The History of Antiquity, Vol. 3 (of 6)

568

Strabo, p. 801.

569

Polyæn. "Strateg.," 7, 30.

570

On the side of the alabaster statue of Ameniritis, which was dug up in a chapel at Karnak, we find under the name: "The regent of the South and the North, the royal sister of – the royal daughter of – " the names are chiselled out. But a Scarabæus of Gurnah informs us: "Ameniritis, goddess, consort, daughter of Kashta;" and legends in the place where the statues were found run thus: "The royal sister of Raneserke (Sabakon), the royal daughter of Kashta, the just." Mariette, "Revue Archæeolog." N.S. 1863, p. 418, 419.

571

Herod. 2, 154.

572

Diod. 1, 67. Χώραν πολλὴν κατεκληρούχησε. Jerem. xlvi. 21.

573

Herod. 2, 112, 154; Diod. 1, 67.

574

Herod. 2, 30.

575

Diod. 1, 67; Strabo, p. 770, 786. Plin. "Hist. Nat.," 6, 35. Vol. I. p. 14. The statement of Diodorus repeated in the text – that the Greeks had the right wing – might seem to have been borrowed from Greek customs, if Herodotus did not tell us that the emigrants were called Asmach (2, 30), which means standing on the left side of the king. The monuments show that the Egyptians denoted the order of precedence, according to the right and left side of the king; we find bearers of the fan on the right side and on the left of the king. According to Brugsch, Asmach really means what is found on the left side. Klöder ("Das Stromsystem des oberen Nil," s. 36 ff. 86) assumes that the settlement of the emigrant warriors is to be sought at Axum.

576

Herod. 2, 105, 163. Diod. 1, 68.

577

Brugsch "Hist. of Egypt," 2, 286. That the Egyptians counted the reign of Psammetichus from the end of Tirhaka's, i. e. from 664 B.C., is proved above, p. 71 n.

578

Herod. 2, 159.

579

Lepsius, "Ægypt. Chronologie," s. 351.

580

The Chronicles (2, xxxv. 20 ff) represent Josiah as dying in Jerusalem, but they can hardly be correct. In order to explain the unhappy death of the pious king, who had introduced the Book of the Law, and destroyed the worship of idols, by a transgression, they represent Josiah as not hearkening to the words of Necho "out of the mouth of God," and making an attack on the Egyptians, who were not at war with them. But though the Chronicles represent Necho as declaring that he was hastening to the Euphrates, it is, on the other hand, clear that he did not march to the Euphrates till four years after the battle of Megiddo. The Magdolus of Herodotus is, no doubt, the Megiddo of the Hebrews. Josephus ("Antiq." 10, 5, 1) names Mende as the place of the battle. Whether the camp of the Jews was really pitched at Hadad Rimmon, to the south-east of Megiddo, is not clear.

581

On the sons of Josiah, Johanan, Jehoiakim, Shallum (by Zebudah), Jehoahaz, and Zedekiah (by Hamutal), cf. 1 Chron. iii. 15, 16.

582

Jerem. xlvii. 1. Cadytis in Herodotus 2, 159 is Gaza. The name is formed after the Egyptian "Kazatu."

583

Jerem. xxii. 10-19.

584

Jerem. xxvi. 12-14; 20-23.

585

The opinion that Necho marched to the Euphrates to the relief of Nineveh seems to me quite untenable. Setting aside the fact that for this object Necho must have been at the Euphrates earlier, – which he could well have done, – what interest had Necho in Assyria, from whose power his father had liberated Egypt? Nor can I adopt the opinion of M. Niebuhr that Necho marched to Assyria merely to defend Syria. Josephus ("Antiq." 10, 5, 1) tells us, "that Necho marched to the Euphrates in order to make war upon the Medes and Babylonians, who had destroyed the Assyrian power." This idea of offensive warfare is confirmed by the words in Jeremiah: "I will go up and destroy their cities." Syria was easier of defence when he had the desert before him, than when it lay behind him.

586

Berosi Frag. 14 ed. Müller. That in Berosus the satrap of Syria has taken the place of Necho, may be explained by the supposition that Nabopolassar had laid claim to Syria as an appurtenance of the part of the Assyrian kingdom which had fallen to him, and perhaps announced to Necho that he was prepared to give him Syria as a dependency of Babylon – an offer which Necho did not accept. But the "satrap" is also sufficiently explained by the point of view of the historian of Babylon, who sees the period of Nebuchadnezzar in the most brilliant light.

587

Jerem. xlvi. 1-13, 15, 16, 17.

588

Above, p. 250. Joseph. "c. Apion.," 1, 19. "Antiq." 10, 11, 2.

