The Expositor's Bible Part 31

Behold, it was for my peace that I had great bitterness; But Thou hast loved my soul from the pit of nothingness: For Thou hast cast all my sins behind Thy back.

The Lord is ready to save me; Therefore will we sing my songs to the stringed instruments All the days of our life in the house of the Lord."[525]

"The wonder done in the land" was, according to the Chronicler, one of the grounds for the emba.s.sy which, after his recovery, Hezekiah received from Merodach-Baladan, the patriot prince of Babylon. The other ostensible object of the emba.s.sy was to send letters and a present in congratulation for the king's restoration to health. But the real object lay deeper, out of sight. It was to secure a southern alliance for Babylon against the incessant tyranny of Nineveh.

Merodach-Baladan is mentioned in the inscriptions of Sargon.[526] He is described as "Merodach-Baladan, son of Baladan, King of Sumir and Accad, king of the four countries, and conqueror of all his enemies."

There had been long struggles, lasting indeed for centuries, between the city on the Euphrates and the city on the Tigris. Sometimes one, sometimes the other, had been victorious. Babylon--on the monuments Kur-Dunyash--had its original Accadian name of Ca-dinirra, which, like its Semitic equivalent Bal-el, means "Gate of G.o.d." Kalah (Larissa and Birs Nimroud) had been built by Shalmaneser I. before B.C. 1300. His son conquered Babylon, but not permanently; for in some later raid the Babylonians got possession of his signet-ring, with its proud inscription, "Conqueror of Kur-Dunyash," and it was not recovered by the a.s.syrians till six centuries later, when it fell into the hands of Sennacherib. About 1150 Nebuchadrezzar I. of Babylon thrice invaded a.s.syria, but there was again peace and alliance in 1100.

Merodach-Baladan I. reigned before 900. The king who now sought the friendship of Hezekiah was the second of the name. He seized or recovered the throne of Babylon in 721, after the death of Shalmaneser, perhaps because Sargon was a usurper of dubious descent.

He helped the Elamites against a.s.syria. Sargon was compelled to retreat to a.s.syria, but returned in 712, and drove Merodach-Baladan to flight. He was captured and taken to a.s.syria. But on the murder of Sargon in 705, he again managed to seize the throne of Babylon, killed the viceroy who had been set up, and became king for six months. After this, Sennacherib invaded his country, defeated him, and drove him once more to flight. He was perhaps killed by his successor.

Whether his overtures to Hezekiah took place before his defeat by Sargon, or after his escape, is uncertain. In either case he doubtless sent a splendid emba.s.sy, for Babylon was far-famed for its golden magnificence as "the glory of kingdoms" and "the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency."[527] At that time the Jews knew but little of the far-off city which was destined to be so closely interwoven with their future fortunes, as it was mingled with their oldest and dimmest traditions.[528] Apart from the magnificence of the presents brought to him, it was not unnatural that Hezekiah should regard this emba.s.sy with intense satisfaction. It was flattering to the power of his little kingdom that its alliance should be sought by the far-off and powerful capital on the great river;[529] it was still more encouraging to know that the frightful Nineveh had a strong enemy not far from her own frontier. Merodach-Baladan's amba.s.sadors would be sure to inform Hezekiah that their lord had flung off the authority of Sargon, had kept him at bay for many years, and was still the undisputed king of the dominions s.n.a.t.c.hed from the common enemy. It might have seemed reasonable that Hezekiah, for his part, should desire to leave the most favourable impression of his wealth and power on the mind of his distant and magnificent ally. He "hearkened unto"

the amba.s.sadors, or, more properly, "he was glad of them" (R.V.),[530]

and "showed them all the house of his spicery and other treasures, his precious unguents, his armoury, his bullion, plate, and the whole resources of his kingdom." The Chronicler regards this as ingrat.i.tude to G.o.d. He says that "Hezekiah rendered not again according unto the benefits done unto him; for his heart was lifted up: therefore there was wrath upon him, and upon Judah and Jerusalem." It is a severe judgment of later times, and the historian of the Kings p.r.o.nounces no such censure. Nevertheless, he records the stern sentence p.r.o.nounced by Isaiah. The prophet had seen through the secret diplomacy of the Babylonian amba.s.sadors, and knew that the real object of their mission was to induce his king to revolt against a.s.syria in reliance on an arm of flesh. He came to ask Hezekiah whose these men were, whence they came, and what they had said. The king told him who they were, and how he had received them; but he did not think it wise to reveal their secret proposals. If Isaiah had so vehemently reproved all negotiations with Egypt, there was little probability that he would sanction the overtures of Babylon. He saw in Hezekiah's conduct a vein of ostentatious elation, a swerving from theocratic faith; and with remarkable prophetic insight convinced the king of the error and impolicy of his proceedings, by announcing that the final and, in fact, irrevocable captivity of Judah would ultimately come, not from Nineveh, the fierce enemy, whose cloud of war was lurid on the horizon, but from Babylon, the apparently weaker friend, who was now making overtures of amity. With what heartrending grief must the king have heard the doom that the display of his treasures would prove to be in the future an incentive to the cupidity of the kings of Babylon, and that they would sweep away all those precious things to the banks of the Euphrates with such final overthrow that even the descendants of David should be sunk to the infinite degradation of being eunuchs in the palace of the King of Babylon.[531] The doom seems to have been fulfilled in part in the reign of Hezekiah's son, and more fearfully in the days of his great-grandchildren.[532]

The king's pride was humbled to the dust. In the spirit of Job--"The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord"[533]--he resigned himself without a murmur to the will of Heaven, and exclaimed that all which G.o.d did must be well done. At least G.o.d granted him a respite. Peace and truth would be in his own days; for that let him be thankful. They were words of humble resignation, uttered by one who had learnt to believe that whatever G.o.d decreed was just and right.

