Reading: Captivity by T. Nicol.

W
1. Western Campaigns of Shalmaneser II, 860-825 BC:

The captivity of the Northern Kingdom was the work of the great Assyrian power having its seat
at Nineveh on the Tigris. The empire of Assyria, rounded nearly 2000 BC, had a long history
behind it when its annals begin to take notice of the kingdom of Israel and Judah. The reign of
Shalmaneser II (860-825 BC) marks the first contact between these powers. This is not the
Shalmaneser mentioned in 2 Kings 17 and 18, who is the fourth of the name and flourished
more than a century later. Shalmaneser II was contemporary during his long reign with
Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Ahaziah and Joash, kings of Judah; with Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram and
Jehu, kings of Israel; with Hazael and Benhadad II, kings of Syria at Damascus, and with
Mesha, king of Moab. The Assyrian authorities for his reign are an inscription engraved by
himself on the rocks of Armenia; the Black Obelisk brought by Layard from Nimroud, now in the
British Museum; and the texts engraved on the bronze gates of Balawat, discovered by
Hormuzd Rassam in 1878, and recognized as the swinging gates of Shalmaneser's palace.
From these authorities we learn that in his 6th year he encountered the combined forces of
Damascus, Hamath, Israel, and other states which had united to oppose his progress
westward, and completely routed them in the battle of Karkar (854 BC). The danger which
threatened the western states in common had brought Syria and Israel together; and this is in
accord with the Scripture narrative which tells of a covenant, denounced by God's prophet,
between Ahab and Benhadad (1 Kings 20:34), and mentions a period of three years when
there was no war between Syria and Israel. The defeat of the allies seems, however, to have
broken up the confederacy, for, soon after, Ahab is found, with the aid of Jehoshaphat of
Judah, attempting unsuccessfully, and with fatal result to himself, to recover from the
weakened power of Syria the city of Ramoth-gilead (1 Kings 22). In another campaign to the
West, which likewise finds no record in Scripture, Shalmaneser received the tribute of Tyre and
Sidon, and of "Yahua of Khumri," that is, of Jehu, of the land of Omri, as Israel is called on the
monuments.

2. Of Rimmon-nirari III, 810-781 BC:

The next Assyrian monarch who turned his arms against the West was Rimmon-nirari III (810-
781 BC), grandson of Shalmaneser II. Although he is not mentioned by name in Scripture, his
presence and activity had their influence upon contemporary events recorded in 2 Ki. He
caused Syria to let go her hold of Israel; and although he brought Israel into subjection, the
people of the Northern Kingdom would rather have a ruler exercising a nominal sovereignty
over them in distant Nineveh than a king oppressing them in Damascus. Hence, Rimmon-nirari
has been taken for the saviour whom God gave to Israel, "so that they went out from under the
hand of the Syrians" (2 Kings 13:5; compare 2 Kings 13:23).

With the death of Rimmon-nirari in 781 BC, the power of Assyria received a temporary check,
and on the other hand the kingdom of Judah under Uzziah and the kingdom of Israel under
Jeroboam II reached the zenith of their political prosperity. In 745 BC, however, a usurper, Pul,
or Pulu, ascended the throne of Assyria, and reigned as Tiglath- pileser III. It is by the former
name that he is first mentioned in the Scripture narrative (2 Kings 15:19; 1 Chronicles 5:26),
and by the latter that he is mentioned on the monuments. That the two names belong to one
man is now held to be certain (Schrader, COT, I, 230 f).

3. Of Tiglath-pileser III, 745-727 BC:

Tiglath-pileser was one of the greatest monarchs of antiquity. He was the first to attempt to
consolidate an empire in the manner to which the world has become accustomed since Roman
times. He was not content to receive tribute from the kings and rulers of the states which he
conquered. The countries which he conquered became subject provinces of his empire,
governed by Assyrian satraps and contributing to the imperial treasury. Not long after he had
seated himself on the throne, Tiglath-pileser, like his predecessors, turned his attention to the
West. After the siege of Arpad, northward of Aleppo, the Assyrian forces made their way into
Syria, and putting into operation the Assyrian method of deportation and repopulation, the
conqueror annexed Hamath which had sought the alliance and assistance of Azariah, that is
Uzziah, king of Judah. Whether he then refrained from molesting Judah, or whether her
prestige was broken by this campaign of the Assyrian king, it is not easy to say. In another
campaign he certainly subjected Menahem of Israel with other kings to tribute. What is stated
in a word or two in the Annals of Tiglath-pileser is recorded at length in the Bible history
(2 Kings 15:19):

"There came against the land Pul the king of Assyria; and Menahem gave Pul a thousand
talents of silver, that his hand might be with him to confirm the kingdom in his hand. And
Menahem exacted the money of Israel, even of all the mighty men of wealth, of each man 50
shekels of silver, to give to the king of Assyria. So the king of Assyria tamed back, and stayed
not there in the land." In the reign of Pekah, under his proper name of Tiglath-pileser, he is
recorded to have raided the northern parts of Israel, and carried the inhabitants away into the
land of Assyria (2 Kings 15:29). We next hear of Ahaz, king of Judah, appealing to the
Assyrians for help against "these two tails of smoking firebrands," Rezin of Syria and Pekah,
the son of Remaliah (Isaiah 7:4). To secure this help he took the silver and gold of the house of
the Lord, and sent it as a present to the king of Assyria (2 Kings 16:8). Meanwhile Tiglath-
pileser was setting out on a new campaign to the West. He carried fire and sword through
Syria and the neighboring lands as far as Gaza, and on his return he captured Samaria,
without, however, razing it to the ground. Pekah having been slain by his own people, the
Assyrian monarch left Hoshea, the leader of the conspiracy, on the throne of Israel as the
vassal of Assyria.

