صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

and arrows. And he took unto him bow and

arrows.

16 And he said to the king of Israel, 'Put thine hand upon the bow. And he put his hand upon it and Elisha put his hands upon the king's hands.

17 And he said, Open the window castward. And he opened it. Then Elisha said, Shoot. And he shot. And he said, The arrow of the LORD's deliverance, and the arrow of deliverance from Syria: for thou shalt smite the Syrians in Aphek, till thou have consumed them.

18 And he said, Take the arrows. And he took them. And he said unto the king of Israel, Smite upon the ground. And he smote thrice, and stayed.

19 And the man of God was wroth with him, and said, Thou shouldest have smitten five or six times; then hadst thou smitten Syria till thou hadst consumed it: whereas now thou shalt smite Syria but thrice.

20 ¶ And Elisha died, and they buried him. And the bands of the Moabites in

vaded the land at the coming in of the year.

21 And it came to pass, as they were burying a man, that, behold, they spied a band of men; and they cast the man into the sepulchre of Elisha: and when the man "was let down, and touched the bones of Elisha, he revived, and stood up on his feet. 22 But Hazael king of Syria oppressed Israel all the days of Jehoahaz.

23 And the LORD was gracious unto them, and had compassion on them, and had respect unto them, because of his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and would not destroy them, neither cast he them from his 'presence as yet.

24 So Hazael king of Syria died; and Ben-hadad his son reigned in his stead.

25 And Jehoash the son of Jehoahaz took again out of the hand of Ben-hadad the son of Hazael the cities, which he had taken out of the hand of Jehoahaz his father by war. Three times did Joash beat him, and recovered the cities of Israel.

6 Heb. Make thine hand to ride. 7 Heb. went down. 8 Ecclus. 48. 14. 9 Heb. face. 10 Heb. returned and took. Verse 14. "O my father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof."-This expression was first used by Elisha when Elijah was taken up by the chariot and horses of fire, and might then be supposed to refer to that event; but their repetition now, when nothing of the kind occurs, appears to indicate that the phrase was proverbially applicable to one who was considered the principal guard and defence of his country. The Targum takes this view, understanding the expression as equivalent to "My father, my father, who art better to Israel than chariots and

horsemen."

[ocr errors]

17. "Open the window eastward."--The country which the Syrians had taken from Israel lay due east of Samaria; or, as the indications of the cardinal points of the compass include intermediate directions, the point called "east" may have been north-east, towards the proper territory of the Syrians.

"Shoot."-This was a symbolical declaration of war against Syria, and the ensuing action of striking on the ground denoted the result of the war thus symbolically indicated. It was a custom among the Romans to declare war against a nation, by deputing the chief of the feciales to go to its confines, and, after declaring in a loud voice the reasons for going to war, to throw a javelin into its territory. In later times, when they came to have wars with remote nations, this custom became inconvenient or impracticable; and then the ceremony was performed at Rome in a field, which from this appropriation, was called ager hostilis. This custom is said to have been borrowed from the Greeks, most of whose more remarkable usages may be traced to the East. This act must have quite apprized the king of the prophet's intention, even if he had not himself explained it by calling the arrow, "the arrow of the Lord's deliverance from Syria:" and this explains why Elisha was not only sorry but angry that the king, after such preparation, smote only three times upon the ground.

21. "They cast the man into the sepulchre of Elisha.”—The remains of the prophet were of course deposited in a cave, apparently in some field or garden; and the bearers, in conveying this man's corpse to his own sepulchre, being alarmed at the appearance of the predatory band of Moabites, placed their burden in Elisha's sepulchre, which seems to have been near at hand; and for this purpose they had only to remove the stone which probably closed the entrance to the cave. See the note to Gen. xxiii. 19.

"Touched the bones of Elisha."-The remains of Elisha were no doubt, as Josephus states, very honourably interred; yet it seems clear from this, that he was not deposited in a coffin. We have stated in the notes to Gen. xxiii. 19, and I. 26, that it is not an eastern custom to place a dead body in a coffin, whether it is to be deposited in a sepulchre or in a grave-it is swathed only. This was also the ancient custom, with some exceptions, as stated in the notes to which we refer. It is still more clear that the man, thus miraculously delivered from the power of the grave, was not enclosed in a coffin, or even swathed in such a manner as to prevent him from getting upon his feet when life returned.