589

Ezek. i. 1, 3; iii. 15, 23; x. 15; xx. 22; xliii. 3.

590

Jerem. ii. 23.

591

Jerem. xiii. 23.

592

Jerem. xxiii. 5.

593

Jerem. xxxi. 31-35.

594

Jerem. xxvi. 1-5, 13.

595

Jerem. vii. 18.

596

Jerem. vii. 1-15; viii. 8; xxvi. 6.

597

Micah iii. 12.

598

Jerem. xxv. 1-3. By this date the identity of these warnings with the writing which, according to xxxvi. 1, 2, was read on the fast day, is established, an identity which is also proved by internal reasons.

599

Jerem. ch. xxv.

600

Jerem. xxxvi. 1, 22.

601

Jerem. xxxvi. 9-26.

602

Beros. ap. Joseph. "Antiq." 10, 11, 2. "c. Apion," 1, 19. In these passages the acts of Nebuchadnezzar in Syria are put together in such a general way, that from them we cannot draw the conclusion that Nebuchadnezzar in his first campaign into Syria passed the borders of Judah, and that even then he had not only set foot in Syria but had incorporated it. The uncertainty of the succession in the new kingdom must have called him back as quickly as possible to his home, and the retirement of the whole army is expressly mentioned. Besides, from Jeremiah xxxvi. 1, 9, 22, and xxv. 1, 3, it follows that Nebuchadnezzar, in the years 605-604 B.C., and 604-603 B.C., i. e. in the fourth and fifth of the reign of Jehoiakim, had not yet marched with his army through Judah. Joseph., "Antiq." 10, 6, 1, represents Nebuchadnezzar as conquering Syria, except Judah, after the victory of Karchemish. The statement in the Book of Daniel (i. 1 ff) that Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem in the third year of Jehoiakim, i. e. in the year 606-605 B.C., is not a cogent proof.

603

Jerem. xxv. 20-23; xlix. 28-33.

604

Habakkuk i. 6-11.

605

Habakkuk iii. 16.

606

Habakkuk i. 17; ii. 5-8.

607

Jerem. xlix. 19.

608

Jerem. xlix. 28-33.

609

Jerem. xlix. 3.

610

Jerem. xlviii. 40, 46.

611

Jerem. xlix. 23, 24.

612

Jerem. xlix. 16.

613

2 Kings xxiv. If it is stated here that Jehoiakim served Nebuchadnezzar for three years, and then revolted from him; if the punishment for this revolt falls not on him but on his successor Jechoniah, it is clear that these three years must be reckoned from the end of the reign of Jehoiakim, so that in this way the first subjugation falls in the year 600 B.C. So Josephus ("Antiq." 10, 6, 1,) states that the subjugation of Jehoiakim took place in the eighth year of his reign, i. e. in 601-600 B.C.

614

2 Kings xxiv. 1-10. That Jehoiakim could not have attempted a rebellion without reliance on the help of Egypt, is clear without further proof. Josephus ("Antiq." 10, 6, 2) says: Jehoiakim had revolted because he heard that the Egyptians were taking the field against Nebuchadnezzar; but the Egyptians had not had the courage really to take the field. An attack of Nebuchadnezzar on Egypt, as well as Egyptian prisoners who are led from Syria to Babylonia, are mentioned in the statements of Berosus, quoted by Josephus above, p. 328, n. But these statements are so general that they may also be referred to the war which Nebuchadnezzar carried on with the Egyptians in 587 B.C., p. 341. Nevertheless, the observation in the Second Book of Kings, which follows after Jehoiakim's death, "that Nebuchadnezzar had taken all the land, as far as the brook of Egypt (2 xxiv. 7), which belonged to the king of Egypt," may have reference to a struggle then going on with Egypt. Beyond their own borders the Egyptians could only have maintained Gaza, and a few other cities of the Phenicians. The statement of the Chronicles that Jehoiakim was carried to Babylon in chains cannot be maintained against the accounts of the Books of Kings.

615

2 Kings xxiv. 10, 11.

616

Jerem. xxii. 24-27.

617

This date is fixed by the remark that it occurred in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxiv. 12).

618

Ezekiel xvii. 13. 2 Kings xxiv. 13-17. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 13. In Jerem. xxxix. 1-3, and lii. 28, the number of the captives is given at 3023; the passages quoted from the Books of Kings put the number of the soldiers at 7000, of the captives generally at 10,000.

619

Jerem. xxviii. 1-4.

620

Jerem. xxviii. 12-17.

621

Jerem. xxix.; cf. xxiv. 5 ff.

622

Jerem. xx. 7, 8.

623

Jerem. xx. 9.