4. Of Shalmaneser IV, 727-722 BC--Seige of Samaria:

In 727 BC Tiglath-pileser III died and was succeeded by Shalmaneser IV. His reign was short
and no annals of it have come to light. In 2 Kings 17 and 18, however, we read that Hoshea,
relying upon help from the king of Egypt, thought the death of Tiglath-pileser a good
opportunity for striking a blow for independence. It was a vain endeavor, for the end of the
kingdom of Israel was at hand. The people were grievously given over to oppression and
wickedness, which the prophets Amos and Hosea vigorously denounced. Hosea, in particular,
was "the prophet of Israel's decline and fall." Prophesying at this very time he says:

"As for Samaria, her king is cut off, as foam upon the water. The high places also of Aven, the
sin of Israel, shall be destroyed: the thorn and the thistle shall come up on their altars; and they
shall say to the mountains, Cover us; and to the hills, Fall on us" (Hosea 10:7,8;
compare Hosea 10:14,15). No less stern are the predictions by Isaiah and Micah of the doom
that is to overtake Samaria: "Woe to the crown of pride of the drunkards of Ephraim, and to the
fading flower of his glorious beauty, which is on the head of the fat valley of them that are
overcome with wine" (Isaiah 28:1). "For the transgression of Jacob is all this, and for the sins of
the house of Israel. What is the transgression of Jacob? is it not Samaria? .... Therefore I will
make Samaria as a heap of the field, and as places for planting vineyards" (Micah 1:5,6). No
help came from Egypt. With the unaided and enfeebled resources of his kingdom Hoshea had
to face the chastising forces of his sovereign. He was made prisoner outside Samaria and was
most likely carried away to Nineveh. Meanwhile the land was over-run and the capital doomed
to destruction, as the prophets had declared.

5. Samaria Captured by Sargon, 722 BC:

Not without a stubborn resistance on the part of her defenders did "the fortress cease from
Ephraim" (Isaiah 17:3). It was only after a three years' siege that the Assyrians captured the
city (2 Kings 17:5). If we had only the record of the Hebrew historian we should suppose that
Shalmaneser was the monarch to whom fell the rewards and honors of the capture. Before the
surrender of the city Shalmaneser had abdicated or died, and Sargon, only once mentioned in
Scripture (Isaiah 20:1), but one of the greatest of Assyrian monarchs, had ascended the
throne. From his numerous inscriptions, recovered from the ruins of Khorsabad, we learn that
he, and not Shalmaneser, was the king who completed the conquest of the revolted kingdom
and deported the inhabitants to Assyria. "In the beginning (of my reign)," says Sargon in his
Annals, "the city Samaria (I took) with the help of Shamash, who secures victory to me (....
27,290 people inhabiters of it) I took away captive; 50 chariots the property of my royalty, which
were in it I appropriated. (.... the city) I restored, and more than before I caused it to be
inhabited; people of the lands conquered by my hand in it (I caused to dwell. My governor over
them I appointed, and tribute) and imposts just as upon the Assyrians I laid upon them." The
Assyrian Annals and the Scripture history support and supplement each other at this point. The
sacred historian describes the deportation as follows:

"The king of Assyria took Samaria, and carried Israel away into Assyria, and placed them in
Halah, and on the Habor, the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes .... because they
obeyed not the voice of Yahweh their God, but transgressed his covenant, even all that Moses,
the servant of Yahweh, commanded, and would not hear it, nor do it" (2 Kings
17:6,7; 18:11,12).

6. Depopulation and Repopulation of Samaria:

The repopulation of the conquered territory is also described by the sacred historian:

"And the king of Assyria brought men from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Avva, and
from Hamath and Sepharvaim, and placed them in the cities of Samaria instead of the children
of Israel; and they possessed Samaria, and dwelt in the cities thereof" (2 Kings 17:24). The
fact that Sargon introduced foreign settlers taken in war into Samaria is attested by
inscriptions. That there were various episodes of deportation and repopulation in connection
with the captivity of the Northern Kingdom appears to be certain. We have seen already that
Tiglath-pileser III deported the population of the northern tribes to Assyria and placed over the
depopulated country governors of his own. And at a time considerably later, we learn that
Sargon's grandson Esarhaddon, and his great-grandson Ashur-bani-pal, "the great and noble
Osnappar," imported to the region of Samaria settlers of nations conquered by them in the
East (Ezra 4:2,10). Of the original settlers, whom a priest, carried away by the king of Assyria
but brought back to Bethel, taught "the law of the god of the land," it is said that "they feared
Yahweh, and served their own gods, after the manner of the nations from among whom they
had been carried away" (2 Kings 17:33). The hybrid stock descended from those settlers is
known to us in later history and in the Gospels as the Samaritans.

7. The Ten Tribes in Captivity:

We must not suppose that a clean sweep was made Of the inhabitants of the Northern
Kingdom. No doubt, as in the Babylonian captivity, "the poorest of the land were left to be
vinedressers and husbandmen" (2 Kings 25:12). The numbers actually deported were but a
moiety of the whole population. But the kingdom of the Ten Tribes was now at an end. Israel
had become an Assyrian province, with a governor established in Samaria. As regards the
Golah--the captives of Israel in the cities of the Medes--it must not be supposed that they
became wholly absorbed in the population among whom they were settled. We can well
believe that they preserved their Israelite traditions and usages with sufficient clearness and
tenacity, and that they became part of the Jewish dispersion so widespread throughout the
East. It is quite possible that at length they blended with the exiles of Judah carried off by
Nebuchadrezzar, and that then Judah and Ephraim became one nation as never before. The
name Jew, therefore, naturally came to include members of what had earlier been the Northern
Confederacy of Israel as well as those of the Southern Kingdom to which it properly belonged,
so that in the post-exilic period, Jehudi, or Jew, means an adherent of Judaism without regard
to local nationality.

II. Of Judah (The Work of the Chaldean Power).

Southern Kingdom and House of David

The captivity of Judah was the work of the great Chaldean power seated at Babylon on the
Euphrates. While the Northern Kingdom had new dynasties to rule it in quick succession,
Judah and Jerusalem remained true to the House of David to the end. The Southern Kingdom
rested on a firmer foundation, and Jerusalem with its temple and priesthood secured the throne
against the enemies who overthrew Samaria for nearly a century and a half longer.

1. Break-up of Assyria:

Sargon, who captured Samaria in 722 BC, was followed by monarchs with a great name as
conquerors and builders and patrons of literature, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal.
When Ashurbanipal died in 625 BC, the dissolution of the Assyrian Empire was not far off. Its
hold over the West had greatly slackened, and the tributary peoples were breaking out into
revolt. Bands of Scythians, a nomad Aryan race, from the region between the Caucasus and
the Caspian, were sweeping through the Assyrian Empire as far as Palestine and Egypt, and
the prophecies of Jeremiah and Zephaniah reflect their methods of warfare and fierce
characteristics. They were driven back, however, at the frontier of Egypt, and appear to have
returned to the North without invading Judah.