[blocks in formation]

2 He was twenty and five years old when he began to reign, and reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Jehoaddan of Jerusalem.

3 And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, yet not like David his father: he did according to all things as Joash his father did.

4 Howbeit the high places were not taken away: as yet the people did sacrifice and burnt incense on the high places.

5¶ And it came to pass, as soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand, that he slew his servants which had slain the king

his father.

6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

7 He slew of Edom in the valley of salt ten thousand, and took 'Selah by war, and called the name of it Joktheel unto this day.

8 ¶ Then Amaziah sent messengers to Jehoash, the son of Jehoahaz son of Jehu, king of Israel, saying, Come, let us look one another in the face.

9 And Jehoash the king of Israel sent to Amaziah king of Judah, saying, The thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife and there passed by a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down the thistle.

10 Thou hast indeed smitten Edom, and thine heart hath lifted thee up: glory of this, and tarry at home: for why shouldest thou meddle to thy hurt, that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and Judah with thee?

11 But Amaziah would not hear. Therefore Jehoash king of Israel went up; and he and Amaziah king of Judah looked one another in the face at Bethshemesh, which belongeth to Judah.

12 And Judah was put to the worse before Israel; and they fled every man to

their tents.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

15 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoash which he did, and his might, and how he fought with Amaziah king of Judah, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?

16 And Jehoash slept with his fathers, and was buried in Samaria with the kings of Israel; and Jeroboam his son reigned in his stead.

17 ¶ And Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah lived after the death of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel fifteen years.

18 And the rest of the acts of Amaziah, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?

19 Now they made a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem: and he fled to Lachish; but they sent after him to Lachish, and slew him there.

20 And they brought him on horses: and he was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the city of David.

21 ¶ And all the people of Judah took "Azariah, which was sixteen years old, and made him king instead of his father Amaziah.

22 He built Elath, and restored it to Judah, after that the king slept with his fathers.

23 In the fifteenth year of Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel began to reign in Samaria, and reigned forty and one years.

24 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD: he departed not from all the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin.

25 He restored the coast of Israel from the entering of Hamath unto the sea of the plain, according to the word of the LORD God of Israel, which he spake by the hand of his servant 'Jonah, the son of Amittai, the prophet, which was of Gath-hepher.

26 For the LORD saw the affliction of Israel, that it was very bitter: for there was not any shut up, nor any left, nor any helper for Israel.

Ezek. 18. 20. 4 Or, the rock. 82 Chron. 26, 1, he is called Uzziah,

5 Heb. at thy house.

9 Matth, 12. 39, 40, called Jonas.

Heb. was smitten.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small]

Verse 7. "Valley of Salt."-The king of Judah being on his way to the capital of Edom, the Edomites met him and gave him battle in the "Valley of Salt;" and after their defeat, the king continued his march to Selah, which he took, and called it Joktheel. Whatever theory be taken with respect to the capital of Edom, the probability remains nearly the same, that the "Valley of Salt" was the salt and sandy plain to the south of the Dead Sea. On several occasions we have spoken of the Ghor, or valley, which extends from the Dead Sea to the Gulf of Akaba. But it is to be understood that at present the valley is closed, at about twelve miles to the south of the bay in which the sea terminates, by a sandy cliff, about sixty or eighty feet high, which runs across the valley, and forms a southern margin for the basin of the sea when its waters are at their greatest height. To the south of this sand-cliff, however, the valley extends, without interruption, to the Red Sea. The plain or valley enclosed between this sand-cliff and the extremity of the sea, to which we may add the broad eastern margin of the southern bay, which partakes of the same character, does, we have little doubt, form the "Valley of Salt" of the present text. This plain or valley has been traversed and amply described by Captains Irby and Mangles, in their valuable unpublished Travels.' Their description is the more interesting, as they entered it by the very road from Jerusalem and Hebron which must needs have been taken by the armies of Judah. After descending from the western hills, they say, "We entered the great plain at the end of the Dead Sea for about a quarter of an hour we had few bushes, and afterwards found the soil sandy and perfectly barren. On our right we had a continued hill of sandy soil, running in a south-east and north-west direction towards the middle of the plain." In a ravine at the side of this hill they tarried for the night, and "collected a quantity of wood, which the Dead Sea had thrown up at high-water mark, and endeavoured to make a fire, in order to bake bread, as we had flour. The wood was, however, so impregnated with salt, that all our efforts were unavailing." On proceeding across the plain the next morning, they had still the same sand-hill on their right. "We found, exclusive of the saline appearance left by the retiring of the waters, several large fragments of clear rock-salt lying on the ground; and on examining the hill, we found it composed partly of salt and partly of hardened sand. In many instances the salt was hanging from cliffs in clear perpendicular points like icicles; and we observed numerous strata of that material, of considerable thickness, having very little sand mixed with it. Strabo mentions that, to the southward of the Dead Sea, there are towns and cities built entirely of salt;' and although such an account seems