624

Jerem. xx. 14-18.

625

Jerem. xv. 15.

626

Jerem. xvii. 6.

627

Jerem. xi. 19.

628

Jerem. xv. 16-18.

629

Jerem. xii. 1.

630

Jerem. xii. 3.

631

Jerem. xviii. 21-23.

632

Jerem. i. 17-19; xv. 20, 21.

633

Jerem. xiv. 11-16.

634

Jerem. xiv. 20-22; xv. 1.

635

Jerem. xvii. 1.

636

Jerem. xxvii. 1-12.

637

Jerem. li. 59.

638

This conclusion is rendered certain by the fact that afterwards the island city of Tyre is the only one spoken of as not subjugated. Cf. p. 352.

639

Ezek. xxxii. 29 mentions Sidon among the nations which had succumbed to the sword of the king before the twentieth year of Nebuchadnezzar. Cf. xxviii. 21-26. Jerem. xlvii. 4.

640

Jerem. xlvi. 19, 26. The position of affairs shows that this announcement belongs to this date. According to Ezek. viii. 1, Zedekiah appears to have had dealings with Egypt as early as 591 B.C. Cf. Joseph. "Antiq." 10, 7, 5.

641

2 Kings xxv. 1-3, 8. Jerem. xxxiv. 1-7. Ezek. xxiv. 1.

642

2 Kings xxv. 1.

643

Jerem. xxxiv. 7.

644

Ezek. xxi. 21, 22, 25, 26.

645

Jerem. xxi. 1, 10.

646

Jerem. xxxvii. 5. Ezekiel prophesies the ruin of the Egyptians in the tenth month of the tenth year of his captivity, i. e. in the year 587 B.C.; in this year, no doubt, the march of the Egyptians took place.

647

Jerem. xxxvii. 6-10.

648

Jerem. xxxvii. 11-21.

649

Joseph. "Antiq." 10, 7, 1. Ezek. xvii. 17. At the beginning of the eleventh year of Zedekiah (586B.C.), Ezekiel says: "I have broken the arm of Pharaoh," xxx. 21; cf. xxxi. 1.

650

2 Kings xxv. 1-3. Jerem. lii. 4, 5. Cf. Ezek. iv. 2; xvii. 17; xxi. 21.

651

Jerem. xxxiii. 4.

652

Jerem. xxxviii. 4.

653

Jerem. xxxvii. 21; xxxviii. 28.

654

Jerem. xix. 9. Ezek. iv. 16, 17; v. 11, 12. Lamentations i. 19, 20; ii. 20; iv. 9, 10; ii. 11, 12.

655

Vol. II., p. 186. Jerem. xxxix. 3; lii. 6, 7. 2 Kings xxv. 3, 4. It was this outer wall of which the western front had to be pulled down for 400 cubits under Amaziah. Vol. II., p. 261.

656

The capture took place in the fourth month of the eleventh year of the reign of Zedekiah, in the nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar. Cf. Ideler, "Handbuch der Chronologie," 1, 529. Ezekiel, chap. xii.

657

Jerem. xxxix. 6, 7; lii. 11. 2 Kings xxv. 7.

658

Jerem. xxxix. 6, where the statement is quite general, "all the nobles of Judah also the king of Babylon slew;" and lii. 16, "all the princes of Judah also he slew at Riblah."

659

2 Kings xxv. 13-17. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 18. Jerem. lii. 12-28. The ark of the covenant was not mentioned separately; it may have been already taken away in 597 B.C.

660

2 Kings xxv. 8-11, 18-21. Jerem. xxxix. 9, 10.

661

Jerem. xl. 5-10.

662

Lamentations iv. 12; ii. 7; iv. 1.

663

Lamentations ii. 14-18; i. 12.

664

Lamentations v. 1-14.

665

Lamentations iv. 6.

666

Lamentations i. 7, 21, 22.

667

Lamentations v. 7, 21, 22.

668

Jerem. xl. 9.

669

Jerem. xl. 6.

670

Jerem. xl. 8.

671

Jerem. xxiv. 1, 8; chaps. xl. – xliv. Ezek. i. 1-3, &c.

672

The announcements of Ezekiel, chaps, xxix. – xxxii., belong to the period from the tenth to the twelfth year of the captivity, i. e. to the years 587 to 585 B.C.

673

Daphne in Herod. 2, 30, 107.

674

Jerem. xliii. 8-13; xliv. 30.