2. Downfall of Nineveh, 606 BC:

From the North these hordes were closing in upon Nineveh, and on all sides the Assyrian
power was being weakened. In the "Burden of Nineveh," the prophet Nahum foreshadows the
joy of the kingdom of Judah at the tidings of its approaching downfall:

"Behold, upon the mountains the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace!
Keep thy feasts, O Judah, perform thy vows; for the wicked one shall no more pass through
thee; he is utterly cut off" (Nahum 1:15; compare Nahum 3:8-11). The Medes regained their
independence and under their king, Cyaxares, formed an alliance with the Chaldeans, who
soon afterward revolted under the leadership of Nabopolassar, viceroy of Babylon. Rallying
these various elements to his standard Nabopolassar laid siege to the Assyrian capital, and in
606 BC, Nineveh, which had been the capital city of great conquerors, and had "multiplied
(her) merchants above the stars of heaven" (Nahum 3:16), fell before the combined forces of
the Medes and Chaldeans, fell suddenly and finally, to rise no more. Of the new Babylonian
Empire upon which the Chaldeans now entered, Nebuchadrezzar, whose father Nabopolassar
had associated him with him on the throne, was the first and most eminent ruler.

3. Pharaoh Necoh's Revolt:

That the people of Judah should exult in the overthrow of Nineveh and the empire for which it
stood we can well understand. Jerusalem herself had by God's mercy remained unconquered
when Sennacherib nearly a century before had carried off from the surrounding country
200,150 people and had devastated the towns and fortresses near. But the hateful Assyrian
yoke had rested upon Judah to the end, and not upon Judah only but even upon Egypt and the
valley of the Nile. In 608 BC Pharaoh Necoh revolted from his Assyrian suzerain and resolved
upon an eastern campaign. He had no desire to quarrel with Josiah of Judah, through whose
territory he must pass; but in loyalty to his Assyrian suzerain Josiah threw himself across the
path of the Egyptian invader and perished in the battle of Megiddo. The Pharaoh seems to
have returned to Egypt, taking Jehoahaz the son of Josiah with him, and to have appointed his
brother Jehoiakim king of Judah, and to have exacted a heavy tribute from the land.

4. Defeat at Carchemish, 604 BC:

But he did not desist from his purpose to win an eastern empire. Accordingly he pressed
forward till he reached the Euphrates, where he was completely routed by the Babylonian army
under Nebuchadrezzar in the decisive battle of Carchemish, 604 BC. The battle left the
Chaldeans undisputed masters of Western Asia, and Judah exchanged the yoke of Assyria for
that of Babylon.

5. The New Babylonian Empire under Nebuchadrezzar, 604-562 BC:

So far as cruelty was concerned, there was little to choose between the new tyrants and the
old oppressors. Of the Chaldeans Habakkuk, who flourished at the commencement of the new
Empire, says:

"They are terrible and dreadful. .... Their horses also are swifter than leopards, and are more
fierce than the evening wolves; and their horsemen spread themselves: yea, their horsemen
come from far; they fly as an eagle that hasteth to devour" (Habakkuk 1:7,8 the American
Revised Version, margin). Over Western Asia, including Judah, Nebuchadrezzar since the
battle of Carchemish was supreme. It was vain for Judah to coquet with Egypt when
Nebuchadrezzar had a long and powerful arm with which to inflict chastisement upon his
disloyal subjects.

The Mission of Jeremiah, 626-580 BC.

The mission of Jeremiah the prophet in this crisis of the history of Judah was to preach
obedience and loyalty to the king of Babylon, and moral reformation as the only means of
escaping the Divine vengeance impending upon land and people. He tells them in the name of
God of the great judgment that was to come at the hand of the Chaldeans on Jerusalem and
surrounding peoples. He even predicts the period of their subjection to Chaldean domination:

"And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve
the king of Babylon seventy years" (Jeremiah 25:11). This preaching was unpalatable to the
partisans of Egypt and to those who believed in the inviolability of Jerusalem. But with stern
rebuke and with symbolic action he proclaims the doom of Jerusalem, and in the face of
persecution and at the risk of his life, the prophet fulfills his ministry.

6. Revolt and Punishment of Jehoiakim, 608-597 BC:

Jehoiakim, who was first the vassal of Pharaoh Necoh, and then of Nebuchadrezzar, was in
corruption and wickedness too faithful a representative of the people. Jeremiah charges him
with covetousness, the shedding of innocent blood, oppression and violence (Jeremiah 22:13-
19). The fourth year of Jehoiakim was the first year of Nebuchadrezzar, who, fresh from the
victory of Carchemish, was making his sovereignty felt in the western world. The despicable
king of Judah became Nebuchadrezzar's vassal and continued in his allegiance three years,
after which he turned and rebelled against him. But he received neither encouragement nor
help from the neighboring peoples. "Yahweh sent against him bands of the Chaldeans, and
bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and
sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of Yahweh, which he spake by his
servants the prophets" (2 Kings 24:2). The history of the latter part of Jehoiakim's reign is
obscure. The Hebrew historian says that after a reign of eleven years he slept with his fathers,
from which we infer that he died a natural death. From Daniel we learn that in the third year of
Jehoiakim, Nebuchadrezzar came up against Jerusalem and besieged it, and carried off, along
with vessels of the house of God, members of the seed royal, and of the nobility of Judah,
among whom was Daniel the prophet. That Jehoiakim was included in what seems to be a first
installment of the captivity of Judah is expressly affirmed by the Chronicler who says:

"Against him (Jehoiakim) came up Nebuchadnezzar .... and bound him in fetters, to carry him
to Babylon" (2 Chronicles 36:6). However the facts really stand, the historian adds to the
record of the death of Jehoiakim and of the succession of Jehoiachin the significant comment:
"And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of this land; for the king of Babylon had
taken, from the brook of Egypt unto the river Euphrates, all that pertained to the king of Egypt"
(2 Kings 24:7).

7. Siege and Surrender of Jerusalem under Jehoiachin, 597 BC:

Jehoiachin who succeeded Jehoiakim reigned only three months, the same length of time as
his unfortunate predecessor Jehoahaz (2 Kings 23:31). The captivity of Jehoahaz in Egypt and
the captivity of Jehoiachin in Babylon are lamented in a striking elegy by Ezekiel, who
compares them to young lions, the offspring of the mother lioness Israel, which learned to
catch and their prey and devoured men, but were taken in the pit of the nations and put in
rings, so that their roar was no more heard in the mountains of Israel (Ezekiel 19:1-9).
Nebuchadrezzar came in person while his servants were besieging Jerusalem, and Jehoiachin
surrendered at discretion. So the king and his mother and his servants and his princes and his
officers were carried off with the mighty men of valor, even ten thousand captives. `None
remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land. He carried out thence all the
treasures of the house of Yahweh, and the treasures of the king's house, and cut in pieces all
the vessels of gold, which Solomon king of Israel had made in the temple of Yahweh, as
Yahweh had said.

