
but a tool; and God makes no apology for using him but this, that he
has the qualities of a tool.
Now we cannot help being struck with the contrast of all this, the
Hebrew view of Cyrus, with the well-known Greek views of him. To the
Greeks he is first and foremost a character. Xenophon, and Herodotus
almost as much as Xenophon, are less concerned with what Cyrus did
than with what he was. He is the King, the ideal ruler. It is his
simplicity, his purity, his health, his wisdom, his generosity, his
moral influence upon men, that attract the Greeks, and they conceive
that he cannot be too brightly painted in his virtues, if so he may
serve for an example to following generations. But bring Cyrus out
of the light of the eyes of this hero-worshipping people, that light
that has so gilded his native virtues, into the shadow of the austere
Hebrew faith, and the brilliance is quenched. He still moves forcibly,
but his character is neutral. Scripture emphasizes only his strength,
his serviceableness, his success: _Whose right hand I have holden, to
subdue nations before him, and I will loosen the loins of kings; to
open doors before him, and gates shall not be shut. I will go before
thee, and make the rugged places plain. I will shiver doors of brass,
and bars of iron will I sunder_ (xlv. 1, 2). That Cyrus is doing a work
in God's hand and for God's end, and therefore forcibly, and sure of
success--that is all the interest Scripture takes in Cyrus.
Observe the difference. It is characteristic of the two nations. The
Greek views Cyrus as an example; therefore cannot too abundantly
multiply his morality. The Hebrew views him as a tool; but with
a tool you are not anxious about its moral character, you only
desire to be convinced of its force and its fitness. The Greek mind
is careful to unfold the noble humanity of the man,--a humanity
universally and eternally noble. By the side of that imperishable
picture of him, how meagre to Greek eyes would have seemed the
temporary occasion, for which the Hebrew claimed that Cyrus had been
raised up--to lead the petty Jewish tribe back to their own obscure
corner of the earth. Herodotus and Xenophon, had you told them that
this was the chief commission of Cyrus from God, to restore the Jews
to Palestine, would have laughed. "Identify him, forsooth, with those
provincial interests!" they would have said. "He was meant, we lift
him up, for mankind!"
What judgement are we to pass on these two characteristic pictures of
Cyrus? What lessons are we to draw from their contrast?
They do not contradict, but in many particulars they corroborate
one another. Cyrus would not have been the efficient weapon in
the Almighty's hand, which our prophet panegyrises, but for that
thoughtfulness in preparation and swift readiness to seize the
occasion, which Xenophon extols. And nothing is more striking to one
familiar with our Scriptures, when reading the _Cyropædia_, than
the frequency with which the writer insists on the success that
followed the Persian. If to the Hebrew Cyrus was the called of God,
upheld in righteousness, to the Greek he was equally conspicuous as
the favourite of fortune. "I have always," Xenophon makes the dying
king say, "seemed to feel my strength increase with the advance of
time, so that I have not found myself weaker in my old age than in
my youth, nor do I know that I have attempted or desired anything in
which I have not been successful."[100] And this was said piously,
for Xenophon's Cyrus was a devout servant of the gods.
The two views, then, are not hostile, nor are we compelled to choose
between them. Still, they make a very suggestive contrast, if we put
these two questions about them: Which is the more true to historical
fact? Which is the more inspiring example?
Which is the more true to historical fact? There is no difficulty
in answering this: undoubtedly, the Hebrew. It has been of far
more importance to the world that Cyrus freed the Jews than that
he inspired the _Cyropædia_. That single enactment of his, perhaps
only one of a hundred consequences of his capture of Babylon, has
had infinitely greater results than his character, or than its
magnificent exaggeration by Greek hero-worship. No one who has read
the _Cyropædia_--out of his school-days--would desire to place it
in any contrast, in which its peculiar charm would be shadowed,
or its own modest and strictly-limited claims would not receive
justice. The charm, the truth of the _Cyropædia_, are eternal; but
the significance they borrow from Cyrus--though they are as much
due, perhaps, to Xenophon's own pure soul as to Cyrus--is not to be
compared for one instant to the significance of that single deed
of his, into which the Bible absorbs the meaning of his whole
career,--the liberation of the Jews. The _Cyropædia_ has been the
instruction and delight of many,--of as many in modern times,
perhaps, as in ancient. But the liberation of the Jews meant the
assurance of the world's religious education. Cyrus sent this people
back to their land solely as a spiritual people. He did not allow
them to set up again the house of David, but by his decree the Temple
was rebuilt. Israel entered upon their purely religious career, set
in order their vast stores of spiritual experience, wrote their
histories of grace and providence, developed their worship, handed
down their law, and kept themselves holy unto the Lord. Till, in
the fulness of the times, from this petty and exclusive tribe, and
by the fire, which they kept burning on the altar that Cyrus had
empowered them to raise, there was kindled the glory of an universal
religion. To change the figure, Christianity sprang from Judaism as
the flower from the seed; but it was the hand of Cyrus, which planted
the seed in the only soil, in which it could have fructified. Of
such an universal destiny for the Faith, Cyrus was not conscious,
but the Jews themselves were. Our prophet represents him, indeed, as
acting for _Jacob My servant's sake, and Israel's My chosen_, but the
chapter does not close without proclamation to _the ends of the earth
to look unto Jehovah and be saved_, and the promise of a time _when
every knee shall bow and every tongue swear unto the God of Israel_.
