« 이전계속 »
pie, but before the Trojan war, with which the Trojans and their times ended. As to the expression before us, we shall more clearly see what was designed by it, if we consider, 1. That the sacred writers represent the Jews as suffering in and after these times from the kings of two countries, from the kings of Assyria and from the kings of Babylon. Israel was a scattered sheep: the Lions had drove him away: first, the king of Assyria devoured him; and last, the king of Babylon? brake his bones.p —2. The kings of Assyria, who began the troubles which were brought upon the \ Israelites, were the kings who reigned at Nineveh, from Pul, before Tiglath-Pileser,* to Nabopolassar, who destroyed Nineveh, and made Babylon the sole metropolis of the empire.' Pul first began to afflict them; his successors, atdifferent*times, and in different
» Jeremiah I. ver. 17.
q 1 Chron. v. ver. 26. 2 Kings xv. 19. Usher. Chroriol. 'See Prideaux Connect. vol. i. book 1.
manners, distressed them; until Nebuchadnezzar completed their miseries in the captivity.* But, 3. The sacred writers, in the titles which they give to these kings, did not design to hint either the extent of their empire, or the history of their succession; but commonly call them kings of the country Or city where they resided, whatever other dominions they were masters of, and without any regard to the particulars of their actions or families, of the rise 6f one family, or the fall of another. Pul seems to have been the father of Sardanapulus 5 Tiglath-Pileser was Arbaces, who, in confederacy with Belesis, overthrew the empire of Pul, in the days of his son Sardanapulus;" and Tiglath-Pileser was not king of such large dominions as Pul and Sardanapulus commanded; but the sacred writers take no notice of these revolutions. Pul had his re* sidence at Nineveh, in Assyria, and Tiglath
'Id ibid. 'Sees Ush6*'s Chron.
"Prideaux Connection, ub. sup.
Pileser made that city his royal seat;* for which reason they are both called in Scripture kings of Assyria; and upon the same account the successors of Tiglath-Pileser have the same title, until the empire was removed to Babylon. Salmanezer, the son of Tiglath-Pileser, is called king of Assyria;7 and so is Sargon, or Sennacherib;1 Esarhaddon, though he was king of Babylon as well as of Assyria,* is called in Scripture, king of Assyria, for in that country was his seat of residence ;b but after Nabopolassar destroyed Nineveh, and removed the empire to Babylon, the kings of it are called in Scripture kings of Babylon, and not kings of Assyria, though Assyria was part of their dominions, as Babylon and the adjacent country had been of many of the Assyrian kings. There were great turns and revolutions in the kingdoms of these countries, from the death of Sardanapulus, to the esta
* Prid. Connect. vol. i. book 1. t 2Kiogs xvii. 3.
* Isaiah xx.l. • See Prideaux Connect. vol. 1. b. 1. note in p. 42- "Exra-iv . 2.
blishmcntof Nebuchadnezzar's empire; but the sacred history does not pursue a narration of these matters; for as the writers of it called the kings of the ancient Assyrian empire kings of Elam when they resided there,1 kings of Nineveh,*1 or of Assyria, when they lived in that city or country;' so they call the several kings, which arose after the fall of Sardanapulus' empire, kings of the countries where they held their residence; and all that can fairly be deduced from the words of Nehemiah is, that the troubles of the Jews began, whilst there were kings reigning in Assyria, that is, before the empire of these countries was removed to Babylon •
4. "Sesac and Memnon (says our learned author) were great conquerors, and reigned over Chaldea, Assyria, and Persia; but in their histories there is not a word of any opposition made to them by an Assyrian empire then standing. On the contrary,
Susiana, Media, Persia, Bactria, Armenia, Cappadocia, &c. were conquered by them, and continued subject to the kings of Egypt, till after the long reign of Ramesses, the son of Memnon." This objection, in its full strength, is, that the Egyptians conquered and possessed the very countries which were in the heart of the supposed Assyrian empire, in the times when that empire is supposed to have nourished; and therefore certainly there was in those days no such empire. I answer, 1. The Egyptians made no great conquests until the times of Sesac, in the reign of Rehoboam, about A. M. 3033, about two hundred years before Sardanapalus. This Sesac was their famous Sesostris/ I am sensible, that there have been many very learned writers who have thought otherwise. Agathias supposed Sesostris to be long before Ninus and Seiniramis;( and the Scholiastk upon Apollonius sets
'Marsham. Can. Chron. p. 358.
( L. 2. p. 55. See Prideaux not. Histor. in Cbron. Marm. Ep. 9. b Id. ibid*