8. First Deportation, 597 BC:

And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and the craftsmen and the smiths a thousand,
all of them strong and apt for war, even them the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon.
And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah, Jehoiachin's father's brother, king in his stead, and
changed his name to Zedekiah' (2 Kings 24:10-17). From Jehoiachin dates the carrying away
into Babylon, the year being 597 BC. The unfortunate monarch lived in exile in Babylon 38
years, and seems to have retained the respect and loyalty of the exiles among whom he dwelt.

The Baskets of Figs:

It was with reference to the deportation of the princes and craftsmen and smiths that Jeremiah
had his vision of the baskets of figs--one containing figs very good, like the first ripe figs; the
other very bad, so bad they could not be eaten (Jeremiah 24:1-3). The good figs were the
captives of Judah carried away into the land of the Chaldeans for good; the bad figs were the
king Zedekiah and his princes and the residue of Jerusalem, upon whom severe judgments
were yet to fall till they were consumed from off the land (Jeremiah 24:4-10).

9. The Ministry of Ezekiel, 592-570 BC:

Among the captives thus carried to Babylon and placed on the banks of the Chebar was the
priest-prophet Ezekiel. Five years after the captivity he began to have his wonderful "visions" of
God, and to declare their import to the exiles by the rivers of Babylon. To the desponding
captives who were engrossed with thoughts of the kingdom of Judah, not yet dissolved, and of
the Holy City, not yet burned up with fire, Ezekiel could only proclaim by symbol and allegory
the destruction of city and nation, till the day when the distressing tidings reached them of its
complete overthrow. Then to the crushed and despairing captives he utters no lamentations
like those of Jeremiah, but rather joyful predictions of a rebuilt city, of a reconstituted kingdom,
and of a renovated and glorious temple.

10. Jeremiah's Ministry in Jerusalem, 597-588 BC:

Although the flower of the population had been carried away into Babylon and the Temple had
been despoiled of its treasures, Jerusalem and the Temple still stood. To the inhabitants who
were left behind, and to the captives in Babylon, Jeremiah had a message. To the latter he
offered counsels of submission and contentment, assured that the hateful and repulsive
idolatries around them would throw them back upon the law of their God, and thus promote the
work of moral and spiritual regeneration within them. `Thus saith Yahweh, I will give them a
heart to know me, that I am Yahweh:

and they shall be my people, and I will be their God; for they shall return unto me with their
whole heart' (Jeremiah 24:5,7). To "the residue of Jerus" his counsels and predictions were
distasteful, and exposed him to the suspicion of disloyalty to his people and his God. None of
his warnings was more impressive than that symbolically proclaimed by the bands and bars
which the prophet was to put upon his neck to send to the kings of Edom and Moab and
Ammon and Tyre and Sidon, who seem to have had ideas of forming an alliance against
Nebuchadrezzar. Zedekiah was also urged to submit, but still entertained hopes that the king
of Babylon would allow the captives of Judah to return. He even himself went to Babylon,
perhaps summoned thither by his suzerain (Jeremiah 51:59). With an Egyptian party in
Jerusalem urging an alliance with Egypt, and with a young and warlike Pharaoh on the throne,
Hophra (Apries), Zedekiah deemed the opportunity favorable for achieving independence, and
entered into an intrigue with the Egyptian king. So Zedekiah rebelled against the king of
Babylon (2 Kings 24:20).

11. Zedekiah's Rebellion and the Siege of Jerusalem, 588-586 BC:

It was a bold throw, but Nebuchadrezzar would brook no such disloyalty from his vassals. He
marched at once to the West, and committed to Nebuzaradan the task of capturing Jerusalem,
while he himself established his headquarters at Riblah, in Syria, on the Orontes. Meanwhile
the Pharaoh with his army crossed the frontier to the help of his allies, and compelled the
Chaldeans to raise the siege of Jerusalem and meet him in the field (Jeremiah 37:5). But here
his courage failed him, and he retired in haste without offering battle. Nebuzaradan now led
back his army and the siege became closer than before.

Jeremiah "Falling Away to the Chaldeans"

During the breathing-space afforded by the withdrawal of the Chaldeans, Jeremiah was going
out of the city to his native Anathoth, some 4 miles to the Northeast across the ridge, on family
business (Jeremiah 37:11-15). His departure was observed, and he was charged with falling
away to the Chaldeans, and cast into an improvised dungeon in the house of Jonathan the
scribe. While there the king sent for him and asked, "Is there any word from Yahweh?" And
Jeremiah answered fearlessly, "There is. Thou shalt be delivered into the hand of the king of
Babylon." For a time Jeremiah, by the favor of Zedekiah, enjoyed after this a greater measure
of freedom; but as he continued to urge in hearing of all the people the duty of surrender, his
enemies vowed that he should be put to death, and had him cast into a foul empty cistern,
where he ran the risk of being choked or starved to death. Once again the king sought an
interview with the prophet, giving him private assurance that he would not put him to death nor
allow his enemies to do so. Again the prophet counseled surrender, and again he was allowed
a measure of freedom.
12. Destruction of Jerusalem, 586 BC:

Flight, Capture, and Punishment of Zedekiah

But the end of the doomed city was at hand. In the 11th year of Zedekiah, 586 BC, in the 4th
month, the 9th day of the month, a breach was made in the city (Jeremiah 39:1,2), and the final
assault completed the work that had been done by months of famine and want. Zedekiah and
his men of war do not seem to have waited for the delivery of the last assault. They fled from
the city by night "by the way of the king's garden, through the gate betwixt the two walls," and
made eastward for the Arabah. But the army of the Chaldeans pursued them, and overtook
Zedekiah in the plains of Jericho. They took him prisoner and brought him to Nebuchadrezzar
at Riblah, where the king of Babylon first slew the son of Zedekiah, and then put out his eyes.
With the sons of the captured monarch were slain all the nobles of Judah. This time neither city
nor temple nor palace was spared. Nebuzaradan "burnt the house of Yahweh, and the king's
house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, even every great house, burnt he with fire" (2 Kings
25:9). His soldiers, too, broke down the walls of Jerusalem round about. The treasure and the
costly furnishings of the Temple, in so far as they had escaped the former spoliation, were
carried away to Babylon. The ruin of Jerusalem was complete. The Book of Lamentations
utters the grief and shame and penitence of an eyewitness of the captures and desolation of
the Holy City:

"Yahweh hath accomplished his wrath, he hath poured out his fierce anger; and he hath
kindled a fire in Zion, which hath devoured the foundations thereof. The kings of the earth
believed not, neither all the inhabitants of the world, that the adversary and the enemy would
enter into the gates of Jerusalem. Woe unto us! for we have sinned. For this our heart is faint;
for these things our eyes are dim; for the mountain of Zion, which is desolate: the foxes walk
upon it" (Lamentations 4:11,12; 5:16,18). 13. Second Deportation of Inhabitants, 586 BC:

"So Judah," says the prophet who had been through the siege and the capture (if not rather the
editor of his prophecies), "was carried away captive out of his land" (Jeremiah 52:27). The
statements of the numbers carried away are, however, conflicting. In Jeremiah 52:28-30 we
read of three deportations:

that of 597 BC when 3,023 Jews were carried off; that of 586 BC when Nebuchadrezzar
carried off 832 persons; and one later than both in 581 BC, when Nebuzaradan carried away
captive of the Jews 745 persons--a total of 4,600.

