and which, was derived from the other,** are questions which have been differently answered by

critics. Probably - for we are dealing in great measure with conjectures - both look back upon a

common original, which, in the Book of Kings and in the prophecies of Isaiah, is presented

respectively in a manner accordant with the spirit and object of each of those works.***

* We again repeat that we are leaving aside the difficult question of the relation between Biblical

and Assyrian chronology, for which - at least, in the judgment of the present writer - we have not

yet sufficient data. According to the Assyrian monuments, this expedition was the "third

campaign" of Sennacherib.

** The critics who suppose a mutual dependence of the two narratives are somewhat evenly

divided as to the priority of the one or the other. It will be understood that all here rests chiefly on

conjectural grounds.

*** This v iew, which seems to us most accordant with facts, and simplest, has been adopted by

many of the ablest writers of both schools of criticism.

It is another question whether this original account "in the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel"

was not written by the prophet Isaiah himself, as seems indicated in 2 Chronicles 32:32.* In any

case, the narrative in the Book of Chronicles, which, in accordance with its general spirit, so

largely dwells on the Temple reformation of Hezekiah, seems an abbreviated s ummary of the two

other accounts, although containing some notable peculiarities of its own.**

* Presumably these "prophetic annals" were the same as those referred to in 2 Kings 20:20.

** With these it is obviously impossible to deal in a book like the present. The reader must be

asked to believe that what is passed over does not involve any critical difficulty requiring special

The Biblical narrative opens with a brief reference to the first part of the campaign, when

Sennacherib detached a corps which laid waste Judah and took the principal towns along the

route* (2 Kings 18:13; Isaiah 36:1). In 2 Chronicles 32:1-8, the various preparations are also

noticed** which Hezekiah had made, with advice of "his princes and mighty men," when he felt

certain of the danger threatening Jerusalem.

* The expression, 2 Chronicles 32:1, "And purposed [lit., 'spake'] to win [or 'break up'] them for

himself," may refer to the detaching of the conquered towns from Judah, and their annexation to

his Phoenician and Philistine vassals, of which the Assyrian monuments make mention.

** Not necessarily all at one time, but all before the Assyrian advance from Lachish.

First among them was the cutting off of the water-supply for a besieging army. To the west o f

Jerusalem runs from north to south the valley of Gihon. The rain -water and that coming from the

hills around was stored in two pools, the upper (Isaiah 22:11 - the modern Birket Mamilla), and

the lower (Isaiah 22:9 -the modern Pool of the Patriarch*), wh ich were connected by an open

conduit.

* But, according to some, the modern Birket-es -Sultan.

As the upper pool lay outside the city walls}and would supply the wants of a besieging army,

Hezekiah covered it in, and by an aqueduct brought its waters into a large reservoir or "lake,"

"between the two walls" of the upper and the lower city (Isaiah 22:11; comp. 2 Kings 20:20; 2

Chronicles 32:30). But some writers conjecture* that in ancient times (although not at present)

there may have been a spring or brook near the upper port, which Hezekiah also covered in,

diverting its waters into the city** (2 Chronicles 32:30). Further, he repaired all the walls that