Ty "work of my hands," (comp. lx. 21; lxiv. 7 and often), but Israel retains the name of honor 'nn, "mine inheritance," for thereby it is characterized as the actual son of the house world powers represent the entire earth. From B) THE ASSYRIAN CAPTIVITY OF EGYPT. This chapter, whose date is exactly determined | But to that conversion of Egypt spoken of xix. by the historical notices of ver. 1 in connection 18 sqq., outward distresses also must contribute. with ver. 3 (comp. the introduction to chapters prevailed in the period when chapters xix. xx. These, according to the political relations that xvii.-xx.), is related to chap. xix., with which it originated, can proceed only from Assyria. At is manifestly contemporaneous, as a completion. the same time this weighty lesson resulted from Thus chap. xix. speaks chiefly of the visitations these things, that Judah in its then felation to that shall overtake Egypt, by means of catastro- Assyria and Egypt must not rely on Egypt for phes of its inward political and natural life. protection against Assyria. 1 In the year that Tartan came unto Ashdod, (when Sargon the king of Assyria 2 sent him), and fought against Ashdod, and took it; at the same time spake the LORD by 'Isaiah the son of Amoz, saying, Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot, And he did so, walking naked and 3 barefoot. And the LORD said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder 'upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia; so shall the king of Assyria lead away 'the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks un5 covered, to the shame of Egypt. And they shall be afraid and ashamed of Ethio6 pia their expectation, and of Egypt their glory. And the inhabitant of this isle shall say in that day, Behold, such is our expectation, whither we flee for help to be delivered from the king of Assyria: and how shall we escape? 4 Ver. 2. One must carefully note that what follows im- | must be connected with a verb understood. Compare mediately on the formula of announcement," 17 GREEN., § 273, 3. Ver. 3. Dh occasions difficulty. The interpretation is altogether ungrammatical that takes these words in the sense: "in three years shall be fulfilled what this symbolical act signifies." The words can only be made to relate to, or, according to the accents, to what follows; but in either case must be taken in the sense "for three years." Regarding the words only grammatically, the nearest meaning that offers is: "like my servant Isaiah has gone three years," etc. For were it said: "like my servant goes for three years," why then does it not read Or if the meaning were: "like my servant will go," why then does it not read is לאמר in the beginning of ver. 3 like ויאמר י) .lows subordinate to the more intensive 7, and introduces the second stage of the revelation announced by 11 727 The expression for the human organ of the divine revelation occurs in Isaiah only here. In Jeremiah, too, it occurs only xxxvii. 2; 1. 1.-Note the constr. praegn. ?? Although the Hebrew perfect indicates directly only that something actually occurs objectively without reference to the time, still the fact must belong to some time; and if neither an internal nor external sign in 'n by pʊn nnng where the preposition points to the present nor future, then we are obliged to as take the verbal form that designates facta just in the Ver. 4. D is held by EWALD ( 211, c, Anm. 2: (DElitzsch, DIETRICH) hold this form, like (in xix. 8), foot for a type of three years long" (tribus annis comple- chaic ending of the Construct State, of which the punctuators had availed themselves "in order to avoid the disagreeable sound that would be occasioned by the following ." But then they would often have had to resort to this change. It appears to me of course probable that the pointing is to be charged to the Masorets. But did not prompt them to this; it was the foregoing singulars. They sup -as singular to cor חשופי posed they must punctuate | אות ומופת but on הלד is to depend not on שלש שנים then must the dependence be indicated corresponding to the sense. The mere Accusative then durst not be used. If Isaiah was for three years long a type, then must he three years long go naked. But did he go naked only once or a few times, and were only the typical significance of this going naked to extend to three years, then it must read D' respond with these. Therefore I believe that " is to be regarded as a singular like the , etc., named above, but that it is set in the place of the original by tradition only. But " y is partly conditioned by ver. 3, partly it is to be treated as an ideal number (xxiv. 22). אות or .