14. Third Deportation, 581 BC:

(1) Number and Quality of Exiles:

In 2 Kings 24:15,16 it is said that in 597 Nebuchadrezzar carried to Babylon 8,000 men. Dr.
George Adam Smith taking all the data together estimates that the very highest figures
possible are 62,000 or 70,000 men, women and children, less than half of the whole nation
(Jerusalem, II, 268-70). In 597 BC, Nebuchadrezzar carried off the princes and nobles and
craftsmen and smiths, leaving behind the poorest sort of the people of the land (2 Kings 24:14).

(2) The Residue Left:

In 586 BC Nebuzaradan carried off the residue of the people that were left in the city, but he
"left of the poorest of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen" (2 Kings 25:12). "They
were, as the Biblical narratives testify, the poorest of the land, from whom every man of
substance and energy had been sifted; mere groups of peasants, without a leader and without
a center; disorganized and depressed; bitten by hunger and compassed by enemies;
uneducated and an easy prey to the heathenism by which they were surrounded. We can
appreciate the silence which reigns in the Bible regarding them, and which has misled us as to
their numbers. They were a negligible quantity in the religious future of Israel:

without initiative or any influence except that of a dead weight upon the efforts of the rebuilders
of the nation, when these at last returned from Babylonia" (Jerusalem, II, 269-70).

15. Gedaliah, Governor of Judah:

Over those who were left behind, Gedaliah was appointed governor, with his residence at
Mizpah, where also a Babylonian contingent remained on guard. Jeremiah had the choice of
being taken to Babylon or of remaining in Judah. He preferred to remain with the residue of the
people under the care of Gedaliah. With the murder of Gedaliah by Ishmael, a traitorous scion
of the royal house, who in turn had to flee and made good his escape, it looked as if the last
trace of the former kingdom of Judah was wiped out.

(1) Jeremiah and the Flight to Egypt:

Against the counsel of Jeremiah, the remnant, led by Johanan the son of Kareah, resolved to
take refuge in Egypt and insisted that Jeremiah and his friend Baruch should accompany them.
It is in Egypt, amid disappointment and misrepresentation which he had to endure, that we
have our last glimpse of the prophet of the downfall of Judah.

(2) Descendants of the Fugitives, 471-411 BC:

Of the descendants of those settlers in Egypt remarkable remains have been discovered within
the last few years. They consist of Aramaic papyri which were found at Assouan, the ancient
Syene, and which belong to a time not more than a century after the death of Jeremiah. The
documents are accounts and contracts and deeds of various kinds, from which we gather that
in the 5th century BC there were Jews keeping themselves apart as they do still, worshipping
Yahweh, and no other God, and even having a temple and an altar of sacrifice to which they
brought offerings as their fathers did at Jerusalem before the destruction of the Temple. These
papyri give us valuable glimpses of the social condition and religious interest of the settlers.

See DISPERSION.

16. The Exiles in Babylon:

Their Social Condition, 464-405 BC:

Of the Jewish captives carried off by Nebuchadrezzar and settled by the rivers of Babylon, we
learn something from the prophecies of Daniel which are now generally believed to belong to
the Maccabean period, and much from the prophecies of Ezekiel, from the Psalms of the
Captivity, and from the Second Isaiah, whose glowing messages of encouragement and
comfort were inspired by the thought of the Return. From Haggai and Zechariah we see how
the work of rebuilding the Temple was conceived and carried out. Of the social condition of the
Exiles an interesting revelation is given by the excavations at Nippur. From cuneiform tablets,
now in the Imperial Ottoman Museum at Constantinople, preserved among the business
archives of the wealthy firm of Murashu, sons of Nippur, in the reign of Artaxerxes I and Darius
II (464- 405 BC), there can be read quite a number of Jewish names. And the remarkable thing
is that many of the names are those known to us from the genealogical and other lists of the
Books of Ki and Ch and Ezr and Neh. Professor Hilprecht (The Babylonian Expedition, IX, 13)
infers from an examination of these that a considerable number of the Jewish exiles, carried
away by Nebuchadrezzar after the destruction of Jerusalem, were settled in Nippur and its
neighborhood. Of this fact there are various proofs. The Talmudic tradition which identifies
Nippur with Calneh (Genesis 10:10) gains new force in the light of these facts. And "the river
Khebar in the land of the Chaldeans," by which Ezekiel saw his vision, is now known from
inscriptions to be a large navigable canal not far from Nippur (ibid., 27,28).

17. The Rise and Development of Judaism:

The influence of the Captivity as a factor in the development of Judaism can hardly be
overestimated. "The captivity of Judah," says Dr. Foakes-Jackson (Biblical History of the
Hebrews, 316) "is one of the greatest events in the history of religion. .... With the captivity the
history of Israel ends, and the history of the Jews commences." Placed in the midst of heathen
and idolatrous surroundings the Golah recoiled from the abominations of their neighbors and
clung to the faith of their fathers in the God of Abraham. Exposed to the taunts and the scorn of
nations that despised them, they formed an inner circle of their own, and cultivated that
exclusiveness which has marked them ever since. Being without a country, without a ritual
system, without any material basis for their life as a people, they learned as never before to
prize those spiritual possessions which had come down to them from the past. They built up
their nationality in their new surroundings upon the foundation of their religion. Their prophets,
Jeremiah and Ezekiel, had encouraged and stimulated them with the assurance of spiritual
blessings, and the promise of restoration. For their whole social and domestic and spiritual life
there was needed some steady and continuous regulative principle or scheme. The need of
this threw their leaders and thinkers back upon the Law of Moses. The rabbi and the scribe
took the place of the sacrificing priest. The synagogue and the Sabbath came to occupy a new
place in the religious practice of the people. These and other institutions of Judaism only
attained to maturity after the Return, but the Captivity and the Exile created the needs they
were meant to supply. While the prophets were clear and explicit in setting forth the Captivity,
they were not less so in predicting the Return. Isaiah with his doctrine of the Remnant, Micah,
Zephaniah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and others gifted with the vision of God, cheered the nation,
each in their day, with the hope of restoration and return, not for Judah only but for Israel as
well. Vineyards were to be planted again upon the mountains of Samaria as well as in the
valleys of Judah. Jeremiah had even predicted the length of the period of the Exile, when he
declared that the inhabitants of the land should serve the king of Babylon for seventy years
(Jeremiah 25:12; 29:10).

