MESOPOTAMIA AND THE BIBLE.
1. _Assyria._
MESOPOTAMIA--“the Land between the Rivers”--is a tract of
country nearly 700 miles long, and from 20 to 250 miles broad, enclosed
between the Euphrates and the Tigris, and extending from the mountains
of Armenia to near the Persian Gulf. It is for the most part a vast
plain, but is crossed near its centre by a range of hills running
almost east and west-from Hit on the Euphrates, famous for its bitumen
pits, to Samarah on the Tigris. North of this line the country, though
dry and bare, is undulating, and rises occasionally into mountains,
while south of it the region is flat and consists of rich, moist,
alluvial land, formed by the rivers themselves. This land of alluvium
was Babylonia, and its capital Babylon; the country north of it was
Assyria, with its capital Nineveh. But the extent of both countries
varied from time to time, according to the power of various monarchs
and their successes in war.
The beginnings of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires are lost in
obscurity, and no records exist among the people themselves accounting
for their origin. Yet the account given in the Bible agrees so well
with what is known from the records that there can be no reasonable
doubt that in it there is a true history of the rise of these two
nations, which were in after time to wield the power of the then known
world. This Biblical account, borne out and amplified as it is by the
late discoveries, forms one of the most interesting and instructive
links in the history of the human race and its progress in civilisation.
“Taking, then, the account as it stands in the Bible,”[49] says Mr
Budge, “it appears that the descendants of Ham, the third son of Noah,
were Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan. The lands of Cush and Mizraim
have hitherto been identified with Ethiopia and Egypt respectively;
Phut was regarded as doubtful, and Canaan was the country with which
we are so well acquainted from the frequent occurrence of the name in
the Bible. The identification of the first-named and most important
of these districts, the land of Cush, has been regarded by many as
unsatisfactory: for Nimrod, judging from the names of towns said to
have been founded by him, could hardly have been an Ethiopian, though,
according to the Bible story, he was a descendant of Cush.”
Amongst the treasures of the Assyrian excavations there has luckily
been found a tablet, giving, in a list of the nations, &c., along the
Taurus range of mountains, a country bearing the name of Kusu, the same
word as is used in the inscriptions to denote the country of Ethiopia;
and from this and from other sources it is clear that two countries
of this name were known to the people of the ancient world, the one
being Ethiopia and the other Cappadocia or its immediate neighbourhood.
It seems therefore likely that Nimrod and his followers, for some
reason unrecorded, left his home in the land of Cush or Cappadocia,
and journeying in a south-easterly direction, came to the land of
Sumer or Shinar. There meeting perhaps with the Semitic population of
the country, he did not go any farther, but settled there with his
followers, and built Babylon, and Birs Nimroud, the supposed Tower of
Babel.
In course of time the new comers began to mingle with the original
(Semitic) inhabitants of the country, and both races were obliged,
for the purpose of trade and intercourse, to learn each other’s
language, so that there must have been for several hundreds of years
two tongues in use at the same time in Mesopotamia, and it was not
until the twelfth or even perhaps the tenth century before Christ, that
the Akkadian was entirely supplanted by the language of the Semitic
Babylonians. The Norman invasion in England is a case parallel to the
above, but with this difference, that whilst the invasion of England
by the Normans was a conquest, the entry of these people (afterwards
known as Akkadians and Sumerians) into Babylonia seems to have been
otherwise; and the Babylonian language, therefore, while admitting very
many Akkadian and Sumerian words, has not suffered, with regard to the
grammatical forms, to the same extent as the English language.
The entry of the Akkadians into Babylonia was the beginning of
civilisation in that country, for they brought with them, along with
their religion, their legends and traditions, their laws, their art,
building knowledge, agricultural skill, and that great civiliser of
nations, the art of writing. From this union of the intellectual
Akkadian race and the warlike Babylonians arose the two nations of whom
both tradition and history have preserved the record, as having been
the mightiest of the nations of the ancient world, namely, Babylonia
and Assyria, of whom so many tales are told, and whose power and high
civilisation amongst the barbarism of the early ages of the world made
so great an impression during the time of their supremacy.
After the mingling of these two races, but long before the Akkadian
language had died out, the Babylonians, as they will be henceforth
called, sent out colonies northwards and founded the great cities of
Assyria--Ninua (Nineveh), Resin, Kalhu (Calah), Assur, &c.
The religion of the Assyrians was derived from Babylonia, and remained
very similar to that of the latter country. Both countries worshipped
the same deities, but the Assyrians made some changes in the system,
especially in introducing the worship of Assur. Assur was worshipped
as “king of the gods,” “father of the gods,” “the deity who created
himself.” Among the other principal gods of the Assyrians were Nebo,
the god of writing; Merodach, or Bel, a companion deity to Nebo;
Shamas, the Sun-god, and Sin, the Moon-god; Ishtar, corresponding to
Venus; Nergal and Ninip, gods of hunting; Vul, the storm god, Anu, king
of heaven, and Hea, the lord of the under world.
The government of Assyria was monarchical, and the power of the king
was absolute, though in practice his rule was tempered by the advice of
counsellors. The commander-in-chief of the army was called the Tartan,
and here was also a high officer called the Rabshakeh (2 Kings xviii.
17). Judges decided cases in the gate of the temple or the palace, and
there was an appeal from them to the governor or king. The priests were
a privileged class; they lived on the revenues of the temples and the
offerings of worshippers. The Assyrian months were lunar, and the 7th,
14th, 21st, and 28th days were Sabbaths of rest: extra work and even
missions of mercy were forbidden, certain foods were not to be eaten,
and the king was not to ride in his chariot. The laws of the country
resembled in many respects those of Israel: a father was supreme in his
household, and a husband had the power of divorcing his wife. Slavery
was in vogue, and whole families were sometimes sold together. Various
trades were practised, including weaving, dyeing, manufacture of iron
goods, copper, and bronze goods, sculpture, and building, &c. But the
most remarkable feature of Assyrian civilisation was their literature
and libraries of clay tablets, and it is to these that we owe most of
our present knowledge of this great people.
Before the days of Moses there was friendly intercourse, as we have
seen, between Mesopotamia and Egypt. In later ages Assyria and Egypt
were frequently at war with one another. The hostile armies were
obliged to march through Palestine; and it became very difficult for
the kings of Israel and Judah to look on with equanimity and preserve a
strictly neutral attitude. Yet if they favoured one of the great powers
they of course gave umbrage to the other; besides which, Assyria, in
the days of its power, could hardly brook to leave any small kingdom
independent. At length Samaria was conquered, and its inhabitants
deported, by Shalmaneser or by Sargon; and afterwards Judea also, by
Nebuchadnezzar.
Speaking of the captivity of Israel in Babylonia as a providential
event, a great German writer, Lessing, says,--“When the child, by dint
of blows and caresses had come to years of understanding, the father
sent it at once into foreign countries, and here it recognised at once
the good which in its father’s house it had possessed but not been
conscious of.”[50] Again he says,--“The child, sent abroad, saw other
children, who knew more, who lived more becomingly, and asked itself in
confusion, why do I not know that too? why do I not live so too? ought
I not to have been taught and admonished of all this in my father’s
house?”
It is because of this sojourn abroad of the Jews, and the influence
of other nations upon them, that the exploration of these eastern
countries is a matter of such importance to Bible students. In Assyria,
Babylonia, and Egypt we get into by-paths of Bible history, and the old
records when unearthed, read sometimes like new chapters of the Bible.
The land of Mesopotamia, not inaptly called a graveyard of empires and
nations, is now neglected and desolate, under Turkish misrule. “The
monotony of the landscape would be unbroken” (says Zénaïde A. Ragozin)
“but for certain elevations and hillocks of strange and varied shapes,
which dot the plain in every direction; some are high and conical
or pyramidal in form, others are quite extensive and rather flat on
the summit, others again long and low, and all curiously unconnected
with each other or with any ridge of hills. This is doubly striking
in Lower Mesopotamia or Babylonia, proverbial for its excessive
flatness. The few permanent villages, composed of mud-huts or plaited
reed-cabins, are generally built on these eminences; but others are
used as burying-grounds, and a mosque, the Mohammedan house of prayer,
sometimes rises on one or the other. The substance of these mounds
being rather soft and yielding, their sides are still furrowed in many
places with ravines, worn by the rushing streams of rain-water. The
rubbish washed away lies scattered on the plain, and is seen to contain
fragments of bricks and pottery, sometimes inscribed with arrow-headed
characters; in the ravines themselves are laid bare whole sides of
walls of brickwork and pieces of sculptured stone.”