חשופי שׁי The latter construction would not .וּמוֹפַת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים be incorrect, as STADE (p. 68) seems to assume, in as much as ID IN, as to sense, form only one notion (comp. Ezek. xxxi. 16). is in apposition with ערות מי Vers. 5 and 6. , that to which one looks (hoping and trusting) occurs in Isaiah only in these two verses. Beside this in Zech. ix. 5.- comp. x. 3; xxxi.1. EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL. 1. In the year when the Tartan, i. e. comman- | 17.--As regards Sargon, it is now settled by der-in-chief of king Sargon of Assyria, came against Ashdod to besiege the city-which he also took after a comparatively short siege, Isaiah received commandment from the LORD to take off his garment made of bad sack linen and his sandals, and to go about naked and barefoot (vers. 1, 2). For the incredible thing shall happen that the Egyptians and Ethiopians, shall be compelled to go into captivity naked and barefoot, like Isaiah goes about, (vers. 3, 4). Thereupon all inhabitants of the sea-board of Palestine, will, with terror and shame, be sensible how wrong they were to confide in the power and glory of Ethiopia and Egypt (ver. 5). They will say: Thus it has gone with the power from whom we expected protection; how now shall it go with us? (ver. 6). 2. In the year—barefoot.-Vers. 1, 2. According to the testimony of Assyrian monuments, Tartan is not a proper name, but an appellative. It is the "Assyrian official name for the commander-in-chief." In Assyrian the word sounds tur-ta nu, and is, to the present, of unknown derivation. On the Assyrian list of recents that is communicated by SCHRADER(Die Keilinschriften u. das A. T., Giessen, 1872, p. 323 sqq.) it reads (obvers. 9): "Mardukiluya, Tartan, to the city Gozan (obv. 38); Samsulu, Tartan, to Armenia (obv. 48); Samsulu, Tartan, to the city Surat (Reverse 19); Samsulu, Tartan, in the land (Rev. 32); Nabudaninanni, Tartan, to the city Arpad." Thus the ordering of these high officers to their various posts of administration is designated. The word "Tartan" occurs again in the Old Testament, only 2 Kings xviii. documentary proof that Salmanassar and Sargon are not one person. The Assyrian canon of regents, which the great work of inscriptions by RAWLINSON, Vol. ÌII., communicates in amended form (comp. SCHRADER, 1. c., p. 317) contains as fifth Eponyme of that administration that followed Tuklat-habal-asar, i. e., Tiglath-Pileser, the name Sal-ma-nu-âsir (another form Sal-manâsir): and RAWLINSON (Athenaeum, 1867, No. 2080, p. 304, comp. SCHRADER in Stud. and Krit., 1872, IV. p. 737) remarks on this: "Salmanassar IV., (for there were three older Salmanassars) ascended the throne in the year 727 B. C., for which year there was already an Eponyme established, so that he could only enter on his Archonship in 723." But Sargon came to the administration in the course of the year 722 B. C. He is mentioned in the Old Testament only in our passage. whereas the monuments offer just about his reign the richest results. His name in Assyrian is Sarrukin, which by the Assyrians themselves, is construed partly as Sarrukin, i. e. "mighty the king," or "the right king," partly as Sarruakin, i. e. "He (God) appointed the king" (comp. ). Sargon is the builder of North Nineveh or Dur-Sarrukin, now Khorsabad, whose monuments, with their inscriptions of the most various sorts, are a most valuable source of historical information (comp. SCHRADER, Keilinschriften, p. 256 sqq.). The following is the account of the conquest of Ashdod as the Khorsabad inscription gives it according to SCHRADER'S (l. c., p. 259 sqq.) translation. “Azu ri, king of Ashdod, hardened his heart to pay no - year. Perhaps the divided state of the inhabitants of Ashdod was to blame for this speedy capture. That there was an Assyrian party among them appears from the inscription communicated above. tribute and sent demands to the princes of his long at that time. The capture followed, accordneighborhood to revolt from Assyria. According to the inscriptions (see above), in the same ingly I did vengeance and changed his government over the inhabitants of his territory. Achimit, his brother, I set over them in the government in his place. The Syrians, that meditated revolt, despised his dominion and raised up Iaman over themselves, who