18. The Return by Permission of Cyrus, 538 BC:

It was in Cyrus, who brought about the fall of Babylon and ended the New Babylonian Empire
in 539 BC, that the hopes of the exiles came to be centered. He was "the battle- axe" with
which Yahweh was to shatter Babylon (Jeremiah 51:20), and as he proceeded on his path of
victory the unknown Seer whom we call the Second Isaiah welcomed him as the liberator of his
people. "Thus saith Yahweh .... of Jerusalem, She shall be inhabited; and of the cities of
Judah, They shall be built, and I will raise up the waste places thereof; that saith to the deep,
Be dry, and I will dry up thy rivers; that saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all
my pleasure, even saying of Jerusalem, She shall be built; and of the temple, Thy foundation
shall be laid" (Isaiah 44:26-28).

19. Rebuilding of the Temple, 536 BC:

Within a year of the entry of Cyrus into Babylon an edict was issued (2 Chronicles
36:22,23; Ezra 1:1), granting permission to the exiles to return and build a house for the Lord in
Jerusalem. He also brought forth the vessels of the Temple which Nebuchadrezzar had carried
away and handed them over to Sheshbazzar, the prince of Judah; and Sheshbazzar brought
them with him when they of the Captivity were brought up from Babylon unto Jerusalem.

Particulars of the Return are given in the Books of Ezr and Neh, and in the prophecies of
Haggai and Zechariah. Of the exiles 42,360 returned under Sheshbazzar, besides slaves; and
under Jeshua the son of Jozadak the priest, and Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, first an altar
was built and then the foundations of the Temple were laid. In consequence of the opposition
of the Samaritans, who were refused any share in the restoration of the Temple, the work of
rebuilding was greatly hindered, and came to a stop. It was then that Haggai and Zechariah
urged the resumption of the work and partly by denouncing the niggardliness of the people and
partly by foreshadowing the glorious future in store for the Temple, hastened forward the
enterprise.

Completed 515 BC:

At length in the month Adar, in the 6th year of Darius (515 BC) the work was completed and
the Passover celebrated within the courts of the restored Sanctuary (Ezra 6:15-).

20. Reforms and Labors of Ezra and Nehemiah, 445 BC:

For some decades the history is silent, and it was in 458 BC that Ezra set out for Jerusalem
taking 1,800 Jews along with him. He found that the returned Jews had become allied in
marriage with the people of the land and were in danger of losing their racial characteristics by
absorption among the heathen (Ezra 9). It was due no doubt to his efforts and those of
Nehemiah, supported by the searching and powerful utterances of Malachi, that this peril was
averted. Thirteen years later (445 BC) Nehemiah, the cupbearer of Artaxerxes, having heard of
the desolate condition of the Holy City, the place of his fathers' sepulchers, obtained leave of
his master to visit Jerusalem. With letters to the governors on the route and to the keeper of
the king's forest, he set out, and came safely to Jerusalem. Having himself inspected the walls
he called the people to the work of repairing the ruins, and despite the taunts and calumny and
active hostility of the Samaritan opposition he had the satisfaction of seeing the work
completed, the gates set up and the city repopulated. Nehemiah and Ezra then gathered the
people together to hear the words of the Law, and at a solemn convocation the Law was read
and explained to the assembly. Thereafter a covenant was entered into by the people that they
would observe the Law of Moses and not intermarry with the heathen nor traffic on the
Sabbath, but would pay a third of a shekel annually for the services of the Temple and would
bring first-fruits and tithes (Nehemiah 10:28).

21. Modern Theories of the Return:

The course of the history as here set forth has been disputed by some modern scholars, who
hold that there was no return of the exiles under Cyrus and that the rebuilding of the Temple
was the work of the Jews who remained behind in Judah and Jerusalem (EB, article "Ezra-
Nehemiah"). This view, held by the late Professor Kosters of Leyden and supported by
Professor H. P. Smith and other scholars, proceeds largely upon the rejection of the historical
character of the Book of Ezra-Nehemiah. The historical difficulties which are found in the book
are by no means such as to warrant us in denying the fact of the Return and the work of Ezra
in connection with Nehemiah. As regards the Return, the course of the narrative is too well
supported by documents which bear upon them the stamp of historical truth to be rashly
disputed. Moreover, it seems highly improbable that an enterprise requiring such energy and
skill and faith should have been undertaken, without stimulus from without, by the residue of
the people. We have already seen how little initiative was to be expected of the poorest of the
people; and the silence of Haggai, on the subject of the Return, is no argument against it. That
the Judaism of Palestine required invigoration by an infusion of the zeal and enthusiasm which
grew up in the Judaism of Babylonian, is manifest from the story of the Captivity.

22. Importance of the Period Ezra-Nehemiah:

From the age of Nehemiah and the period immediately preceding it came influences of the
utmost moment for the future. "Within these hundred years," says the late Dr. P. Hay Hunter in
After the Exile (I, xvi), "the teaching of Moses was established as the basis of the national life,
the first steps were taken toward the formation of a canon of Scripture. Jewish society was
moulded into a shape which succeeding centuries modified, but did not essentially change.
During this period the Judea of the days of our Lord came into being. Within this period the
forces which opposed Christ, the forces which rallied to His side, had their origin. This century
saw the rise of parties, which afterward became sects under the names of Pharisees and
Sadducees. It laid the foundation of Rabbinism. It fixed the attitude of the Jews toward the
Gentiles. It put the priesthood in the way to supreme authority. It gave birth to the Samaritan
schism."

LITERATURE.

Schrader, COT, I; McCurdy, HPM, I, 281, II, 249, III; C. F. Barney, Notes on Heb Text of Bks of
Kings; Foakes-Jackson, Biblical Hist of the Hebrews, 260-412; G. A. Smith, Jerusalem, II, 223-
349; Cambridge Biblical Essays, 93-135; P. Hay Hunter, The Story of Daniel and After the
Exile; EB, article "Ezra-Nehemiah"; Nicol, Recent Archaeology and the Bible, 239-78; H. P.
Smith, Old Testament Hist, 219-412; Kittel, History of the Hebrews, II, 329.