The Arabs never thought of exploring these curious heaps. Their
law forbids them to represent the human form either in painting or
sculpture, lest it should lead the ignorant into idolatry. They are
superstitious, and look on relics of ancient statuary with suspicion
amounting to fear, and connect them with magic and witchcraft. It is
therefore with awe not devoid of horror that they tell travellers of
underground passages in the mounds, haunted not only by wild beasts,
but by evil spirits, strange figures having been dimly perceived in
the crevices. Better instructed foreigners have long ago assumed that
within these mounds must be entombed whatever ruins and relics may be
preserved of the great cities of yore.
The first European whose love of learning was strong enough to make
him disregard difficulty and expense, and use the pick-axe upon these
mounds, was an Englishman named Rich. This was in 1820: but Mr Rich was
not very successful, and it was literally true that up to 1842, “a
case 3 feet square enclosed all that remained, not only of the great
city Nineveh, but of Babylon itself.” In 1842 M. Botta, a French Consul
stationed at Mosul on the Tigris, began to dig, and after fruitless
labour at the mound of Kouyunjik, opposite Mosul, was directed by a
native to Khorsabad, and there, on cutting a trench, entered a hall
lined all round with sculptured slabs, representing battles, sieges,
and similar events. A new and wonderful world was suddenly opened, and
he walked as in a dream. The discovery created an immense sensation
in Europe, and the spirit of research and enterprise was effectually
aroused.
[Illustration: MAP of the ASSYRIAN EMPIRE AND SURROUNDING COUNTRIES
_London; Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co._
_F.S. Weller, F.S.G.S._]
The investigation was soon taken up by Mr Austen Henry Layard, our own
countryman, and the objects found were brought to the British Museum,
which now boasts a splendid collection. After getting over preliminary
difficulties--the interesting story of which may be found in his
volumes on “Nineveh and its Remains”--Mr Layard obtained a grant of
money from the Museum, with full licence from the Turkish Government,
and then succeeded in organizing a band of Arabs to work willingly and
well, and from that moment made new discoveries every day.
One morning, as he was going to the scene of operations--they were
digging in the mound of Nimroud--two Arabs galloped up to him, and
said, “Hasten, O Bey, hasten to the diggers, for they have found Nimrod
himself! Wallah, it is wonderful, but it is true; we have seen him with
our eyes! There is no God but God!” What they had seen was a sculptured
human head, which, upon removing more earth, was seen to belong to a
winged quadruped--one of those colossal “bulls” since deposited at the
British Museum. A “bull” we say, but really a monster with the body of
a bull (sometimes the body of a lion), the head of a man, and the wings
of an eagle--the Assyrian idea of the cherubim. Many of these objects
were surrounded by writing in the curious cuneiform or arrow-headed
character.
[Illustration: WINGED HUMAN-HEADED BULL. (N.-W. Palace,
Nimrod.)]
Besides these so-called bulls, Mr Layard found obelisks of black
basalt, with figures in low relief representing tribute being
brought to the Assyrian kings. On the black obelisk in the British
Museum--found in the central mound of Nimroud, amid the ruins of
Shalmaneser’s palace--occurs the name and figure of Jehu, king of
Israel, as bringing tribute to Shalmaneser II. (about B.C.
842). “I have received the tribute of Jehu, the son of Omri; silver,
gold, bowls of gold, chalices of gold, cups of gold, pails of gold,
lead, sceptres for the hand of the king, (and) spear-shafts.” The
mistake indeed is made of calling him “Jehu, son of Omri;” Jehu sat
upon the throne of Omri, but he was a usurper and not of Omri’s
house. The tribute bearers on this obelisk carry golden cups and
goblets, bars of the precious metals, and other valuable things.
Rev. H. G. Tomkins, speaking of these Assyrian sculptured portraits
of Jehu and his princes, says they have “strong aquiline features,
and that peculiar shrug or quirk of the nostril which gives a shrewd
and sinister look to many a Jew of London streets. In drawing one of
these familiar faces from the monument, I was ready to believe that it
belonged to a lineal ancestor of the London ‘Clo’ men.’ The bag falling
down the stooping back deepened this impression.”[51]
[Illustration: BLACK OBELISK.]
In addition to these things Mr Layard brought home a large number of
alabaster slabs sculptured with battle scenes, lion hunts, and the
representation of sacred trees to which winged figures are making
mysterious offerings. It was the custom of these Assyrian kings to have
the halls and chambers of their palaces lined with plain alabaster
slabs, and after each new victory to have the story engraved in a
separate room, so that in one chamber we get an account of a battle
in Babylonia, in another the story of the siege of Lachish near the
Philistine country, and so on.
But the reader--who has no doubt visited the British Museum and looked
at all these things--may perhaps ask why we repeat the familiar story.
It is in order to give completeness to the picture, and also to induce
young visitors to the Museum to look _into_ things as well as look at
them. Where did the antiquities come from? How have the inscriptions
been deciphered? What do they say? Although many of them were brought
to the Museum years ago, the writing was not immediately read; the
process of decipherment is still going on, and hardly a year passes
without startling discoveries being made in the Museum itself. In the
year 1872 Mr George Smith there, taking up a clay tablet that had been
neglected, deciphered the inscription, and found it to be the Chaldean
story of the Flood. In 1873, going out to Assyria for the purpose,
he actually discovered the missing portion of the tablet. Such facts
are intensely interesting to the student of the Scriptures, and they
attract us to give a portion of our attention to the legends and the
literature of the Assyrians and the Chaldeans.
Nineveh, we read, was a city of three days’ journey. It actually
extended 20 miles in length by 10 miles in breadth, and was surrounded
by a great wall upon which three chariots could be driven abreast.[52]
Within this circumference great mounds exist, as those referred to
at Nimroud, Khorsabad, and Kouyunjik. Within these mounds have been
discovered six palaces and three temples; although only one of these
buildings--the palace of Sennacherib, at Kouyunjik--is in a decent
state of preservation. The restoration of this structure by Mr J.
Ferguson, the architect, prefixed as an illustration to Layard’s
“Nineveh,” shows it to have been a very magnificent pile. A second
palace found at Kouyunjik belonged to Assurbanipal, the grandson of
Sennacherib.
[Illustration: SENNACHERIB BEFORE LACHISH.]
Sennacherib himself we are familiar with through the Bible. He was that
monarch who so terrified the good king Hezekiah, when he sent him a
blasphemous message and threatened to come and destroy Jerusalem. What
the Jews of Jerusalem had to fear if he should come they knew too well;
and we know now, for Sennacherib had been besieging Lachish (2 Kings
xviii.; Isaiah xxxvi.) in Palestine, and we have recovered the record
of that siege. It is inscribed on one of the bulls discovered at the
largest of the royal buildings, and shows the monarch seated on his
throne, while the writing around him says, “I, Sennacherib, the great
king, the king of Assyria, seated on the throne of judgment before
Lachish, I give permission for the slaughter.” Before him are the
miserable captives, having rings fixed into their noses or lips, with
bridles attached, so that their heads may be held facing forward while
the king puts out their eyes with a pointed instrument. Captives are
there having their tongues torn out, others being stripped naked and
flayed alive, while human heads are piled up into pyramids.
All these tortures the Jews themselves had to fear if Sennacherib
should take Jerusalem. It was doubtless a day of terrible suspense in
the Holy City, and a night in which few dared go to sleep. But the
early morning brought the tidings that the army of Sennacherib was
destroyed, that the angel of the Lord had gone forth and slain in the
camp of the Assyrians a hundred four score and five thousand men. We
knew the Scripture story of the deliverance, but we can realise it
better now when we have the record of the siege of Lachish, and know
what fate threatened the Jews of Jerusalem.