had no claim to the throne, and who, like those, refused to own the dominion. In the burning wrath of my heart I did not assemble my whole power, took no concern for baggage. With my men of war, who separated not themselves from me behind the raising of my arms, I advanced on Ashdod. That Iaman, when he perceived the approach of my army from far, fled to a region (?) of Egypt, which lay on the borders of Meroe; not a trace of him was to be seen. Ashdod, Gimt-Asdudim (?) I besieged, took it; his gods, his wife, his sons, the treasures, possessions, valuables of his palace, along with the inhabitants of his land I appointed to captivity. Those cities I restored; I colonized there the inhabitants of the lands that my hands had conquered, that are in the midst of the East; I made them like the Assyrians; they rendered obediThe king of Meroe, who in the midst of a desert region, on a path. whose fathers since remote times down to (this time) had not sent their ambassadors to my royal ancestors, to entreat peace for himself: the might of Merodach (overpowered him), a mighty fear came over him, fear seized him. In bonds ence. iron chains he laid him (Iaman); he directed his steps toward Assyria and appeared before me." If we compare the annals of Sargon, which register year by year the deeds of this king, we find that in the year of his beginning to reign (722), which is not reckoned as his first year, he conquered Samaria; in the second year (720) he conquered king Sevech of Egypt in the battle of Raphia and took prisoner king Hanno of Gaza; in the eleventh year (711) he made war on Azuri of Ashdod and conquered the city, after which the king of Ethiopia sued for peace (SCHRADER, l. c., p. 264 sq.). In all, Sargon reigned seventeen years (until 705). The monuments and the Prophet mutually complete one another. If from the former we see the occasion, the nearer circumstances and the time of the expedition against Ashdod, the Prophet, on the other hand, informs us that it was not Sargon himself that conducted the undertaking, as might appear from the monuments. It was the constant usage of those Asiatic potentates, to which there are only a few exceptions, to register the deeds of the leaders of their armies as their own on the monuments. Comp. SCHRADER, Stud. u. Krit., 1872, IV. p. 743. Moreover from the contents of the Khorsabad inscription it is seen that Ashdod was not at that time visited for the first by the Assyrians, as also on the other hand it appears that Egypt had already experienced emphatically the might of the Assyrian arm. For without any campaign, merely out of fear of that arm, the Egyptian-Ethiopian king surrendered the fugitive Iaman. As regards the time, our prophecy, according to the inscription, falls in the year 711, thus in the eleventh year of king Sargon's reign. The siege of Ashdod, for which later Psammetichus required twenty-five years (HEROD. 2, 157), appears not to have lasted The phrase ", and he fought against, etc., is parenthetical. As to the sense, it is in so far an historical anticipation that the taking did not follow after what is related in ver. 2. But in relation to ver. 3, that phrase is no anticipation. For the meaning of the typical action, if my interpretation of "three years" is correct, can only have been signified three years later. Consequently the entire chapter can not have been written earlier than three years after the "coming of the Tartan" mentioned in ver. 1. In as much as this "coming of the Tartan" is taken as the point of departure for the course of events, while the conquest is only mentioned in parenthesis, as a side affair, the Prophet likely received the command of ver. 2, about the time of that "coming," therefore before the capture. By implication, therefore, there lay in the command at the same time a prediction of that conquest of Ashdod. For the conquest of Egypt presupposes the taking of the outworks. Therefore the point of the prophecy also is directed against Egypt. At the same time is related to "In the year that the Tartan came" as a wider sphere, as cer tainly as the notion is more comprehensive than the notion . The following contains indeed, information concerning two facts: first concerning the command to go naked, and second, concerning the interpretation that followed after three years. To these refer those two dates, the narrower and the broader, as a matter of course, the first date corresponding to the first fact and the second to the second fact. Therewith is closely connected that the sentence "spake the LORD. . . saying," introduces the entire revelation contained in what follows. (See under Text. and Gram.). It is not accidental that Isaiah is called here by his complete name, Isaiah the son of Amoz. For this happens, beside the present, only i. 1 and ii. 1, therefore only in the first and second introduction; then xiii. 1 (in the beginning of the prophecies against the nations) and xxxvii. 