675

Ezekiel, chaps, xxvi. – xxviii. The prophecy begins in the eleventh year after the captivity of Jechoniah, on the first day of the month, and therefore four months before the capture of Jerusalem; from xxvi. 7 it is clear that the siege of Tyre had not yet begun: because Tyre rejoiced in the fall of Jerusalem, she also was to be destroyed. Afterwards, in the year 570 B.C., Ezekiel declares that the Chaldæans have received no reward for their heavy service against Tyre (xxix. 17). Hence the siege of Tyre, which, according to Josephus, lasted for 13 years, falls between 586-570 B.C. This result is confirmed by the quotations of Josephus from Phenician annals ("c. Apion." 1, 21; "Antiq." 10, 11, 1). According to these, Cyrus ascended the throne in the fourteenth year of Hiram, king of Tyre. Before Hiram Merbaal reigned for four years; before him the judges Mutton and Gerastrat, and king Balator, for six years, the arch-priest Abbar for three months, the judges Eknibal and Chelbes for 12 months, king Baal for 10 years, and before him Ithobal, under whom Tyre was besieged for 13 years. The reign of Cyrus is obviously calculated from the date at which he conquered Babylon and the Persians took the place of the Chaldæans, i. e. from the year 538 B.C. If we calculate the dates given by Josephus to this point, the siege of Tyre came to an end in the year 573 B.C., and began immediately after the conquest of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. The addition of Josephus that the siege of Tyre began in the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar (599 B.C.) is a direct contradiction to the other more detailed statements. No doubt we ought to read the seventeenth year of Nebuchadnezzar for the seventh year with M. Niebuhr ("Assur und Babel," s. 107).

676

Ezek. xxvi. 8, 9, 10.

677

Ezek. xxvi. 14.

678

That Tyre, though not captured, was subjugated by the Babylonians, must be concluded from the statement of Berosus, general though that is – that all Phœnicia was subjugated by Nebuchadnezzar (supr. p. 328, n.), and further from the fact that Josephus ("c. Apion." 1, 21) tells us that Merbaal and Hiram were fetched by the Tyrians from Babylon; and, finally, from the circumstance that the reign of Ithobal ceases with the end of the siege, and that of Baal commences. Hence it follows that Ithobal was deposed, and his race carried away to Babylon. That the deportation of kings and elevation of others in their place was usual among the Babylonians, as among the Assyrians, is clear from the example of Jechoniah, and from 2 Kings xxv. 28.

679

Herod. 2, 178.

680

Joseph. "c. Apion." 1, 19.

681

Alcæi fragm. 35, ed. Bergk.

682

Tassie, "Catalogue Raisonné," p. 64; Raspe, "Planches," 11, 653.

683

Cp. Strabo, p. 739.

684

Vol. I. p. 300. Herod. 1, 185. Arrian, "Anab." 7, 21. Polybius, 9, 43. Strabo, p. 754. Ammian. Marcell. 23, 6. Ptolem. 5, 20.

685

Vol. I. p. 301. Abyden. fragm. 8, 9, ed. Müller. The position of the βασίλειος ποταμός is fixed by Ptolemy, 5, 17. That Nebuchadnezzar caused the Nahr Malka to be excavated follows from the words of Abydenus in Eusebius ("Chron." I. p. 37, ed. Schöne): Armacalen fluvium ex Arazane (Euphrate) derivavit: cp. "Præp. Evang." 9, 41. Armacale must obviously be the same name as Nahr Malka. Cp. Plin. "Hist. Nat." 6, 26 (30). On the position of the Nahr Malka, Xen. "Anab." 2-4. Ammian. Marcell. 26, 6; and that it was navigable, Herod. 1, 193.

686

Abydenus in Eusebius, loc. cit. "Præp. Evang." 9, 41. Diod. (2, 9) ascribes this basin, as he does all the buildings of Babylon, with the exception of the hanging gardens, to Semiramis. Herodotus describes the basin, and considers the maker of it to be, not Semiramis, but Nitocris, who lived five generations later. To the same queen he ascribes the works in the bed of the Euphrates, the embankment of the river, and the bridge over the Euphrates, 1, 184-188. He fixes the date of Nitocris more precisely when he states that Cyrus marched against her son, who like his father was called Labynetus, and took Babylon. We know for certain that no woman reigned over Babylon from Nabopolassar to the overthrow of the kingdom. Herodotus' knowledge about the kingdom of Babylon is extremely scanty; he obtained his information, it would seem, chiefly through the Persians; and it is restricted chiefly to these two names, Nitocris and Labynetus, for he denotes by the same name the Babylonian, who arranged the peace between the Medes and the Lydians (supr. p. 260). In the one case Nabopolassar is meant by Labynetus, in the other Nabonetus; and so Nitocris can only be Amyite, the daughter of Cyaxares, the consort of Nebuchadnezzar (p. 285). The statement of Berosus in Abydenus, putting the extent of the basin at 40 parasangs (it is also found in Diodorus, 2, 9, viz. 1200 stades), is so exaggerated that in this particular the statement of Herodotus, who allows an extent of 420 stades to the lake, deserves the preference. Diodorus, loc. cit., gives the depth as stated in the text; according to the Armenian Eusebius it was 20 cubits; according to the "Præp. Evang.," which also quote Abydenus, it was 20 fathoms, i. e. 120 feet.