Moreover, we have recovered Sennacherib’s own account of this very
campaign, in which he tells us that he had taken forty-six fenced
cities in Judea, and that he shut up Hezekiah in Jerusalem “like a bird
in a cage.” He forbears to tell us why he failed to capture the bird;
he glosses over the disaster which befell his army; and he seems even
to misrepresent the facts by declaring that, after this, Hezekiah sent
him splendid presents to Babylon, for the presents of Hezekiah were
sent before this, when Sennacherib was down by Lachish, and sent with
the hope of buying him off, which there was no need to do after his
retreat.
A great difficulty in the Book of the Prophet Isaiah is also
satisfactorily cleared up by these inscriptions. Sennacherib, coming
from the Philistine country to Jerusalem, would have to travel from the
south-west, whereas, in an earlier chapter, Isaiah had told us that the
Assyrian invader came down from the north, that he captured Carchemish
in his way, and conquered Damascus, and took Samaria, and then, after
crossing the gorge at Michmash, encamped at Nob, outside Jerusalem on
the north. Moreover, the prophet intimates, he is likely to take the
city; whereas, in the later chapter, he says, “He shall not take it,
nor so much as shoot an arrow against it.” It was a great difficulty,
and it appeared to be a contradiction; but it is now satisfactorily
explained, for we find from the Assyrian inscriptions that there
had been an earlier campaign, conducted by Sargon, the father of
Sennacherib, ten years before, and that he it was who actually came by
the northerly route, and did capture Carchemish, &c., on his way. There
can be no doubt that if we read the 10th chapter of Isaiah with Sargon
in our minds, and not Sennacherib, all difficulty disappears.
In the 20th chapter of Isaiah there is an incidental mention of this
Sargon, “In the year that the Tartan (_i.e._, the commander-in-chief)
came unto Ashdod, when Sargon, the king of Assyria, sent him,” &c.;
and for twenty-five centuries this had been the only evidence that
any such monarch had lived. Not unnaturally the evidence was thought
insufficient--this isolated reference standing like a doubtful fossil
in old-world rocks--and many historians and critics wished to identify
Sargon with Shalmaneser, Sennacherib, or Esarhaddon. Some said that
Isaiah had made a mistake. But Nineveh is disinterred, and it turns
out that Sargon was a very great king, and not even the first of that
name, for there had been two Sargons, heroes of antiquity, before him.
M. Botta finds at Khorsabad the palace of Sargon; and it appears that
he was the successor of Shalmaneser, he was the father of Sennacherib,
and he reigned for seventeen years. Among the treasures which Mr George
Smith recovered from the ruins of Nineveh is the royal seal of Sargon,
with his name and date.
As soon as Sargon ascended the throne he prosecuted the Syrian war with
vigour, keeping up the siege of Tyre, storming the city of Samaria,
and subduing the whole country of Israel. The kingdom of Samaria was
put an end to, the people being carried into captivity and spread over
the northern provinces of the Assyrian empire and in the cities of the
Medes. It appears to be Sargon who is referred to in 2 Kings xvii. 6,
and xviii. 11 (although the passages had hitherto been understood of
Shalmaneser), where “the king of Assyria” took Samaria and carried
Israel away, placing in their cities men from Babylon, from Cuthah,
from Avva and Hamath and Sepharvaim.
In the eleventh year of Sargon the people of Ashdod in Philistia
deposed the ruler whom Sargon had placed over them, and set up a man
named Yavan, whose chief recommendation was his hostility to Assyria.
Yavan made league with Hezekiah, king of Judah, with Moab, and with
Edom, and led the Philistines to revolt. The leaguers sent an embassy
to Egypt, asking aid, and Pharaoh held out encouragements, but did not
give any assistance when the hour of danger came. Sargon, learning of
the revolt, came to Palestine; Yavan fled into Egypt, the rebellion
collapsed, and the cities of Ashdod and Gimtu were taken by the
Assyrians. Yavan ultimately delivered himself up to the king of Meroe,
or Ethiopia, who bound him and sent him in chains to Sargon.
The expedition against Ashdod took place in B.C. 711, during
the reign of Hezekiah, king of Judah, and is the one referred to in the
twentieth chapter of Isaiah, where the prophet denounces the conduct
of Egypt. The way in which Isaiah speaks of the Egyptians and the
Ethiopians, in this and other chapters, is remarkably justified by the
account given in the Assyrian inscriptions. Egypt is described in the
annals of Sargon as a weak power, always stirring up revolts against
Assyria, and unable to help or shield the revolters. “In those days”
(remarks Mr George Smith, from whose larger work we are here quoting)
“Egypt was truly a broken reed. The account which Sargon gives of the
turning of the fountains and water-courses to protect the city of
Ashdod strikingly parallels the similar preparations of Hezekiah (2
Chron. xxxii.); and it is a curious fact that Hezekiah’s preparations
had been made only two years before, according to the ordinary
chronology.”
As remarked by Mr St Chad Boscawen, the political significance of the
embassy of Berodach Baladan (2 Kings xx. 12) is at once apparent when
viewed in the light of the monumental inscriptions; and the atmosphere
of intrigue, rebellion, and stern vengeance is very clearly apparent in
the writings both of the Hebrew and the Assyrian scribe. It was this
embassy, in B.C. 712, which brought about the invasion of
Judea and the siege of Jerusalem in B.C. 711, by Sargon. The
prophecies of Isaiah (chapters x. and xi.), so long unsolved mysteries,
are now found to be clear and detailed records of this lost incident in
Oriental history.
“Sargon” claimed descent from an ancient hero named Bel-bani; and he
assumed the name of an old Babylonian monarch--Sargon of Agadé, who was
worshipped as a demi-god--but his own name was not really Sargon. When
he stormed the city of Samaria, he carried away, he tells us, 27,000 of
the Israelites into captivity. The kingdom of Samaria was suppressed,
and those Israelites who were not deported were placed under an
Assyrian governor. Thus the Bible account of the captivity of the ten
tribes is confirmed. And as to Judah, when we come to the Babylonian
annals of the conquest by Nebuchadnezzar, we find confirmation of the
statement that he destroyed Jerusalem, and carried the inhabitants of
that city into captivity.
These, then, are some instances of the light that is being thrown upon
the Scriptures by these Assyrian writings--of the manner in which
the Bible narrative is being filled out and illustrated with new and
copious details, and on the whole, as all critics are bound to say, is
being confirmed in its statements.
Besides Ahab and Omri, Jehu and Hezekiah, the cuneiform tablets mention
Menahem, Pekah, and Hoshea, kings of Israel; and Azariah, Ahaz, and
Manasseh, kings of Judah. Ahaz is called Jehoahaz, his name, like so
many more, being compounded with the name of Jehovah; and it would
seem that on account of his perversion to foreign worship the Bible
writers would not use the Lord’s name in such association. Further,
the kings of Assyria and Babylon spoken of in the Bible come before us
again in the cuneiform texts, with many particulars of their warlike
expeditions,--Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, Shalmaneser, Tiglath-Pileser,
Nebuchadnezzar, &c. Tiglath-Pileser, we find, was not the first of
that name, for there had been a monarch so designated as early as
1300 B.C. In fact the real name of the later king was Pul or
Pulu, and it is doubtful whether he was the rightful heir; but when
he ascended the throne (in B.C. 745) he took the name of the
earlier conqueror, a circumstance which led the Bible writer to suppose
there were two kings. [S. A. Strong, in “Records of the Past.” New
Series. Vol. v.]
The other palace found at Kouyunjik belonged, as stated before, to
Assurbanipal. He was the Sardanapalus of Greek writers and was a
great conqueror. His date is about 640 B.C. Mr Rassam, the
native co-worker with Mr Layard, was fortunate enough to discover
Assurbanipal’s library--the library of the Assyrian kings. The “books”
of the Assyrians differed very much from our own. They used to take
a tablet of clay, to write upon it with an iron stylus, bake it into
terra cotta, and then place the record on the library shelf. These clay
tablets were more durable than leaves of paper or rolls of parchment,
and the Assyrian records, covered up more than two thousand years ago,
are in many cases so well preserved that scholars can read them.
