** Some wr iters, however, have regarded this "Chabor" as representing not the well-known river,

but a smaller affluent of the Tigris, north of Nineveh. Similarly, it has been maintained that the

right rendering would be "the river Gozan," a river flowing into the Ca spian Sea. Thus, while all

writers are approximately at one as to the general direction of the place of exile, there are

sufficient divergences to make the precise district and localities matter of controversy.

"Gozan" - Gausanitis - the Assyrian Gu -za -nu, is a district in Mesopotamia traversed by the

Chabor (Ass., Ha -bur), the "great" river, with "verdant banks," which springs near Nisibis, and is

navigable long before it drains the waters of Gozan into the Euphrates. The last district mentioned

lies east of the others. "Media" is the province stretching east of the Zagros Mountains, and north

to the Caspian Sea, or rather to the Elbur mountain -chain, which runs parallel to its southern shore.

Its "cities" had only lately been overrun by the Assyrian conqueror. In them the legendary book of

Tobit still places these exiles* (Tobit 1:14; 3:7).

* But the supposition that the birthplace of the prophet Nahum was the Elkosh not far from

Nineveh, and on the left bank of the Tigris, is at least unproved.

The account of the Ten Tribes by Josephus adds little to our knowledge. He describes them as "an

immense multitude, not to be estimated by numbers," and as located "beyond the Euphrates" (Ant.

11. 5, 2). Equally, if not even more vague, are the later references t o them in 4 Esdras, and in

Rabbinic writings.* From all this we may infer that there was no longer any reliable historical

information on the subject.

* See the quotations as to the fate of the Ten Tribes in Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, i. pp.

On another point, however, we have important information. We know that with these exiles went

their priests (2 Kings 17:27), although not of Levitical descent (2 Chronicles 11:14). Thus the

strange mixture of the service of the Lord and foreign rites must have continued. In the course of

time the heathen elements would naturally multiply and assume greater prominence, unless,

indeed, the people learned repentance by national trials, or from higher teaching. Of this there is

not any evidence in the case of Israel; and if the footsteps of these wanderers shall ever be clearly

tracked, we expect to find them with a religion composed of various rites, but prevailingly

heathen, yet with memories of their historical past in traditions, observances, and customs, as well

as in names, and bearing the marks of it even in their outward appearance.

On yet another point does the testimony of the Assyrian records confirm the Biblical narrative.

From the inscriptions we learn that Sargon transported to Samaria, in room of the exiled Israelites,

inhabitants of countries conquered by him. And when in 2 Kings 17:24 we read that these new

colonists were "brought from Babylon, and from Cuthah, and from Ava and from Hamath, and

from Sepharvaim," we recognize the names of places which, according to the Assyrian

inscriptions, were conquered by Sargon, and whence, as was his wont, he deported the

* It has, we think, been fully established that the deportation mentioned in 2 Kings 17:24 was that

made by Sargon, and not the later one by Esar-haddon (Ezra 4:2).

From the inscriptions we further learn that these transportations were successive, and that even the

earliest of them did not take place immediately on the removal of the Israelites. Thus we

understand ho w lions, so numerous in Palestine at one time, but gradually diminished with the

growth of the population, once more increased among the scanty and scattered settlers. The sacred

historian recognizes in this the hand of the LORD.*