687

Herod. 1, 185. It is clear from the account of Herodotus that the artificial bends in the river-bed lay above Sippara. The object which Herodotus ascribes to these works in the river – that the long and winding navigation and the large lake were intended to hinder the Medes from coming to Babylon and seeing what took place there – is naïve enough. The Ardericca of Herodotus is, no doubt, identical with the Idikara of Ptolemy, which he places more than three-fourths of a degree higher up the Euphrates than Sippara. Ptolem. 5, 17, 19.

688

Aristobulus in Strabo, p. 766. Eusebius, "Chron." 1, p. 40, ed. Schöne; "Præp. Evang." 9, 41. Dionys. "Perieg." v. 982. Ptolem. 5, 19. Movers' somewhat different view on Gerrha is given, "Phœnizier," 2, 3, 308.

689

Isaiah xliii. 14. Æsch. "Pers." v. 52-55. Arrian, "Ind." 32. Strabo, p. 766.

690

Strabo, loc. cit. Diodorus, 14, 21, 81. Vol. II. p. 297.

691

Movers, "Phœnizier," 2, 3, 306. This road certainly cannot be carried back to the Phenicians; the nearest way, from Nineveh to Syria, often traversed by the Assyrian kings on their campaigns, passed by Karchemish on the lower Orontes.

692

Plin. "Hist. Nat." 6, 26 (30).

693

Eratosthenes in Strabo puts the length of the wall at 200 stades (25 miles) only, Xenophon at 20 parasangs (75 miles), "as it is said: " in his time a part of the wall was still standing, "Anab." 2, 4; cp. Joseph, "c. Apion." 1, 20. But it is at the same time clear from the whole narrative of Xenophon that the Median wall was not situated at the narrowest point, but far higher up, where the distance between the rivers is far wider, i. e. above Sittace. We have no definite evidence that this wall was built by Nebuchadnezzar. If Strabo ascribes it to Semiramis, that means no more than the fact that the modern inhabitants give the name Sidd Nimrud to the remains. A wall against attacks from the North, against attacks of the Medes, would have no meaning before the rise of the power of the Medes; its origin and importance are entirely due to anxiety in regard to the Medes, and that such anxiety did exist, was due to the experience which Babylonia had had of Assyria, and the relative power of the two kingdoms; and it is also shown in the statements of Herodotus about the object of the windings in the river and the lake. The successors of Nebuchadnezzar were hardly in a position to undertake such works. This could be done at most by Nabonetus; but as Josephus ("c. Apion." 1, 20) quotes from Berosus a comparatively unimportant building of this king, the Median wall would not have been forgotten if it had arisen from him. On the direction of the wall, cp. Grote, "Hist. of Greece," 9, 89.

694

Beros. fragm. 14, ed. Müller.

695

Herod. 1, 186.

696

Herod. 1, 178, 179.

697

Herod. 3, 159.

698

Xenoph. "Anab." 2, 2, 6. "Inst. Cyr." 7, 5, 7, 21.

699

Diod. 2, 7. Cp. Arrian, "Anab." 7, 17, 6. Pseudo-Callisthenes ascribes to Babylon a diameter of no more than 12 stades and 220 or 206 feet: he ascribes to the city of Alexandria in Egypt a diameter of 16½ stades; 1, 31.

700

Diod. 2, 7.

701

Eumenes in Æl. "Var. Hist." 3, 23.

702

So the Ephemerides in Arrian, "Anab." 7, 25, and in Plut. "Alex." c. 75.

703

"Pol." 3, 1, 12.

704

Jerem. li. 53, 58.

705

"Hist. Nat." 6, 26.

706

Vol. I. p. 295.

707

Joseph. "c. Apion." 1, 19.

708

Oppert, "Exped." 1, 140 ff.

709

Joseph. "c. Apion." 1, 19.

710

Euseb. "Præp. Evang." 9, 41, 8.

711

Diod. 2, 10.

712

Strabo, p. 738.

713

Oppert, "Exped." 1, 156 ff.

714

It is the less doubtful that the bridge is the work of Nebuchadnezzar, since the basin of Sepharvaim is vouched for as his work by Berosus.