As progress was made in deciphering the inscriptions, it was found
that new and remarkable light was being obtained regarding the history
and civilisation of half-forgotten empires. Collections of inscribed
tablets had been made by Tiglath-Pileser II. (B.C. 745), who
had copied some historical inscriptions of his predecessors. Sargon,
the father of Sennacherib (B.C. 722), had increased this
library by adding a collection of astrological and similar texts; and
Sennacherib himself (B.C. 705) had composed copies of the
Assyrian canon, short histories, and miscellaneous inscriptions to
add to the collection. Sennacherib also moved the library from Calah,
its original seat, to Nineveh, the capital; and Esarhaddon, the son
of Sennacherib, added numerous historical and mythological texts. All
the inscriptions of the former kings, however, were nothing compared
to those written during the reign of Assurbanipal, the grandson of
Sennacherib, who not only recorded the events of his own reign, but
collected literature from other countries, and caused translations to
be made of Babylonian records which were then ancient. Thousands of
inscribed tablets were collected and copied, and stored in the royal
library at Nineveh; and it is this royal library which has been found.
The amount of Assyrian literature now in our possession is more
than equal to the entire contents of the Old Testament. It includes
religion, astronomy, mythology, history, geography, natural history,
royal decrees and private letters, legal decisions and deeds of sale,
lists of tributes and taxes, precepts for private life, &c. Among
the sacred legends are stories of the Creation and the Deluge. These
narratives did not originate with the Assyrians, for they received
their religious system by inheritance from the Babylonians. But neither
did they originate with the Babylonians; for we learn from their own
records that this learning and these traditions were brought into their
country by the Akkadians.
Assurbanipal, when he made raids into Babylonia and captured a city,
would carry off the sacred writings to enrich the royal library at
Nineveh. When they were brought to Nineveh they were copied by the
priests, and they were sometimes translated into the Assyrian tongue,
although Assyrians who professed to be well educated used to learn the
Akkadian language, much as English boys learn Latin, or theological
students study Hebrew and read the writings in the original. It is
very interesting to find that these old Assyrians and these ancient
Chaldeans had their own version of the Creation, the Deluge, the
Building of Babel, &c., which they venerated as being ancient even
then, and regarded as most sacred.
The Chaldean narratives differed in minor particulars from those in
the Bible. The Chaldean Deluge, for instance, lasted only seven days,
instead of the greater part of a year; the vessel was not an ark, but a
ship, of proper ship shape, with a pilot on board to navigate it, and
other people on board besides the family of Noah. The Chaldean Noah,
when the waters were subsiding, sent out not only a raven and a dove,
but a swallow as well; and in the end of the event he was translated
that he should not see death; and this in the Bible does not occur to
Noah, but to Enoch. Nevertheless, with these and other differences, we
have the grand fact that the cycle of narratives preserved in the early
chapters of Genesis are not mere ingenious inventions on the part of
Hebrew writers, but had their parallel in early Chaldea. The key to
their exact meaning is for the present lost; but we may hope that it
will be recovered, and then there will be an end to the controversy
between Geology and Genesis.
2. _Babylonia._
Babylonia comprehended the country from near the Lower Zab to the
Persian Gulf, about 400 miles long; and from Elam, east of the Tigris,
to the Arabian Desert, west of the Euphrates, an average breadth of 150
miles.
Its history begins very early, for one of its kings--Sargon of
Accad--is believed to have reigned in 3800 B.C. The circumstance to
which we owe the discovery of this remarkable fact is thus related
in Dr Sayce’s “Hibbert Lectures”: “The last king of Babylonia,
Nabonidos, had antiquarian tastes, and busied himself not only with
the restoration of the old temples of his country, but also with
the disinterment of the memorial cylinders which their builders and
restorers had buried beneath their foundations. It was known that the
great temple of the Sun-god at Sippara, where the mounds of Abu-Hubba
now mark its remains, had been originally erected by Naram-Sin,
the son of Sargon, and attempts had been already made to find the
records which, it was assumed, he had entombed under its angles. With
true antiquarian zeal Nabonidos continued the search, and did not
desist until, like the dean and chapter of some modern cathedral,
he had lighted upon ‘the foundation stone’ of Naram-Sin himself.
This foundation-stone, he tells us, had been seen by none of his
predecessors for 3200 years. In the opinion, accordingly, of Nabonidos,
a king who was curious about the past history of his country, and whose
royal position gave him the best possible opportunities for learning
all that could be known about it, Naram-Sin and his father, Sargon I.,
lived 3200 years before his own time, or 3750 B.C.”
The date is so remote and so contrary to all our preconceived ideas
regarding the antiquity of the Babylonian monarchy, that it was not
received without hesitation; but it appears to be supported by other
evidence, and is now generally accepted. It is believed, indeed, that
the monuments found at _Tell-lo_, including statues of diorite, a
material foreign to Babylonia, are earlier still, and must be regarded
as pre-Semitic.
It may be asked, what interest can we have in people and things so
remote? the Babylonians and their religion have long since perished,
and have no influence upon the world of to-day. To this it is replied
that through the providential circumstances of the Captivity the Jews
were brought into contact with the Babylonians; the Jewish religion
in its turn influenced Christianity, and all Christians should be
concerned to know what the Jews learned in their exile. In the view of
Hebrew prophets the Jews were “sent into foreign countries” to receive
education and discipline; the Assyrian conqueror was the rod of God’s
anger (Isaiah x. 5), and the Babylonish exile was the punishment meted
out to Judah for its sins. The captives who returned again to their
own land came back with changed hearts and purified minds, intent upon
re-establishing Jerusalem as the home of a righteous people. And they
had done something more than learn to abominate idolatry, they had been
led to weigh the value of the religious beliefs and practices of the
nations they had lived with during seventy years.
But it was not only through the Babylonian exile that the religious
ideas of the Babylonian and the Jew came into contact with each
other. “It was then, indeed” (says Dr Sayce), “that the ideas of the
conquering race were likely to make their deepest and most enduring
impression; it was then, too, that the Jew for the first time found the
libraries and ancient literature of Chaldea open to his study and use.”
But old tradition had already pointed to the valley of the Euphrates
as the primeval cradle of his race. We all remember how Abraham, it is
said, was born in Ur of the Chaldees, and how the earlier chapters of
Genesis make the Euphrates and Tigris two of the rivers of Paradise,
and describe the building of the tower of Babylon as the cause of the
dispersion of mankind. Now the Hebrew language was the language not
only of the Israelites, but also of those earlier inhabitants of the
country whom the Jews called Canaanites and the Greeks Phœnicians. Like
the Israelites, the Phœnicians held that their ancestors had come from
the Persian Gulf and the alluvial Plain of Babylonia. The tradition is
confirmed by the researches of comparative philology. Their first home
appears to have been in the low-lying desert which stretches eastward
to Chaldea--in the very region, in fact, in which stood the great city
of Ur, the modern Mugheir.
The earliest known kings of Shumir resided in Ur, and besides that,
it was the principal commercial mart of the country. For, strange as
it may appear, when we look on a modern map, and observe the ruins
150 miles from the sea, Ur was then a maritime city, with harbour and
docks. Through the accumulation of alluvium brought down by the two
great rivers, the Babylonian territory has steadily increased from age
to age, and the waters of the Gulf have been pushed back. There was, in
early times, a distance of many miles between the mouths of the Tigris
and Euphrates, and Ur lay very near the mouth of the latter river. The
platform of the principal mound which marks the site is faced with a
wall 10 feet thick, of red kiln-dried bricks, cemented with bitumen.
The mound has something of the shape of a pear, and measures about 2
miles in circumference. This mound representing the town, the suburban
district is full of graves of all ages, showing the long period through
which the city flourished.
It appears from the inscriptions found at Ur that the city was devoted
to the worship of the Moon-god Sin, frequently called “the god Thirty,”
in allusion to his function as the measurer of time by months. Here
stood the great temple of the god, which was partially explored by Mr
K. Loftus--a temple built in stages, of which two remain. The bricks of
the temple are inscribed with the name of Ur-Bagas, its founder, the
first monarch of united Babylonia of whom we know. Some of the hymns
used in the ritual service of the temple, or at any rate composed in
honour of the god, were obtained by Assurbanipal, and translated by
his scribes out of the Akkadian language into the Assyrian. One of them
begins thus:--
“Lord and prince of the gods who in heaven and earth alone is supreme!
