also did he send his former delegates to the Rabh-Shakeh, together with "the elders," probably the

chief officials, of the now reformed priesthood,* to Isaiah to bespeak his prayers.**

* This, as has been remarked, is instructive as showing the re lation between the priesthood and the

** By way of contrast, comp. Jeremiah 21:1, etc.

By a proverbial expression he indicated that in the time of Israel's utmost agony they had not

strength for deliverance, and were in danger of perishing. Bu t since the words of the Assyrian

were a challenge to God, He might "hear" them, and answer the "reproach" by a "rebuke;"

therefore let Isaiah pray for the remnant still left. Strange as it may sound, the strength of this plea

lay in the sense of felt weakness, which appeared in that the king called upon the prophet not to

interpose, but to pray, and even so felt not secure of an answer even to the prophet's prayer, but

rested his hope on the nature of the case.

There could not have been greater contrast than between the boastful confidence of the Assyrian in

his might and the absolute submission of Hezekiah to the LORD); nor yet could prayer have been

the outcome of clearer spiritual perception. Such prayer must have had its answer; and it came in

the ass urance that this very boastfulness of victory should give place to fear upon a rumor, and this

confidence be laid low when "the great king" should "fall by the sword," and that "in his own

* In 2 Kings 19:7 translate (as in the R.V.), "I will put a spirit in him," i.e., by the direct agency of

Jehovah, a spirit of fear would take the place of that of boastful confidence. The "tidings" (this,

rather than "rumor")refer on the one hand to the advance of the Egyptian army, which led to the

retrograde movement of Sennacherib, and on the other hand to the Divine visitation which

determined his return to "his own land." In ver. 6 we mark that the expression "servants," used for

the Assyrian ambassadors, is one of contempt, like the German Burschen (lads), or Buben, and

that their words are taken up as a blasphemous challenge to the LORD.

It was as had been said. The Rabh-Shakeh returned from his bootless expedition to his master,

leaving, as we suppose, his army before Jerusalem. He found Sennacherib not at Lachish, but at

Libnah, to which he had retreated probably on hearing of the advance of Tirhakah,* the king of

Ethiopia. As we have seen,* Sennacherib gained indeed the victory of Altaku.

* Tirhakah - on the Egyptian monuments, Tahark and Taharka; o n the the Assyrian, Tar-ku-u, the

third and last king of the twenty-fifth "Ethiopian" dynasty, although apparently not himself of

Ethiopian but of Egyptian descent. In accordance with the Bible, the monuments describe him as

king of Ethiopia, and as making an incursion into Palestine against Sennacherib. For an abstract of

his history see Ebers, in Riehm's Worterb. ii., pp. 1671, 1672.

** The mention of the places enumerated in 2 Kings 19:12, confirms the view expressed in a

previous note, that the boasted conquests were not those of the present reign, but looked back

upon the past. Thus Gozan was a district in Mesopotamia on the river Chabor, whence Sargon had

transported colonists to Samaria. Not far from Gozan was the town of Haran, the Roman and

Greek Carrhae, one of the earliest Assyrian possessions, mentioned even in the 12th cent. B.C.

(comp. Genesis 11:31, etc.). Rezeph was another Mesopotamian town, frequently mentioned in

Assyrian inscriptions as Rasaappa, or Rasappa. Thelasar (in Ass. Til-Assuri, either "the Assyrian

hill," or, "the hill of Asur")seems to have been one of the cities of "the Sons of Eden," a tribe

inhabiting a district on both banks of the middle Euphrates. It is probable that either Shalmaneser

or Sargon had changed the original n ame of the city to Telassar (comp. the Eden of Ezekiel 27:23;

perhaps also the Beth-Eden of Amos i. 5).