Reading: Daniel by R. Dick Wilson

1. Early Life:

We know nothing of the early life of Daniel, except what is recorded in the book bearing his
name. Here it is said that he was one of the youths of royal or noble seed, who were carried
captive by Nebuchadnezzar in the third year of Jehoiakim, king of Judah. These youths were
without blemish, well-favored, skillful in all wisdom, endued with knowledge, and understanding
science, and such as had ability to stand in the king's palace. The king commanded to teach
them the knowledge and tongue of the Chaldeans; and appointed for them a daily portion of
the king's food and of the wine which he drank. After having been thus nourished for three
years, they were to stand before the king. Ashpenaz, the master or chief of the eunuchs, into
whose hands they had been entrusted, following a custom of the time, gave to each of these
youths a new and Babylonian name. To Daniel, he gave the name Belteshazzar.

In Babylonian this name was probably Belu-lita-sharri-usur, which means "O Bel, protect thou
the hostage of the king," a most appropriate name for one in the place which Daniel occupied
as a hostage of Jehoiakim at the court of the king of Babylon. The youths were probably from
12 to 15 years of age at the time when they were carried captive. (For changes of names,
compare Joseph changed to Zaphenath-paneah (Genesis 41:45); Eliakim, to Jehoiakim
(2 Kings 23:34); Mattaniah, to Zedekiah (2 Kings 24:17); and the two names of the high priest
Johanan's brother in the Sachau Papyri, i.e. Ostan and Anani.)

Having purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the food and drink of the
king, Daniel requested of Ashpenaz permission to eat vegetables and drink water. Through the
favor of God, this request was granted, notwithstanding the fear of Ashpenaz that his head
would be endangered to the king on account of the probably resulting poor appearance of the
youths living upon this blood-diluting diet, in comparison with the expected healthy appearance
of the others of their class. However, ten days' trial having been first granted, and at the end of
that time their countenances having been found fairer and their flesh fatter than the other
youths', the permission was made permanent; and God gave to Daniel and his companions
knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom, and to Daniel understanding in all visions and
dreams; so that at the end of the three years when the king communed with them, he found
them much superior to all the magicians and enchanters in every matter of wisdom and
understanding.

2. Dream-Interpreter:

Daniel's public activities were in harmony with his education. His first appearance was as an
interpreter of the dream recorded in Da 2. Nebuchadnezzar having seen in his dream a vision
of a great image, excellent in brightness and terrible in appearance, its head of fine gold, its
breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of brass, its legs of iron, its feet part of iron
and part of clay, beheld a stone cut out without hands smiting the image and breaking it in
pieces, until it became like chaff and was carried away by the wind; while the stone that smote
the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. When the king awoke from his
troubled sleep, he forgot, or reigned that he had forgotten, the dream, and summoned the wise
men of Babylon both to tell him the dream and to give the interpretation thereof. The wise men
having said that they could not tell the dream, nor interpret it as long as it was untold, the king
threatened them with death. Daniel, who seems not to have been present when the other wise
men were before the king, when he was informed of the threat of the king, and that
preparations were being made to slay all of the wise men of Babylon, himself and his three
companions included, boldly went in to the king and requested that he would appoint a time for
him to appear to show the interpretation, Then he went to his house, and he and his
companions prayed, and the dream and its interpretation were made known unto Daniel. At the
appointed time, the dream was explained and the four Hebrews were loaded with wealth and
given high positions in the service of the king. In the 4th chapter, we have recorded Daniel's
interpretation of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar about the great tree that was hewn at the
command of an angel, thus prefiguring the insanity of the king.

3. Interpreter of Signs:

Daniel's third great appearance in the book is in chapter 5, where he is called upon to explain
the extraordinary writing upon the wall of Belshazzar's palace, which foretold the end of the
Babylonian empire and the incoming of the Medes and Persians. For this service Daniel was
clothed with purple, a chain of gold put around his neck, and he was made the third ruler in the
kingdom.

4. Seer of Visions:

Daniel, however, was not merely an interpreter of other men's visions. In the last six chapters
we have recorded four or five of his own visions, all of which are taken up with revelations
concerning the future history of the great world empires, especially in their relation to the
people of God, and predictions of the final triumph of the Messiah's kingdom.

5. Official of the Kings:

In addition to his duties as seer and as interpreter of signs and dreams, Daniel also stood high
in the governmental service of Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, and Darius the Mede, and
perhaps also of Cyrus. The Book of Dnl, our only reliable source of information on this subject,
does not tell us much about his civil duties and performances. It does say, however, that he
was chief of the wise men, that he was in the gate of the king, and that he was governor over
the whole province of Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar; that Belshazzar made him the third
ruler in his kingdom; and that Darius made him one of the three presidents to whom his
hundred and twenty satraps were to give account; and that he even thought to set him over his
whole kingdom. In all of these positions he seems to have conducted himself with faithfulness
and judgment.
While in the service of Darius the Mede, he aroused the antipathy of the other presidents and
of the satraps. Unable to find any fault with his official acts, they induced the king to make a
decree, apparently general in form and purpose, but really aimed at Daniel alone. They saw
that they could find no valid accusation against him, unless they found it in connection with
something concerning the law of his God. They therefore caused the king to make a decree
that no one should make a request of anyone for the space of thirty days, save of the king.
Daniel, having publicly prayed three times a day as he was in the habit of doing, was caught in
the act, accused, and on account of the irrevocability of a law of the Medes and Persians, was
condemned in accordance with the decree to be cast into a den of lions. The king was much
troubled at this, but was unable to withhold the punishment. However, he expressed to Daniel
his belief that his God in whom he trusted continually would deliver him; and so indeed it came
to pass. For in the morning, when the king drew near to the mouth of the den, and called to
him, Daniel said that God had sent His angel and shut the mouths of the lions. So Daniel was
taken up unharmed, and at the command of the king his accusers, having been cast into tile
den, were destroyed before they reached the bottom.

LITERATURE.

Besides the commentaries and other works mentioned in the article on the Book of Daniel,
valuable information may be found in Josephus and in Payne Smith's Lectures on Daniel.

Reading: Nehemiah by R. Dick Wilson

Nehemiah, the son of Hacaliah, is the Jewish patriot whose life is recorded in the Biblical work
named after him. All that we know about him from contemporary sources is found in this book;
and so the readers of this article are referred to the Book of Nehemiah for the best and fullest
account of his words and deeds.