“Father Nannar, Lord of the firmament, prince of the gods!
“Father Nannar, Lord of heaven, mighty one, prince of the gods!
“Father Nannar, Lord of the moon, prince of the gods!”
It was from a city where such hymns were repeated in praise of the
Moon-god that Abraham was called to rise up and go forth. With Terah,
his father, and a tribe of servants and adherents, he started for new
lands.
The distance from Ur of the Chaldees to Haran in northern Mesopotamia
was considerable, but it lay along the line of the river and by the
common route of travel. It is remarkable that Haran, like Ur, was a
city of the Moon-god, who appears at one time to have taken primary
rank among the Babylonians. Nabonidos restored the temple at Haran,
and it is thus that he celebrates the event:--“May the gods who
dwell in heaven and earth approach the house of Sin, the father who
created them. As for me, Nabonidos, king of Babylon, the completer
of this temple, may Sin, the king of the gods of heaven and earth,
in the lifting up of his kindly eyes, with joy look upon me month by
month at noon and sunset: may he grant me favourable tokens, may he
lengthen my days, may he extend my years, may he establish my reign,
may he overcome my foes, may he slay my enemies, may he sweep away my
opponents. May Nin-gal, the mother of the mighty gods, in the presence
of Sin, her loved one, speak like a mother. May Samas and Istar, the
bright offspring of his heart, to Sin, the father who begat them, speak
of blessing. May Nuzku, the messenger supreme, hearken to my prayer and
plead for me.”
There would seem to be as much reason for Abraham to leave Haran as
there was for his leaving Ur; and the Bible actually represents the
stay in Haran as only a stage in the migration. Canaan was the land
which God had “told him of;” and there, building altars successively
at Shechem and Bethel and in the oak-grove of Mamre, he realized that
the Lord could be approached in every place by those who worshipped in
spirit and in truth.
Terah and Abraham had come out of Chaldea with a large family and
numerous following. “For years,” says Ragozin, “the tribe travelled
without dividing, from pasture to pasture, over the land of Canaan,
into Egypt and out of it again, until the quarrel occurred between
Abraham’s herdsmen and Lot’s, when Lot chose the Plain of the Jordan
and Abraham remained in the centre of the country. After the battle
of four kings against five, in the Vale of Siddim, when Lot was taken
prisoner, Abraham pursued the victorious army, now carelessly marching
homewards, with its long train of captives and booty, and produced a
panic among them by a sudden and vigorous onslaught. Not only was Lot
rescued, with his women folk and his goods, but all the captured goods
and people were brought back too. Chedorlaomer, of whom the spirited
Bible narrative gives us so life-like a sketch, lived, according to the
most probable calculations, about 2200 B.C. In the cuneiform
inscriptions he is called Khudur-Lagamar; and among the few vague forms
whose blurred outlines loom out of the twilight of those dim ages, he
is the second with any flesh and blood reality about him, probably the
first, conqueror of whom the world has any authentic record.”
It is supposed that the “Amraphel, king of Shinar,” who marched with
Khudur-Lagamar as his ally, was no other than a king of Babylon, one
of whose names has been read Amarpal, while “Ariokh of Ellassar” was
an Elamite, Eriaku, brother or cousin of Khudur-Lagamar and king of
Larsam. At Larsam the Elamite conquerors had established a powerful
dynasty, closely allied by blood to the principal one, which had made
the venerable Ur its headquarters.
Babylon was a very ancient city of Babylonia, and is first mentioned
in the inscriptions of Izdhubar,[53] a mythical hero, whose name is
connected with the Chaldean story of the Flood. It remained for some
centuries of secondary importance, but became at length the capital
of the country. The native name, Bab-ilu, signifies the Gate-of-God,
corresponding to Beth-el, the House of God, in the land of Palestine.
According to Herodotus, the city stood in a broad plain, and was an
exact square, measuring 15 miles each way. It was surrounded, he says,
by a broad and deep moat, full of water, behind which rose a wall 50
royal cubits in breadth and 200 in height. In digging the moat the
alluvial clay was at once made into bricks and baked in kilns; and with
these the walls were built, the cement being hot bitumen. “On the top,
along the edges of the wall, they constructed buildings of a single
chamber, facing one another, leaving between them room for a four-horse
chariot to turn. In the circuit of the wall are a hundred gates of
brass, with brazen lintels and side-posts.”
The broad stream of the Euphrates passed through the city, dividing
it into two parts, and the centre of each division was occupied by a
fortress. In the one stood the palace of the kings, surrounded by a
wall of great strength and size; in the other was the sacred precinct
of Jupiter Belus, a square enclosure, 2 furlongs each way, with gates
of solid brass. “In the middle of the precinct,” says Herodotus, “there
was a tower of solid masonry, a furlong in length and breadth, upon
which was raised a second tower, and on that a third, and so on up to
eight. The ascent to the top is on the outside, by a path which winds
round all the towers.... On the topmost tower there is a spacious
temple, and inside the temple stands a couch of unusual size, richly
adorned, with a golden table by its side. Below, in the same precinct,
there is a second temple, in which is a sitting figure of Jupiter, all
of gold.” Other historians make the circuit of the city from 45 to 48
miles, instead of 60; and it is hardly necessary to say that modern
writers question both its extent and the height of its walls.
The god whom Herodotus calls Jupiter-Belus was Bel-Merodach. Babylon
was called “the dwelling-place of Bel” and the “town of Marduk.” The
temple of Bel is represented by the ruin of Babil, a mound on the
eastern side of the stream. Some writers believe this to be the site
of the Tower of Babel. Others, including Sir Henry Rawlinson, have
identified the Babel tower with the ruin of Birs Nimroud, the ancient
Borsippa, on the western side of the river. Birs Nimroud is one of the
most imposing ruins in the country, standing in the midst of a vast
plain, with nothing to break the view. Sir H. Rawlinson excavated at
the site, and discovered that the tower was built in seven stages, the
material being brickwork on an earthen platform. The first stage was an
exact square, 272 feet each way, and 26 feet high, the bricks blackened
with bitumen. The higher stages were of course successively smaller,
but they were not placed in the centre of those on which they rested,
but considerably nearer to the south-western end which constituted the
back of the building. The bricks of the lowest stage being blackened,
those of the second stage were orange-coloured, of the third red, the
fourth it is supposed were plated with gold. Seven colours were used,
emblematic of the planets, and the building was called the Temple of
the Seven Spheres. On the seventh stage there was probably placed the
ark or tabernacle, which seems to have been again 15 feet high, and
must have nearly covered the top of the seventh story. This temple was
sacred to Nebo, the Babylonian Mercury, the inventor of the alphabet,
“the writer,” “the prophet,” “the author of the oracle.” Assurbanipal
is never weary of telling us, at the end of the documents which his
scribes had copied from Babylonian originals, that Nebo and Tasmit had
given him broad ears, and endowed him with seeing eyes, so that he had
written and bound together and published the store of tablets, a work
which none of the kings who had gone before him had undertaken, even
the secrets of Nebo!
From receptacles at the corners of the stages above described, Sir H.
Rawlinson obtained inscribed cylinders, stating that the building was
the Temple of the Seven Planets, which had been partially built by a
former king of Babylon, and having fallen into decay, was restored and
completed by Nebuchadnezzar. It was at Birs Nimroud that Mr Hormuzd
Rassam found a leaf of metal with some writing on it, which proved to
be a dedication by Nebuchadnezzar to the god Nebo for his restoration
to health. If this relates to Nebuchadnezzar’s recovery from his
madness, it is an interesting confirmation of the story in the Book of
Daniel.