21, where is related the comforting reply that Isaiah was the means of giving to Hezekiah after the threatening of Sennacherib. By the designation of the Prophet as the son of Amoz" is signified, as appears to m, that there exists a contrast between this name and what is related of Isaiah in this chapter. It is likely no error to assume that a son of Amoz" was a man of importance. this man of noble descent must for three years, when he let himself be seen publicly, go about like a wretched prisoner in the utmost scanty clothing. For that Isaiah went wholly naked is not conceivable. Anciently, indeed, one was regarded as naked who took off the upper garment comp. nudus aru, sere nudus in VIRGIL, Georg. I. 299; PETRON. 92; Joh. xxi. 7; HERZ. R. Ency. VII., p. 725). We observe from this passage that Isaiah constantly wore a sack, as chief and upper garment, i. e. a sack-like garment and made of And | them by what it cost him to give it. For the It was Sign and wonder is a sort of Hendiadys, in as much as to the first notion a second is co-ordinated, that properly is only something subordi nate to that first: sign and portent for portentous sign. In as far as the nakedness of the Prophet represented the misery of the Egyptians generally, it is a sign of it; but in as far as it represented this misery in advance as something future it is a portentous sign. sackcloth. The sack-garment was sign of deep mourning and repentance generally (iii. 24; xv. 3; Gen. xxxvii. 34; Dan. ix. 3; Matth. xi. 21, and often. It was variously worn: partly next to the skin (1 Kings xxi. 27), partly over the under-garment, the "tunic," as was the case, e. g. with Isaiah, and as appears generally to have been a prophet's costume. For, according to 2 Kings i. 8, Elijah wore a hairy garment with a leather girdle, which clothing, Zech. xiii. 4, is described as a prophet's costume generally. John the Baptist, too, wore it, certainly in special imitation of Elijah (Matth. iii. 4; comp. Heb. xi. 37; Rev. xi. 3). Now when Isaiah received command to take off the sack garment and his sandals, it was that he should make himself a living symbol of the extremest ignominy, and of the deepest misery. Not to Judah, however, but to Egypt is this sorrowful fate announced. Judah is only to draw from it the lesson that it must not lean on Egypt for support. For this was the great and ruinous error of the time of Hezekiah, that men supposed they could only find protection To the present, nothing definite is known of against Assyria in Egypt. Against this the Pro- any invasion of Egypt by the Assyrians. The phet strives earnestly in chapters xxviii.-xxxii. Assyrian monuments, however, tell us that the kings Esarhaddon and Asurbanipal (Sardana3. And the LORD said - —we escape.- palus) conquered Egypt. The first on a brick Vers. 3-6. [On the construction of "three years," inscription (SCHRADER, . c. p. 210) calls himsee under Text. and Gram.; also for a grammatical self: "king of the kings" of Egypt; and his son objection to the sense: "like my servant has gone Asurbanipal says in his cylinder inscription naked and barefoot as a three years sign," etc. A (SCHRADER l. c. 212) “Esarhaddon—my progenifurther objection is as follows.-TR.] If the typical tor went down and penetrated into the midst of meaning of the sign was to remain in force only Egypt. He gave Tirhaka king of Ethiopia a three years, then, too, the fulfilment must actually defeat, destroyed his military power. Egypt and follow after three years, or the prophecy prove to Ethiopia he conquered; countless prisoners he led be false. For what can this mean: the going naked forth," etc. Asurbanipal himself seems to have of the Prophet shall be three years long a sign? prepared a still worse fate for the Egyptians Only this after three years the type ceases to be under Tirhaka's successor, Rud-Amon. For he type, and becomes fulfilment. If that does not relates the following in one of his inscriptions come to pass, then the sign was an erroneous one (SCHRADER, l. c. 288): "Trusting in Asur, Sin and misleading. It is no use here