It would be unjust to measure the feelings of those far centuries by those of our own day, and there was none of the gross selfishness in the words of Hezekiah which led Nero to quote the line--

"When I am dead, let earth be mixed with fire";

or which led Louis XIV. to say--

"Apres moi le deluge."

We may perhaps trace in his exclamation something of the fatalism which gives a touch of apathy to the submissiveness of the Oriental.

Some, too, have imagined that his distress was tinged by a gleam of happiness at the implicit promise that he should have a son. His wife's name was Hephzibah ("My delight is in her"), and within two years she brought forth the firstborn son, whose career, indeed, was dark and evil, but who became in due time an ancestor of the promised Messiah. The name "Mana.s.seh" given him by his parents recalled the child born to Joseph in the land of his exile who had caused him to forget his sorrows.[534] Hezekiah had the spirit which says,--

"That which Thou blessest is most good, And unblest good is ill; And all is right which seems most wrong, So it be Thy sweet will."

FOOTNOTES:

[512] One of the first to point out the _necessary_ rearrangement of the events of Hezekiah's reign was Dr. Hincks, in his paper on "A Rectification of Chronology which the newly discovered Apis-steles render necessary" (_Journ. of Sacred Lit._, October 1858). See my article on Hezekiah, Smith, _Dict. of the Bible_, 2nd ed., ii. 1251.

[513] Heb., _sh'chin_; LXX., ?????; Vulg., _ulcus_.

[514] The Rabbis even make his sickness the punishment for his having neglected to secure an heir. He pleads that he foresaw the wickedness of his son. Isaiah tells him not to try to forestall G.o.d (_Berachoth_, f. 10, 1).

[515] Isa. x.x.xviii. 10-20.

[516] Comp. 1 Kings xxi. 4 (Ahab).

[517] 2 Kings xx. 4. The _Q'ri_ or "read" text is, as here rendered, _chatsee_ (comp. 1 Kings vii. 8), and is followed by the LXX. ( ?? t?

a??? t? ?s?), by the Vulgate (_mediam partem atrii_), and by the A.V.

The R.V., which adopts the Kethib or written text, _ha'ir_, renders it "the middle part of the city." If this be the true reading, it would mean that Isaiah had gone some distance from the palace, and was now perhaps in the Valley between the Upper and the Lower City. But it seems not improbable that (1) "the steps of Ahaz" would be in the royal court, and (2) the answer of G.o.d, like the mercy of Christ to the suffering, may have come promptly as an echo to the appealing cry.

[518] The LXX. calls "the stairs" ??aa???? t?? ????? t?? pat??? s??, and so, too, Josephus (_Antt._, X. ii. 1). The Targum calls them "an hour-stone." Symmachus has, st???? t?? s??a? t?? ??a?? ? ?at?? ??

[519] It should, however, be observed that on the question of priority critics are divided. Grotius, Vitringa, Paulus, Drechsler, etc., thought that the account in the Book of Isaiah is the original; De Wette, Maurer, Koster, Winer, Driver, etc., regard that account as a later abbreviation, perhaps from a common source.

[520] See Professor Lumby, _ad loc._

[521] There is an exactly similar sun-dial not far from Delhi.

[522] _Journ. of Asiatic Soc._, xv. 286-293.

[523] Figs have a recognised use for imposthumes. See Dioscorides and Pliny quoted in Celsius, _Hierobot._, ii. 373. In the pa.s.sage of _Berachoth_ quoted above, Hezekiah in his sickness asks Isaiah to give him his daughter in marriage, that he may have an heir. Isaiah replies that the decree of his death is irrevocable. The king bids Isaiah depart, and says (quoting Job xiii. 15) that a man must not despair, even if a sword is laid on his neck.

[524] Comp. Psalm xlii. 4.

[525] Isa. x.x.xviii. 10-20.

[526] The Babylonian form of his name is Marduk-habal-iddi-na--_i.e._, "Merodach gave a son." He is the Mardokempados of the _Ptolemaic Canon_, and the second fragment of his reign (six months) is mentioned by Polyhistor (_ap._ Euseb.). Josephus calls him Baladan (_Antt._, X.

ii. 2). He was originally the prince of the Chaldaean _Bit Yakim_.

Sargon calls him "Merodach-Baladan, the foe, the perverse, who, contrary to the will of the great G.o.ds, ruled as king at Babylon." He displaced him for a time by "Belibus, the son of a wise man, whom one had reared like a little dog" (as we might say "like a tame cat") "in my palace" (Schrader, ii. 32). In the a.s.syrian records he is often called (by mistake?) "the son of Yakim." For the adventures of the Babylonian hero, see Schrader, _K. A. T._, 213 ff., 224 ff., 227, and in Riehm, _Handworterbuch_, ii. 982.

[527] Isa. xiv. 4, xiii. 19.

[528] Gen. x. 10, 11, xi. 1-9.

[529] Jos., _Antt._, X. ii. 2: S?a??? te a?t?? e??a? pa?e???e? ?a?

f????.

[530] 2 Kings xx. 13. LXX., ?????.

[531] See Dan. i. 6.

[532] 2 Chron. x.x.xiii. 11.

[533] Job i. 21.

[534] Mana.s.seh seems to mean "one who forgets." See Gen. xli. 51. It was the name of the husband of Judith (Judith viii. 2), and is found in Ezra x. 30, 33.

CHAPTER XXVII

_HEZEKIAH AND a.s.sYRIA_

B.C. 701

2 KINGS xviii. 13--xix. 37.

???' ? s?f?tat?? as??e?? ??? ?p?a ta?? ??e???? ?asf??a??, ????

p??se???? ?a? d????a ?a? s????? ??t?ta?e?.--THEODORET.