Now put all these results, which the Jews, regardless of the
character of Cyrus, saw flowing from his policy, as the servant of
God on their behalf, side by side with the influence which the Greeks
borrowed from Cyrus, and say whether Greek or Jew had the more true
and historical conscience of this great power,--whether Greek or Jew
had his hand on the pulse of the world's main artery. Surely we see
that the main artery of human life runs down the Bible, that here we
have a sense of the control of history, which is higher than even the
highest hero-worship. Some may say, "True, but what a very unequal
contest, into which to thrust the poor _Cyropædia_!" Precisely; it
is from the inequality of the contrast, that we learn the uniqueness
of Israel's inspiration. Let us do all justice to the Greek and his
appreciation of Cyrus. In that, he seems the perfection of humanity;
but with the Jew we rise to the Divine, touching the right hand of
the providence of God.
There is a moral lesson for ourselves in these two views about Cyrus.
The Greeks regard him as a hero, the Jews as an instrument. The Greeks
are interested in him that he is so attractive a figure, so effective
an example to rouse men and restrain them. But the Jews stand in wonder
of his subjection to the will of God; their Scriptures extol, not his
virtues, but his predestination to certain Divine ends.
Now let us say no word against hero-worship. We have need of all
the heroes, which the Greek, and every other, literature can raise
up for us. We need the communion of the saints. To make us humble
in our pride, to make us hopeful in our despair, we need our big
brothers, the heroes of humanity. We need them in history, we need
them in fiction; we cannot do without them for shame, for courage,
for fellowship, for truth. But let us remember that still more
indispensable--for strength, as well as for peace, of mind--is the
other temper. Neither self nor the world is conquered by admiration
of men, but only by the fear and obligation of God. I speak now
of applying this temper to ourselves. We shall live fruitful and
consistent lives only in so far as we hear God saying to us, _I gird
thee_, and give ourselves into His guidance. Admire heroes if thou
wilt, but only admire them and thou remainest a slave. Learn their
secret, to commit themselves to God and to obey Him, and thou shalt
become a hero too.
God's anointing of Cyrus, the heathen, has yet another lesson to
teach us, which religious people especially need to learn.
This passage about Cyrus lifts us to a very absolute and awful faith.
_I am Jehovah, and none else: Former of light and Creator of darkness,
Maker of peace and Creator of mischief; I Jehovah, Maker of all these
things._ The objection at once rises, "Is it possible to believe this?
Are we to lay upon providence everything that happens? Surely we
Westerns, with our native scepticism and strong conscience, cannot be
expected to hold a faith so Oriental and fatalistic as that."
But notice to whom the passage is addressed. To religious people, who
professedly accept God's sovereignty, but wish to make an exception
in the one case against which they have a prejudice--that a Gentile
should be the deliverer of the holy people. Such narrow and imperfect
believers are reminded that they must not substitute for faith in God
their own ideas of how God ought to work; that they must not limit
His operations to their own conception of His past revelations; that
God does not always work even by His own precedents; and that many
other forces than conventional and religious ones--yea, even forces as
destitute of moral or religious character as Cyrus himself seemed to
be--are also in God's hands, and may be used by Him as means of grace.