“The secrets of Nebo” referred to by Assurbanipal, were astronomical
records and other writings stored up in Nebo’s temple. The religion
of the Babylonians was based on a study of the heavenly bodies, and
was so intimately connected with astronomy that it was necessary
for the priests to be astronomers. There were observatories at the
principal temples; observations of the heavens were regularly made,
and naturally the records were preserved in the temple chambers, and
became the nucleus of large libraries. It was the good fortune of Mr
Rassam to discover one of the most important of these libraries, at
Abu Hubba--about 30 miles south-east from Bagdad--on one of the canals
branching eastward from the Euphrates. Abu Hubba proves to be the
ancient Sippara, the Biblical Sepharvaim, whence some of the people
were taken, to re-people Samaria after the ten tribes of Israel were
carried away. The Hebrew name being in the dual form, and signifying
the two Sippars, we look for duality in the ruins, and we find them
actually on the two sides of the stream. Sippara, we knew from Berosus,
was a great seat of sun-worship; the temple of the god Shamas was here,
and it was here that Xisuthrus, the Chaldean Noah, was said to have
buried the records of the antediluvian world. The explorations of Mr
Rassam have restored to us the remains of the Sun-god’s temple.
The citadel occupies the southern portion of the _enceinte_, and its
highest point on the south-west face was once on the banks of a stream,
either the Euphrates itself or a broad canal communicating with the
river. The trenches excavated in the mound soon struck the walls of a
building, and by following the line of this wall the outer face of a
large square edifice was uncovered. Trenches and shafts sunk in the
interior showed that within the outer rampart there were more than
one hundred chambers ranged round a central court. In the central
portion of the mound an important pair of chambers were found, and in
the centre of one of them a large brick altar platform, about 30 feet
square, upon which it was evident that the altar of burnt-offering
had stood, for there were charred fragments about. The axis of this
chamber was north-east and south-west, and at the north-east end a
doorway was found, leading into a smaller chamber, the floor of which
was paved with a material resembling asphalt. Under this floor Mr
Rassam discovered a terra cotta box containing three inscribed records,
namely, a stone tablet with a sculptured panel, representing the
worship of the Sun-god, and two cylinders. The cylinders were found
to bear inscriptions of Nabonidos, king of Babylon, B.C. 555,
recording the restoration of this temple in the year B.C.
550; and the stone tablet bore a long and important record of the
restoration of the temple by Nabu-abla-iddina, king of Babylon, whose
date may be given as about B.C. 852. Above the figure of the
Sun-god on this tablet were the words--“The statue of the Sun-god--the
great lord--dwelling in the House of Light, which is within the city of
Sippara.” But the statue and other objects of value had been removed.
From the cylinder of Nabonidos, as previously stated, we learn that the
temple had been restored by Naram-Sin, the son of Sargon I., in the
year 3750 B.C. It was of very great interest to find in the
lower strata of the temple area a small ovoid of pink and white marble,
bearing an inscription of Sargon I., of such archaic character as to
appear to confirm this date.
The temple was called by many titles--as, “Palace of the God,” “High
Place,” “Dwelling of the God,” “Resting-Place of the God,”--and,
among others, the “House of God,” in Akkadian, E-Din-gira, in Semitic
Babylonian, Bit-ilu, in Hebrew, Bethel.
The city of Akkad or Agadé, built by Sargon I., seems to have been a
part of the double Sippara, and here Sargon founded the celebrated
library which contained among its treasures a great work on astronomy
and astrology, in seventy books. Around this nucleus other writings
aggregated, and the temple of Shamas became the great record office
of the state. Mr Rassam found at Abu Hubba some thousands of tablets
relating to fiscal, legal, and commercial transactions; and it would
thus appear that all documents of this character were preserved by
the priests. A remarkable example of the careful preservation of the
writings committed to their charge was furnished in the course of the
excavations. On the south-east side of the large quadrangle was a
smaller square, in which were a series of chambers, evidently offices
of the temple. In one of these over 30,000 tablets were found stored.
They were packed by Mr Rassam as he found them, and removed to England
without any disturbance of their order; and when the cases came to be
examined it was found that the majority of the tablets were arranged
chronologically. Ranging as these tablets did from B.C. 625
to B.C. 200, they must have lain for nearly 2000 years quite
undisturbed in the ruins.
A Babylonian temple was also the court of justice, and as the Jewish
Sanhedrim met in the temple at Jerusalem, so did the council of the
grey-haired ones meet in the courts of Chaldean temples to answer
judgment. Dr Oppert has translated some contracts and legal decisions
relating indubitably to captive Jews who had been carried to Babylon
after the destruction of Jerusalem. One of the most interesting of them
is a law-suit commenced by a Jewish slave named Barachiel in order to
recover his freedom. The case was as follows:--Barachiel--who bears the
same name as the father of Elihu in the Book of Job (xxxii. 2-6),--had
been the property of a wealthy person named Akhi-nuri, who had sold him
to a widow of the name of Gaga, about 570 B.C. He remained
in the house of this lady as a slave, with the power of liberating
himself by paying a sum equal to his _peculium_ or private property,
which he had been allowed to acquire, like a slave in ancient Rome; but
it seems that he was never fortunate enough to be able to afford the
sum of money required. He remained with Gaga twenty-one years, and was
considered the _res_ or property of the house, and as such was handed
over in pledge, was restored, and finally became the dowry of Nubti,
the daughter of Gaga. Nubti gave him to her son and husband in exchange
for a house and some slaves. After the death of the two ladies he was
sold to the wealthy publican, Itti-Marduk-baladh, from whose house
he escaped twice. Taken the second time, he instituted an action in
order that he might be recognised as a free-born citizen, of the family
of Belrimanni; and to prove that he was of noble origin he pretended
that he had performed the matrimonial solemnities at the marriage of
his master’s daughter, Qudasa, with a certain Samas-mudammiq. Such a
performance, doubtless, implied that the officiating priest was of free
birth, and no slave or freed-man was qualified to take part in it.
The name Barachiel, says Dr Oppert, is evidently that of a Jew.
He is called “a slave of ransom;” that is to say, not a slave who
has already purchased his freedom, but a slave who was allowed by
special laws to employ his private fortune in the work of liberating
himself. He professes to have been the “joiner” of the hands of bride
and bridegroom at a wedding which must have taken place before the
thirty-fifth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, when he still belonged to
the house of Akhi-nuri, “the seller of the slave,” as he is called at
the end of the text.
The judges, after perusing all the evidence, do not find any proofs
that Barachiel was a man of free birth, and accordingly say to
him:--“Prove to us that you are the descendant of a noble ancestor.”
Thereupon Barachiel confesses that he is not free-born, but has twice
run away from the house of his master; as, however, the act was seen
by many people, he was afraid, and said he was the son of a noble
ancestor. “But I am not free-born,” he confesses, and then gives an
account of the events of his life. The judges decided that Barachiel
should be restored to his condition as a slave of ransom.[54]
Such a story as this serves to show what the life of many an Israelite
may have been during the Captivity.
3. _How the Writings were Read._
To the ordinary visitor to the British Museum, looking at the cuneiform
inscriptions--nothing but arrowhead characters variously grouped--it
seems wonderful that they should constitute a language, and incredible
that they should be read. The question is often asked, “How can we
trust the translations put before us? How do we know that they are any
more than guesses?” It may be well, therefore, to relate how the key
to the lost character was obtained, and how the decipherment proceeded
until now the translation of narrative texts can be made with as much
certainty as translations from the Hebrew of the Old Testament.
[Illustration: BEHISTUN SCULPTURE.]
The clue was obtained from the Behistun inscriptions, through the
energy of Sir Henry Rawlinson; and the records of the successive steps
of the discovery will be found in the _Journal of the Asiatic Society_,
in the _Quarterly Review_ for March 1847, and in such popular works
as Mr Vaux’s “Nineveh and Persepolis.” Edwin Norris and others had
laboured, and the process of deciphering cuneiform texts was already
well advanced when Sir Henry Layard and Mr Rassam discovered such
abundant treasures in the mounds on the Tigris. The inscriptions
which are now known to record the personal history of Darius, the
son of Hystaspes, are almost always in three forms of the cuneiform
character, which may be described as Persian, Median, and Assyrian, and
were addressed to different races of his subjects. The most extensive
monument of the kind is found on a rock escarpment at Behistun, on the
frontiers of Persia, a place on the high road from Babylonia to the
further east. The rock is almost perpendicular, and rises abruptly
from the plain to the height of 1700 feet, an imposing object which
must always have attracted the attention of travellers. It was known
to the Greeks, who erected on the top of it a temple to Zeus; and it
had probably been sacred to Ormazd, the supreme deity of the Persians.