See EZRA-NEHEMIAH.

1. Family:

All that is known of his family is that he was the son of Hacaliah (Nehemiah 1:1) and that one
of his brothers was called Hanani (Nehemiah 1:2; 7:2); the latter a man of sufficient character
and importance to have been made a ruler of Jerusalem.

From Nehemiah 10:1-8 some have inferred that he was a priest, since Nehemiah comes first in
the list of names ending with the phrase, "these were the priests." This view is supported by
the Syriac and Arabic versions of 10:1, which read:

"Nehemiah the elder, the son of Hananiah the chief of the priests"; and by the Latin Vulgate
(Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) of 2 Macc 1:21, where he is called "Nehemiah the priest,"
and possibly by 2 Macc 1:18, where it is said that Nehemiah "offered sacrifices, after that he
had builded the temple and the altar."

The argument based upon Nehemiah 10:1-8 will fall to the ground, if we change the pointing of
the "Seraiah" of the 3rd verse and read "its princes," referring back to the princes of 10:1. In
this case, Nehemiah and Zedekiah would be the princes; then would come the priests and then
the Levites.

Some have thought that he was of the royal line of Judah, inasmuch as he refers to his
"fathers' sepulchres" at Jerusalem (Nehemiah 2:3). This would be a good argument only if it
could be shown that none but kings had sepulchers at Jerusalem.
It has been argued again that he was of noble lineage because of his position as cupbearer to
the king of Persia. To substantiate this argument, it would need to be shown that none but
persons of noble birth could serve in this position; but this has not been shown, and cannot be
shown.

2. Youth:

From the fact that Nehemiah was so grieved at the desolation of the city and sepulchers of his
fathers and that he was so jealous for the laws of the God of Judah, we can justly infer that he
was brought up by pious parents, who instructed him in the history and law of the Jewish
people.

3. King's Cupbearer:

Doubtless because of his probity and ability, he was apparently at an early age appointed by
Artaxerxes, king of Persia, to the responsible position of cupbearer to the king. There is now no
possible doubt that this King his king was Artaxerxes, the first of that name, commonly called
Longimanus, who ruled over Persia from 464 to 424 BC. The mention of the sons of Sanballat,
governor of Samaria, in a letter written to the priests of Jerusalem in 407 BC, among whom
Johanan is especially named, proves that Sanballat must have ruled in the time of Artaxerxes I
rather than in that of Artaxerxes II.

The office of cupbearer was "one of no trifling honor" (Herod. iii.34). It was one of his chief
duties to taste the wine for the king to see that it was not poisoned, and he was even admitted
to the king while the queen was present (Nehemiah 2:6). It was on account of this position of
close intimacy with the king that Nehemiah was able to obtain his commission as governor of
Judea and the letters and edicts which enabled him to restore the walls of Jerusalem.

4. Governor of Judea:

The occasion of this commission was as follows:

Hanani, the brother of Nehemiah, and other men of Judah came to visit Nehemiah while he
was in Susa in the 9th month of the 20th year of Artaxerxes. They reported that the Jews in
Jerusalem were in great affliction and that the wall thereof was broken down and its gates
burned with fire. Thereupon he grieved and fasted and prayed to God that he might be granted
favor by the king. Having appeared before the latter in the 1st month of the 21st year of
Artaxerxes, 444 BC, he was granted permission to go to Jerusalem to build the city of his
fathers' sepulchers, and was given letters to the governors of Syria and Palestine and
especially to Asaph, the keeper of the king's forest, ordering him to supply timber for the wall,
the fortress, and the temple. He was also appointed governor of the province of which
Jerusalem was the capital.

Armed with these credentials and powers he repaired to Jerusalem and immediately set about
the restoration of the walls, a work in which he was hindered and harassed by Sanballat, the
governor of Samaria, and others, some of them Jews dwelling in Jerusalem. Notwithstanding,
he succeeded in his attempt and eventually also in providing gates for the various entrances to
the city.

Having accomplished these external renovations, he instituted a number of social reforms. He

appointed the officers necessary for better government, caused the people to be instructed in
the Law by public readings, and expositions; celebrated the Feast of Tabernacles; and
observed a national fast, at which the sins of the people were confessed and a new covenant
with Yahweh was solemnly confirmed. The people agreed to avoid marriages with the heathen,
to keep the Sabbath, and to contribute to the support of the temple. To provide for the safety
and prosperity of the city, one out of every ten of the people living outside Jerusalem was
compelled to settle in the city. In all of these reforms he was assisted by Ezra, who had gone
up to Jerusalem in the 7th year of Artaxerxes.

5. Death:

Once, or perhaps oftener, during his governorship Nehemiah returned to the king. Nothing is
known as to when or where he died. It is certain, however, that he was no longer governor in
407 BC; for at that time according to the Aramaic letter written from Elephantine to the priests
of Jerusalem, Bagohi was occupying the position of governor over Judea. One of the last acts
of Nehemiah's government was the chasing away of one of the sons of Joiada, the son of
Eliashib, because he had become the son-in-law to Sanballat, the governor of Samaria. As this
Joiada was the father of Johanan (Nehemiah 12:22) who, according to the Aramaic papyrus,
was high priest in 407 BC, and according to Josephus (Ant., XI, viii.1) was high priest while
Bagohi (Bogoas) was general of Artaxerxes' army, it is certain that Nehemiah was at this time
no longer in power. From the 3rd of the Sachau papyri, it seems that Bagohi was already
governor in 410 BC; and, that at the same time, Dalayah, the son of Sanballat, was governor in
Samaria. More definite information on these points is not to be had at present.

LITERATURE.

The only early extra-Biblical data with regard to Nehemiah and the Judea of his times are to be
found:

(1) in the Egyptian papyri of Elephantine ("Aramaische Papyri und Ostraka aus einer judischen
Militar-Kolonie zu Elephantine," Altorientalische Sprachdenkmaler des 5. Jahrhunderts vor
Chr., Bearbeitet von Eduard Sachau. Leipzig, 1911);

(2)in Josephus, Ant, XI, vi, 6-8; vii, 1, 2;

(3) in Ecclesiasticus 49:13, where it is said:

"The renown of Nehemiah is glorious; of him who established our waste places and restored
our ruins, and set up the gates and bars"; (4) and lastly in 2 Macc 1:18-36 and 2:13; in the
latter of these passages it speaks of `the writings and commentaries of Nehemiah; and how he,
founding a library, gathered together the acts of the kings and the prophets and of David and
the epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts.'