strange, yet, when we contemplated the scene before us, it did not seem very improbable. The torrents, during the rainy season, had brought down immense masses of salt; and we observed that the strata were generally in perpen dicular lines." The reader will be careful not to confound the cliffs of which the above extract speaks, with those that cross the Ghor more to the south. The present are those which form the southern expansion of that narrow ravine through which the plain is approached from the west; and which, in fact, form part of the western, not the southern, boundary of the plain. It seems that the plain itself, which, properly speaking, is part of the bed of the Dead Sea, becomes in part a marsh when the water is high during the wet season, but when that is over, is soon dried by the effects of evaporation. The plain must be dry and firm during the greater part of the year, for Irby and Mangles found it so, as early as the month of May, with the exception that water still remained in some of the drains (six in all) in that part contiguous to the Sea. The travellers do not speak of any saline incrustation or impregnation in the "barren flats" thus formed; but this must be the case, not only from the strongly saline character of the evaporated water and the cliffs and rocks of salt already noticed, but from the fact that, in a subsequent visit to the part of the valley east of the southern bay, the remarkably saline character of the dried soil is particularly mentioned. None of these phenomena are singular. The salt lake of Ourmiah, in Persia, leaves, in like manner, during the dry season, an extensive plain, saturated or incrusted with saline matter, and perfectly barren. (See the general note on the Dead Sea, under Gen. xix. 25.)

"He took Selah by war, and called the name of it Joktheel.”—Selah means "a rock;" and as the Greek name for the chief town of the Nabathæan Edomites, Petra, has precisely the same signification, it is, not without reason, conceived by some writers that the town which the Greeks knew as Petra is here and elsewhere denoted. We rather incline to this opinion, which has also the strong support of Eusebius and Jerome, who both describe Petra as "a city of Arabia, in the land of Edom, which is also called Jectael." It is true that in the Hebrew text. the word, in this and other places, may be read as an appellative rather than a proper name, and is so read by the Septuagint and Vulgate (but not the Syriac and Arabic); but as the versions, particularly the Septuagint, often turn the significant proper names of the Hebrew into appellatives, we are not disposed to lay much stress on this; and even did we allow that Selah is an appellative, it would be open to us to contend that a place so emphatically indicated as the rock was most probably the same which is allowed to have borne a proper name of the same import. In other words, a place distinguished as the rock is the most likely to be that to which the proper name of the same meaning, whether Selah or Petra, would be given. This will be allowed by any one who considers the universal process in topographical nomenclature, under which, distinguishing appellatives become, in process of time, fixed as proper names. However, as we are not willing to raise an argument on the question, whether such a word is to be understood as a proper name or an appellative, we are content with the probability, in connection with the other and stronger probability that the chief town of Mount Seir, even if not expressly named, is at least indicated and referred to in the history and prophecy of the Old Testament. In their denunciations against a country, the prophets continually refer to its chief town; and unless there were an exception in this instance, they did so in their copious prophecies against Edom; and that they acted thus is evident from topographical indications, to which we shall find a future occasion to refer. Now the chief town of Edom was Petra; and as the prophets who foretold its doom were not long posterior to the date of the transaction before us, it becomes probable that the present history has the same principal city of Edom in view; particularly when we find it bearing a name analogous to that which the metropolis of Edom certainly bore. We are, however, more anxious to show that the prophecies refer to Petra, than that the present history does so. The former point we consider certain, and the latter sufficiently probable to afford us an opportunity of entertaining the general subject, which now turns upon the question, "Where was Petra?"