to regard the and the great gods, my lords, they (my troops) number three as a round number that is only to brought on him in a broad plain a defeat and be understood "summatim" (STADE, p. 67). smote his troop forces. Undamana (Rud-Amon) For the measures of time of fulfilment, in conse- fled alone, and went to No, his royal city (Thebes). quence of the imperfection of our human know- In a march of a month and ten days they moved ledge about the real length of historical periods, after him over pathless ways, took that city in its or because of the difficulty of knowing the points entire circuit, purged it away like chaff. Gold, of beginning and ending, may very well be re-silver, the dust of their land, drawn off metal, presented as only an approximation. But a mea- precious stones, the treasure of his palace, garsure of time which is named as an earnest pledgements of Berom (?) and Kum, great horses, men of a future transaction, must not prove to be in- and women,. . . pagi and ukupi the yield of their correct, if the earnest itself is not to be found mountains in countless quantity, they bore forth treacherous. But Egypt was not conquered by out of it, appointed them to captivity; to Nineveh, the Assyrians three years after the siege of Ash-my seat of dominion they brought them in peace, and dod, but much later, as will be seen immediately. they kissed my feet." Comp. too, ibid. p. 290. As, Therefore the Prophet cannot have proposed a according to the Apisstelen Tirhaka died in the year three years' validity of that sign. But he went 664, SCHRADER fixes the date of this conquest of three years naked and barefoot, in order to set Thebes about the year 663 B. C. This monubefore the eyes of his people very emphatically mental notice is of great importance for the unand impressively the image of how wretched derstanding of Nah. iii. 8-11, and partly, too, Egypt had become. And only after three years for Isa. xix. and for our passage. From this, as followed the interpretation for the same reason. also from the other Assyrian communications For three years the men of Judah and Jerusalem | cited above, we learn that our prophecy, given in were to meditate and inquire: why does the the year 708 received a double fulfilment: one in Prophet go about in scanty and wretched garb? the time of Asarhaddon, who reigned from 681 When at length after three years they learned: to 668, the other by means of Asurbanipal about this happened for the purpose of parading before the year 663. Therefore, not after three years, your eyes the misery of Egypt conquered by As- but in the course of the fourth and fifth decade evria, then they could measure the worth and after its publication was it fulfilled importance of the warning that the Prophet gave Egypt's shame [see under Text. and Gram.). Did not the Prophet, who for his own person assuredly wore only the lightest Israelitish costume, have here in mind, perhaps, those costumes of the common Egyptians, that allowed the form to appear prominent, which, seen in foreign lands, were well fitted to provoke scorn for Egypt? Comp. e. g. the illustrations in WILKINSON'S, The ancient Egyptians. no command of God are works of our own hands, and because they are without the word of God, they are impious and condemned, especially if the notion of righteousness attaches to them, on which account, also, they are reproved here."— LUTHER. Oser or Osir. And indeed he would have us take as the fundamental meaning of the word, either "beatus," (N), or combine it with "to look," so that Osiris would be as Sun-god, the all seeing, sharp looking (rohvóóðahμos), mus then, as feminine of , would be Isis! 3. On xvii. 8 (0); VITRINGA proposes the conjecture that Osiris is to be derived from It is plain that in ver. 6 the Prophet means, which the Egyptians may have pronounced the Israelites and their neighbors. It is a sign of displeasure and discontent when one addresses a person that is present in the third person. The expression "the isle" in ver. 6 is to be noted. The expression (comp. the singular xxiii. 