High up on the face of this rock, 300 feet above the plain, there are
two tablets, one of them containing sculptured figures and nearly a
thousand lines of cuneiform character. The sculptured portion of the
rock represents a line of nine persons united by a cord tied round
their necks, and having their hands bound behind their backs, who are
approaching another of more majestic stature, who, holding up his right
hand in token of authority, treads on a prostrate body. His countenance
expresses the idea of a great king or conqueror, and behind the king
stand two guards with long spears in their hands.
The reign of Darius was disturbed by many revolts, and the
insurrectionary attempts of many impostors and pretenders. It is these
impostors who are represented as prisoners in the sculpture, and over
the head of each figure we find his name and description. The first
one, the prostrate figure, is “Gomates, the Magian, an impostor,” who
said, “I am Bartius, the son of Cyrus; I am the King,” and so on. The
inscription is by far the largest and most important record which has
been preserved of the greatness of Darius, and of the Persian state and
system. The lines over the monarch himself would read in English as
follows:--
“I am Darius the king, the great king, the king of kings, the king of
Persia, the king of the (dependent) provinces, the son of Hystaspes,
the grandson of Arsames, the Achæmenian,” &c.
It will be noticed here how the word king is repeated; as the
inscription proceeds the name Darius is repeated also. A German
scholar, Professor Grotefend, had observed that such inscriptions
generally begin with three or four words, one of which varies while
the others do not. He suspected that the word which changes would be
the king’s name--as different inscriptions would relate to different
kings--and that the other words gave the king’s titles. He felt
convinced that a word which was constantly repeated signified “king,”
and conjectured that when two kings were mentioned they were probably
father and son. Finding that the names of Cyrus and Cambyses would
not suit, because no two names in the inscription he was dealing with
commenced with the same letter, he tried others. Cyrus and Artaxerxes
seemed equally inapplicable, because of their unequal length, the
two names he was dealing with being of six letters each. The only
names remaining were those of Darius and Xerxes; and these on further
comparison appeared to agree so exactly with the characters that he
did not hesitate at once to adopt them. Having thus found out more
than twelve letters, among which were precisely those composing the
royal title, the next business was to give these names their original
Persian form, in order that by ascertaining the correct value of each
character, the royal title might be deciphered. From the “Zendavesta”
of Anquetil du Perron, M. Grotefend found that the Greek form Hystaspes
was originally represented in Persian by Gustasp, Kishtasp, or
Wistasp. The first seven letters of this name were at once discovered,
while a comparison of all the royal titles led him to the conclusion
that the three last formed the inflection of the genitive singular,
corresponding to the Latin Hystaspis. Thus did Grotefend proceed step
by step, his ingenuity and perseverance being beyond all praise.
Meantime Sir Henry Rawlinson, although stationed in Persia and cut
off in a great degree from the results of European scholarship, was
devoting himself with ardour to the study of the Behistun inscription,
and making independent progress.
It turned out that of the three forms of arrow-headed character in
this class of inscriptions the Persian was the easiest to decipher,
being an alphabetic language, and that the other two were not purely
alphabetic. Still, a sure clue was obtained, and the key being
applied by an increasing number of investigators, the Median and the
Assyrian in the course of time yielded up their secrets. At length,
in 1857, to put the method of decipherment to a test, the inscription
of Tiglath-Pileser I. was submitted to four eminent Assyriologists,
namely, Sir H. Rawlinson, Dr Oppert, Mr Fox Talbot, and Dr Hincks, who
made translations of it independently, and sent them, under seal, to
the secretary of the Royal Asiatic Society. When they were opened and
compared it was found that they exhibited a remarkable resemblance
to one another, much greater, in fact, than could have been the case
if the method of decipherment had not been sound. Since 1857 immense
advances have been made, until now, as Dr Sayce confidently declares,
it is possible to translate an ordinary Assyrian text with as much ease
and certainty as a page of the Old Testament.
[_Authorities and Sources_:--“Assyrian Discoveries.” By
George Smith. “The Chaldean Genesis.” By George Smith.
“Ancient History from the Monuments: Assyria.” By George
Smith. “Ancient History from the Monuments: Babylonia.” By
Rev. Dr A. H. Sayce. “Nineveh and its Remains.” H. A. Layard.
“Nineveh and Persepolis.” W. S. W. Vaux. “Guide to the
Kouyunjik Gallery.” British Museum. “The Story of the Nations:
Assyria.” By Zénaïde A. Ragozin. “The Story of the Nations:
Babylonia.” Zénaïde A. Ragozin. “Hibbert Lectures.” Dr A. H.
Sayce. “Records of the Past.” “Transactions of the Society of
Biblical Archæology.” Smith’s “Dictionary of the Bible.” “From
Under the Dust of Ages.” St Chad Boscawen.]
THE VANDALISM OF THE ORIENTALS.
It seems to be quite providential that the calamities of cities and
the burial of treasures of art and knowledge should result in their
preservation, and contribute to the education of the world. It is
remarkable also that the explorers of the buried cities of the East
should be the Christian nations of the West, and that such a wealth
of discovery should enrich this nineteenth century. Through the
catastrophe which overwhelmed Pompeii, and preserved it under volcanic
ashes for 1700 years, we have become better acquainted with the private
life of the Romans than would have been possible by any other means.
The fugitive from Pompeii, in the hurry of escape, abandoned articles
of intrinsic value, and could not pause or stoop to pick them up;
yet they were saved from the hand of the robber that they might give
instruction to the world many centuries afterwards. The golden diadems,
ear-rings, and bracelets which Dr Schliemann found in a great silver
vase on the supposed site of Troy had been packed in the greatest
haste, and the fair owner, unable to return to them, no doubt gave them
up for lost; but she was an instrument in the hand of Providence, and
knew not what she did. By the recovery of the Assyrian royal library,
we are being informed concerning the religion and mythology, as well as
the history, of early nations, about whom we knew too little through
the ordinary channels of history. Think of Assurbanipal’s librarian at
Nineveh speculating on the ultimate destiny of the records under his
care! How could he guess that when the empire was passed away, its
kings forgotten, its gods put aside as mythical inventions, there would
come scholars from beyond the pillars of Hercules and learn to decipher
its records?
How disappointing is it, then, to all lovers of knowledge, as well
as to all students of Bible antiquities, to know that, now, when the
existence of these treasures is known, there is too little enterprise
in our people to go and reap the harvest of them; and while we wait
they are being carelessly or wantonly destroyed! One explorer tells
of an Arab who found an entire black statue, and because it was too
heavy to carry away bodily, broke off its head and carried that away
first. Palaces and temples, when unearthed, are used as quarries for
the building stone. Limestone slabs, covered with precious sculptures
and inscriptions, are burnt for the sake of the lime. Decaying mounds
of bricks, because they contain nitre, are carted off as manure for the
fields! The following are a few instances of the vandalism which seems
to be defeating the apparent intention of Providence.
The beautiful sanctuaries “erected by Amenhotep III. in the island of
Elephantine, which were figured by the members of the French expedition
at the end of the last century, were destroyed by the Turkish governor
of Assouan in 1822.”--_Professor Maspero._
The great Sphinx at Gizeh.--“The nose and beard have been broken off by
fanatics.”--_Professor Maspero._
Sebakh diggers ply their occupation in the midst of the mounds of the
ancient city of Thebes. “_Sebakh_, signifying ‘salt,’ or ‘saltpetre,’
is the general term for that saline dust which accumulates wherever
there are mounds of brick or limestone ruins. This dust is much valued
as a manure or ‘top-dressing,’ and is so constantly dug out and carried
away by the natives, that the mounds of ancient towns and villages are
rapidly undergoing destruction in all parts of Egypt.”--_Miss Amelia B.