There is frequent charge made in our day against what are called the
more advanced schools of theology, of scepticism and irreverence. But
this passage reminds us that the most sceptical and irreverent are
those old-fashioned believers, who, clinging to precedent and their own
stereotyped notions of things, deny that God's hands are in a movement,
because it is novel and not orthodox. _Woe unto him that striveth with
his Moulder; shall the clay say to its moulder, What makest thou?_ God
did not cease _moulding_ when He gave us the canon and our creeds, when
He founded the Church and the Sacraments. His hand is still among the
clay, and upon time, that great "potter's wheel," which still moves
obedient to His impulse. All the large forward movements, the big
things of to-day--commerce, science, criticism--however neutral, like
Cyrus, their character may be, are, like Cyrus, grasped and anointed
by God. Therefore let us show reverence and courage before the great
things of to-day. Do not let us scoff at their novelty or grow fearful
because they show no orthodox, or even no religious, character. God
reigns, and He will use them, for what has been the dearest purpose
of His heart, the emancipation of true religion, the confirmation of
the faithful, the victory of righteousness. When Cyrus rose and the
prophet named him as Israel's deliverer, and the severely orthodox in
Israel objected, did God attempt to soothe them by pointing out how
admirable a character he was, and how near in religion to the Jews
themselves? God did no such thing, but spoke only of the military and
political fitness of this great engine, by which He was to batter
Babylon. That Cyrus was a quick marcher, a far shooter, an inspirer of
fear, a follower up of victory, one who swooped like a _bird-of-prey_,
one whose weight of war burst through every obstruction,--this is what
the astonished pedants are told about the Gentile, to whose Gentileness
they had objected. No soft words to calm their bristling orthodoxy,
but heavy facts,--an appeal to their common-sense, if they had any,
that this was the most practical means for the practical end God had
in view. For again we learn the old lesson the prophets are ever so
anxious to teach us, _God is wise_. He is concerned, not to be orthodox
or true to His own precedent, but to be practical, and effective for
salvation.
And so, too, in our own day, though we may not see any religious
character whatsoever about certain successful movements--say in
science, for instance--which are sure to affect the future of the
Church and of Faith, do not let us despair, neither deny that they,
too, are in the counsels of God. Let us only be sure that they
are permitted for some end--some practical end; and watch, with
meekness but with vigilance, to see what that end shall be. Perhaps
the endowment of the Church with new weapons of truth; perhaps her
emancipation from associations which, however ancient, are unhealthy;
perhaps her opportunity to go forth upon new heights of vision, new
fields of conquest.
FOOTNOTES:
[93] Identified by Delitzsch as East, Halévy as West, and Winckler
as North, Elam. Cyrus, though reigning here, was a pure Persian, an
Akhæmenid or son of the royal house of Persia.
[94] The parallel which Professor Sayce (_Fresh Light from the
Ancient Monuments_, p. 147) draws between the statement of the
Cyrus-cylinder, that Cyrus "governed in justice and righteousness,
and was righteous in hand and heart," and Isa. xlv. 13, "Jehovah
raised him up in righteousness," is therefore utterly unreal. It
is very difficult to see how the Deputy-Professor of Comparative
Philology at Oxford could have been reminded of the one passage by
the other, for in Isa. xlv. 13 _righteousness_ neither is used of
Cyrus, nor signifies the moral virtue which it does on the cylinder.
[95] See note to ch. vii.
[96] The following are extracts from the Cylinder of Cyrus
(see Sayce's _Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments_, pp.
138-140):--"Cyrus, king of Elam, he (Merodach) proclaimed by name for
the sovereignty.... Whom he had conquered with his hand, he governed
in justice and righteousness. Merodach, the great lord, the restorer
of his people, beheld with joy the deeds of his vicegerent, who was
righteous in hand and heart. To Babylon he summoned his march, and
he bade him take the road to Babylon; like a friend and a comrade he
went at his side. Without fighting or battle he caused him to enter
into Babylon, his city of Babylon feared. The god ... has in goodness
drawn nigh to him, has made strong his name. I Cyrus ... I entered
Babylon in peace.... Merodach the great lord (cheered) the heart
of his servant.... My vast armies he marshalled peacefully in the
midst of Babylon; throughout Sumer and Accad I had no revilers....
Accad, Marad, etc., I restored the gods who dwelt within them to
their places ... all their peoples I assembled and I restored their
lands. And the gods of Sumer and Accad whom Nabonidos, to the anger
of the lord of gods (Merodach), had brought into Babylon, I settled
in peace in their sanctuaries by command of Merodach, the great lord.
In the goodness of their hearts may all the gods whom I have brought
into their strong places daily intercede before Bel and Nebo, that
they should grant me length of days; may they bless my projects with
prosperity, and may they say to Merodach my lord, that Cyrus the
king, thy worshipper, and Kambyses his son (deserve his favour)."
[97] Why so sovereign a God should be in such peculiar relations with
one people, we will try to see in ch. xv. of this volume.
[98] Earth here without the article, but plainly _the earth_, and not
_the land_ of Judah.
[99] _Cf._ with this Hebrew word צלח the Greek προκοπτειν, to beat
or cut a way through like pioneers; then to forward a work, advance,
prosper (Luke ii. 52; Gal. i. 14; 2 Tim. ii. 16).
[100] _Cyropædia_, Book VIII., ch. vii., 6.