2, 6) is nowhere else used of the Holy land. But the Prophet also means, not merely this, but the entire coast of Palestine, which, because is not a proper name, but appellative, he can very well call For, as the conquest of Ashdod itself and the preceding events (comp. the Sargon Inscription, SCHRADER, p. 76) testify, the Phoenicians also, and the Philistines, who shared with Israel in the possession of the coast, were become a prey to the Assyrian power. When the strong power of Egypt and Ethiopia had proved too weak to bear the onset of Assyria, then, indeed, might the anxious thought arise in the hearts of the smaller nations that had joined themselves to Egypt: how is it now possible that we can be saved? STADE is of the opinion that, "the isle, or coast' means merely the city Ashdod, and that ver. 6 contains the words of the fugitive inhabitants of Ashdod, especially of Iaman. After the overthrow of Egypt the exclamation is put in the mouth of these: "quomodo nos effugere poteramus," (p. 43). But the assumption that the conquered inhabitants of the could not say: "how shall we be saved" is erroneous. They were indeed conquered; but as long as, still dwelling in their land, they saw trains of captives led past them, they are still in possession of their land, and can hope for a favorable turn of fortune, and the shaking off of the foreign yoke. Only the captive carried into exile is finally without hope. Only this final and greatest degree of misfortune do the inhabitants of the have in mind when they exclaim, “how shall we escape?" DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL. 1. On xvii. 1-3. "There are no makers of breaches in city and wall stronger than the sins of the inhabitants. When these strengthen and multiply themselves, then entire cities, well built fall over them, and become heaps of stones; as is to be seen in the case of Jericho, Nineveh, Babylon and Jerusalem itself. Therefore let no one put his trust in fortifications."-CRAMER. 2. On xvii. 7, 8. "Potuit hic," etc. "It may be objected here, are not the ark of the covenant and the temple in Jerusalem also work of men's hands? But the theological canon here is, that in every work regard must be had whether there is a word of God for it or not. Therefore such works as are done by God's command, those God does by means of us as by instruments. Thus those are called works of the law that are done by the law's command. But such works as are done by 4. On xvii. 10. "Si hanc," etc. "If so fearful a punishment followed this fault, thou seest what we have to hope for Germany, which not only forgets God, but despises, provokes, persecutes and abominates Him."-LUTHER. 5. On xvii. 14. "Although the evening is long for us, we must still have patience, and believe assuredly, sorrow is a forerunner of joy, disgust a forerunner of delight, death a forerunner of life." CRAMER. 66 6. On xviii. BOETTCHER (Neue exegetische kritische Aehrenl. II., p. 129) calls this chapter, exceeding difficult, perhaps the most difficult in the entire Old Testament." And in fact from the earliest to the most recent times expositors go asunder in the most remarkable manner in regard to the object and sense of the prophecy. JEROME and CYRIL referred the prophecy to Egypt. Others, but in different senses, referred it to Judea. EUSEBIUS of Cesarea held the view that, as JEROME says on our passage, “prophecy in the present chapter is directed against the Jews and Jerusalem, because in the beginning of Christian faith they sent letters to all nations lest they might accept the sufferings of Christ." " "CocCEIUS teaches that Judah is that land shadowed with wings, which (for he refers to wings) are beyond the rivers of Ethiopia" (VITRINGA). RASCHI and KIMCHI, likewise, refer the prophecy to the Jews, but they see in ver. 6 the overthrow of Gog and Magog, and understand the promised deliverance to refer to that greatest of all that would take place by means of the Messiah. Also VON HOFMANN (Schriftbew. II., 2 p. 215 sqq.) explains the passage to refer to "the return of the departed Israel from the remotest regions and by the service of nations of the world themselves, after that they shall have learned that great act of Jehovah and therewith the worth of His people and of His holy places." Others like PELLICAN think of the Roman Empire. ARIUS MONTANUS even casts his eyes over "to the new world converted to Christ by the preaching of the gospel and by the arms of Spain" (VITRINGA). 7. On xix. 1 b. "The passage recalls the myth concerning Typhon, which represents the Hyksos, who formerly coming from Asia subdued Egypt. The Egyptian gods were afraid (according to a later Greek tradition, which explained the Egyptian heads of beasts as masks, comp. DIESTEL in the Zeitschrift f. histor. Theol., 1860, 2, p. 178) of Typhon and hid themselves (PLUT. De Isid. et Osir., cap. 72); they resigned the wreaths when Typhon had received the kingdom (ATHEN. XV. 25, p |