Edwards._
“Prisse d’Avennes relates that when he visited, in 1836, Behbeit el
Hagar, the site of the old Heb, in the Sebennyte nome, near the present
city of Mansoorah, he went away disgusted, seeing the regular trade
that was carried on in the most beautiful sculptures of the ruined
temple, which was besides used as a quarry by the inhabitants of the
spot.”--_M. Naville._
“When the sheikh on whose land I was excavating became reassured as to
the object of my researches, he told me that some twenty years ago a
great number of inscribed stones were unearthed on that spot [site of
Goshen]; but since that time they had disappeared, most of them having
been used for building purposes. The great number of broken pieces
which are built into the walls of the houses prove that the sheikh
spoke the truth.”--_M. Naville._
“At Babel there are four wells scientifically built. When Mr Rassam
cleared one of them of _debris_ he came to water at the bottom. Each
stone is 3 feet in thickness, is bored, and made to fit the one below
it so exactly that you would imagine the whole well was hewn out of the
solid rock. Yet the Arabs break up these stones for the sake of making
lime.”--_Transactions of the Society of Biblical Archæology_, viii. 185.
“In 1815 Lady Hester Stanhope conducted excavations at Ascalon, and
found a colossal statue of a Roman emperor, thought possibly to have
been that of Augustus, erected by Herod. It was unfortunately broken
up by the workmen in search of treasure supposed to be concealed
within.”--Conder’s “_Syrian Stone-lore_.”
“At Cæsarea a broad street has been laid out (by the recent immigrants
from Bosnia) which passes directly over the remains of the Roman temple
built by Herod in honour of Cæsar and of Rome (the finely dressed white
stone being turned to good account by the colonists), and over the
Crusaders’ Cathedral, the foundations and walls of which also furnish
splendid building material.”--“_Quarterly Statement_ of Palestine
Exploration Fund,” July 1884.
“I pointed out that while the objects underground would keep a few
years longer, the march of civilisation was rapidly erasing all records
of the past above ground. The ancient ruins were being burnt into lime,
the old names were giving way to modern appellations, and the records
of the past were disappearing.”--_Colonel Sir Charles Warren._
“Of Memphis there is at present hardly a trace left; and other great
cities known to ancient travellers have disappeared with their
monuments. Mummy cases and coffins with most interesting inscriptions
have for centuries been used as fuel. And innumerable manuscripts
have suffered the same fate.... The tombs are convenient abodes for
Arab families, who destroy the paintings and inscriptions either by
the dense smoke of their fires or by actually pulling down walls. I
was taken to see the ‘Lay of the Harper,’ one of the most interesting
remains of Egyptian poetry, which was published a few years ago by Dr
Dumichen, but we found the walls on which the poem was written a mere
heap of ruins. But the vandalism of European and American travellers
is most fatal to the monuments. There is, or rather was, a famous
picture at Beni-hassan, which was formerly thought to represent Joseph
presenting his brethren to Pharaoh. An English lady has been heard to
request her guide to cut out for her the face of Joseph!”--_P. Le Page
Renouf._
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] From “Records of the Past.” New Series, vol. ii.
[2] See Bishop Butler’s “Sermon on the Character of Balaam.”
[3] Rev. H. G. Tomkins argues that he was a Semite, though in close
contact with the Hittites.--“Journal of the Anthropological Institute,”
November 1889.
[4] Major Conder, in the “Journal of the Anthropological Institute,”
August 1889.
[5] See the authorities given in “Rawlinson’s Historical Illustrations
of the Old Testament.”
[6] Dyer’s “Pompeii.”
[7] Exod. xxix. 22; Levit. vii. 32, viii. 25, ix. 21; Num. xviii. 18.
[8] See Sayce’s “Fresh Light from the Monuments,” p. 139.
[9] “Records of the Past,” New Series, vol. ii.
[10] Brugsch, “History of Egypt,” vol. ii.
[11] May it not perhaps have been a new name given to Bubastis, after
rebuilding?
[12] M. Naville, whose excavations at Tell Basta have shown that
Bubastis was a very large city, and a favourite resort of the king and
his family, thinks it quite possible that, at the time we are speaking
of, the king was at Bubastis and not at Zoan.
[13] Gesenius gives the meaning, “rush, reed, seaweed;” and in Exod.
ii. 3, Moses is said to have been laid in an ark of _souph_ or reeds.
[14] In this paraphrase I render one of the _vavs_ by “then” instead
of “and.” This will be allowed me. What will be objected to is the
assumption that Lasha is Laish, especially as Lasha contains a
different radical, the _ayin_ (לָשַׁע). But the passage in Genesis
may give an archaic spelling; and as Lasha signifies “the breaking
through of waters,” it is eminently descriptive of the source of the
Jordan at Dan. To place Lasha in the south-east of Palestine, as is
done in Smith’s “Dictionary of the Bible,” is to charge the description
in Genesis with being defective, for how are the limits of a people
defined by tracing two sides of an irregular quadrangle?
[15] Josephus: “Wars,” iii. 10. § 8.
[16] “Twenty-one years’ Work in the Holy Land.”
[17] For an account of the “Book of Jasher,” see the “Literary Remains
of Emanuel Deutsch.”
[18] Little Hermon is really a misnomer for the conical hill of Duhy
just north of the Valley of Jezreel. The mention of Tabor and Hermon
together in Psalm lxxxix. 12, has misled those who did not realize that
Tabor would be in the same line of vision with Mount Hermon, for many
observers in the south.
[19] See the chapter on Jerusalem.
[20] _Greek_ “Akra.”
[21] ἡ καθύπερθεν αὐταῖς
[22] “Survey Memoirs.”
[23] This is Dr Sayce’s improved translation, in “Records of the Past,”
Second Series, vol. ii. The inscription has since been cut out and
stolen.
[24] “Quarterly Statement,” Jan. 1890.
[25] Might mean arched, or gibbous, or humped. Conder understands it
“rising to a peak.” Q. S. Oct. 1873.
[26] “Quarterly Statement,” January 1876.
[27] “Wars,” v. 4. 2.
[28] “Quarterly Statement,” Jan. 1886.
[29] In the Authorised Version it is Meah, in the Revised Version
Hammeah. It might be translated Tower of the Hundred.
[30] Ezra iv. 16, 20; v. 3, 6; vi. 6, 8, 13; viii. 36.
[31] The Nethinim were but servants of the Levites.
[32] “Recovery of Jerusalem,” pp. 155-9.
[33] Zion is only called Moriah as the hill of vision (2 Chron. iii. 1).
[34] The resemblances are better seen in the Hebrew.
[35] “Quarterly Statement,” April, 1890.
[36] “Quarterly Statement,” Jan.-March 1870.
[37] Antiq., vii. 14, 4.
[38] Antiq., ix. 10. 4.
[39] “Sinai and Palestine,” chap. iii.
[40] “Quarterly Statement,” July, 1890.
[41] “The Recovery of Jerusalem,” p. 284.
[42] “Quarterly Statement,” 1872, p. 116.
[43] It would be legitimate to read “by the sheep-pool” instead of “by
the sheep-gate.”
[44] xv. 11. 5.
[45] v. 5. 2.
[46] “Sinai and Palestine.”
[47] Conder’s “Tent Work.”
[48] See a paper by Rev. Charles S. Robinson, in the _Century
Magazine_, November, 1888.
[49] Genesis x. 6.
[50] Lessing: “Education of the Human Race.”
[51] “Journal of the Anthropological Institute,” February, 1889.
[52] It is right to say that some writers are not convinced that
Nineveh was 60 miles round. They regard Nimroud, Kouyunjik, &c., as so
many separate cities.
[53] Or Gilgames. (See _Academy_, Nov. 8th, 1890.)
[54] “Records of the Past.” New Series, Vol. i.
* * * * * *
Transcriber’s note:
1. Obvious spelling, printers’ and punctuation errors have been
silently corrected.
2. Where appropriate, both hyphenated and non-hyphenated words have
been retained as in the original.
3. Where appropriate, original spelling has been retained.
4. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g. D^r.
5. In chapter 3, for the numbered subsections, the number 4 was
incorrectly stated as 5. This has been corrected.