This is a piont concerning which it is necessary to have a distinct understanding; for if the Idumean town to which the Scriptures refer be not the excavated city of Wady Mousa, near Mount Hor, we lose much of the force of that satisfactory and beautiful evidence to the divine authority of the sacred writers which may be deduced from the complete correspondence of their predictions with the existing condition of Edom. This correspondence has been only lately discovered; and, as something new, it has engaged more attention than old truths, however valuable, would have been likely to obtain. The Christian world is under great obligations to Dr. Keith, for his services in tracing and illustrating this coincidence; and, in the progress of this work, our humbler services shall not be wanting in the same line of useful labour. With respect to Edom, we have begun here, purposing to lay the foundation for future illustration by showing, which we think has not yet been done satisfactorily, that the city of Wady Mousa was the town of Edom which Scripture history and prophecy have in view.

Two places have been made to contend for the distinction of being the ancient Petra. One is the existing town of Kerek, about twenty-five miles due east from the southern bay of the Dead Sea, the other is the forsaken and desolated city in Wady Mousa, near Mount Hor. The conditions of the question are rather peculiar. No one now denies that the city in Wady Mousa was Petra. The very learned editor of Burckhardt's Travels in Syria' has proved this from the concurrent testimony of ancient writers; but, unfortunately, the same accomplished geographer has taken up the opinion, that, previously to the time of the Macedonian conquests, the present Kerek was Petra and the principal town of the Nabathæans, and this consideration will of course exclude the Petra of Wady Mousa entirely from the cognizance of the sacred writers, the canon of Old Testament Scripture having been closed considerably anterior to the appearance of the Macedonians in Asia. Our wish is, therefore, to disprove this position. To do so with completeness would require a lengthened dissertation, which would scarcely interest the readers of the Pictorial Bible; but we may state a few brief considerations which will, we think, reduce the probabilities which seem in favour of the conclusion to which we are opposed. We have repeatedly read with great attention the statement on the subject, which we find in the Preface to Burckhardt, but have failed to discover that any one authority is cited in proof that Kerek ever was called Petra in ancient times. The only passage bearing an aspect of proof is the following:-"When the Macedonian Greeks first became acquainted with this part of Syria, by means of the expedition which Antigonus sent against the Nabatæi, under the command of his son Demetrius, we are informed by Diodorus that these Arabs placed their old men, women, and children, upon a certain rock (izì rivòs wirgas), steep, unfortified by walls, admitting only of one access to the summit, and situated 300 stades beyond the lake Asphaltitis. As this interval agrees with that of Kerek from the southern extremity of the Dead Sea, and is not above half the distance of Wady Mousa from the same point; and as the other parts of the description are well adapted to Kerek, while they are inapplicable to Wady Mousa, we can hardly doubt that Kerek was at that time the fortress of the Nabatæi; and that during the first ages of the intercourse of that people with the Greeks, it was known to the latter by the name of Petra, so often applied by them to barbarian hill posts." After this, the able writer we are citing goes on to infer (for no proof is adduced) that subsequently, when the effects of commerce required a situation better adapted than Kerek to the collected population and the increased opulence of the Nabatæi, the VOL. II. 249

2 K

appellative of Petra was transferred to the new city at Wady Mousa. But ultimately, when the stream of commerce had partly reverted to its old Egyptian channel and had partly taken the new course by Palmyra, the city at Wady Mousa became gradually depopulated; and, in the end. Kerek came again to be considered by travellers as Petra, because the existence of the ruined city in Wady Mousa has only lately been brought to light, and because Kerek was the principal place, and the only place with a Christian community, remaining in the diocese of the Greek church which retains the old title of the bishopric of Petra, originally derived from the Petra of Wady Mousa. The last sentence affords an explanation, in which we gladly acquiesce, of how Kerek came to be identified with Petra; and we only demur at the almost contradictory opinion, that, in remote antiquity, Kerek was "the crowning city" of the Nabatmans, which was distinguished by this name.

The following are among the considerations which satisfy us in a contrary conclusion to that which we have stated with all the force that can be given to it. We must state them as in the form of a bare abstract, without that full exposition from collateral considerations from which they might derive very material support. In the first place, the passage in Diodorus does not say that the place in question was the city called Petra, but that there was a rock to which the inhabitants retreated, and which served them as a natural fortress. Now, if because Petra means a rock, this rock is to be regarded as Petra, there is no reason why Petra should not be sought wherever a rock happens to be historically mentioned in the rocky country of the Edomites. Thus then, if the rock were at the Kerek east of the Dead Sea. we do not see that Kerek was therefore necessarily Petra. But, on the other hand, allowing that Diodorus had Petra in view, we think it might be shown that it was more probably Wady Mousa than Kerek. He does not say that the rock was east of the Dead Sea, nor that it was 300 stades from that sea; but that, after the affair at the rock, the Greeks marched 300 stades to the neighbourhood of the Dead Sea. It may therefore have been south of the Sea, and the loose indication of distance would allow it without violence to have been as far south as Wady Mousa. In fact, Major Rennell, who in his determination of the site does not appear to have taken cognizance of the recent discoveries in Wady Mousa, cites this very passage of Diodorus among his ancient authorities for placing Petra t another Kerek (Kerek el Shobek) south of the Dead Sea, and in the immediate vicinity of Wady Mousa; which, taken as a conclusion independent of recent discoveries, is a most remarkable and valuable corroboration. Again, if the more northern Kerek had been Petra at the time to which Diodorus refers, this would prove it to have been not the more ancient, but a more modern Petra. We allow the station may have belonged then to the Edomites, because they encroached northward, after the Captivity, into what had formed the dominion of Judah on the one side of the Dead Sea, and of Moab and Ammon on the other. But that it could not have been a principal town or any town of the Edomites, in the time of the inspired writers of the Old Testament, is clear from the fact that its site was then in the territory of Moab, on the borders of Ammon. If any proof of this were wanting, it is found in the fart mentioned by Burckhardt's editor himself, that Kerek was called Charax by the Greeks, to which the Romans added Omanorum (Kerek of Ammon) to distinguish it from the more southern Kerek; and the Greeks themselves, for the same purpose, referred it to Moab, in the name of Charagmoba. We think these considerations demonstrate that Kerek could not have been a town of the Idumæans before the Captivity; nor could it therefore be mentioned or alluded to as such by the sacred writers. And if the prior claims of Kerek be dismissed, no one will dispute those of the town in Wady Mousa. We might rest here: but we will add that the Edomites were a great people, established between the Dead Sea and the Red Sea (the sea of Edom), when the Israelites were about to enter the Promised Land, and the history of the transactions between the two people, appear to demonstrate that the capital of Edom was then south of the Dead Sea. They were also obviously a great commercial people before the time of Solomon; and the very reasons of commercial advantage which are thought to have dictated the ultimate removal to Wady Mousa, must have equally operated at an earlier period-Kerek being most disadvantageously situated as the capital of a people possessing the commerce of the Red Sea. Furthermore, we have seen that Jerome says Joktheel was Petra; and he, of all men, was likely to have known if Kerek was or ever had been the ancient Petra; but he says Petra was near Mount Hor, and Burckhardt and his learned editor were the first to receive and confirm the local traditions which determine Mount Hor to have beea one of the mountains near Wady Mousa. In conclusion, we may add that the prophetic intimations concerning Edom receive no illustration from Kerek, but correspond with astonishing precision to the present appearances presented by the remains of the wonderful city in Wady Mousa: and, although the consideration has been generally overlooked, we shall ever be disposed to contend that the prophetic intimations concerning the (then future but now present) condition of towns, furnish the very best and most authoritative data by which the sites of such places may be determined. At present we have given, in a preceding page, a cut from Laborde, showing one of the aspects in which this wonderful city, with its sculptured and excavated cliffs, appears; reserving the descriptive details to be given in connection with these prophecies, which they will contribute to illustrate. (See the historical note on the Edomites, under Gen. xxxvi. 2.)

[blocks in formation]

In the twenty and seventh year of Jeroboam king of Israel began Azariah son of Amaziah king of Judah to reign.

2 Sixteen years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned two and fifty

years
in Jerusalem. And his mother's name
was Jecholiah of Jerusalem.

3 And he did that which was right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father Amaziah had done;

4 Save that the high places were not removed: the people sacrificed and burnt incense still on the high places.

5 And the LORD smote the king, so that he was a leper unto the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house. And Jotham the king's son was over the house, judging the people of the land.

6 And the rest of the acts of Azariah, and all that he did, are they not written in

« السابقةمتابعة »