distinctive name Jewish could not have been common till long after the destruction of the kingdom of the ten tribes, which left Judah the only representative of Israel. But how long after this event may we assume that such a usage became common? The ten tribes were carried into exile by Sennacherib's father, if not by his grandfather. It is altogether probable that from the time of the great schism between Ephraim and Judah, the latter began to call the national language by its own distinctive name. At the period in question, such a designation was certainly more natural, in the mouths of Jews, than Israelitish or even Hebrew. We understand, literally, we (are) hearing, i. e. hearing distinctly and intelligently.

12. And Rabshakeh said: Is it to thy master and to thee, that my master hath sent me to speak these words? Is it not to the men sitting on the wall to eat their own dung and to drink their own water with you? The last clause is obviously descriptive of the horrors of famine in their most revolting form. The same idea is conveyed still more distinctly in Chronicles: whereon do ye trust that ye abide in the fortress of Jerusalem? doth not Hezekiah persuade you to give over yourselves to die by famine and by thirst, saying, the Lord our God shall deliver us out of the hand of the king of Assyria? (2 Chr. 32: 10, 11). So here the people are described as sitting on the wall, i. e. holding out against Sennacherib, only that they may experience these horrors.

13. And Rabshakeh stood and called with a loud voice in Jewish (i. e. Hebrew), and said, Hear the words of the great king, the King of Assyria. In so doing he not only testified his contempt for the king's messengers by insolently disregarding their request, but made a politic appeal to the hopes and fears of the multitude. That he stood and called, is explained by some to mean that he assumed a higher position, or came nearer to the

wall; but the simplest and most natural explanation is, that he remained where he was before and merely raised his voice.

14. Thus saith the king: let not Hezekiah deceive you, for he will not be able to deliver you. The repeated mention of the king reminds them, that he is not speaking in his own name, but in that of a great monarch. The parallel passage (2 Kings 18: 29) adds, out of his hand.

15. And let not Hezekiah make you trust in Jehovah, saying, Jehovah will certainly save us, this city shall not be given up into the hand of the king of Assyria. The idea of certain deliverance is expressed by the idiomatic combination of the future and infinitive.

16. Hearken not to Hezekiah, for thus saith the king of Assyria, make with me a blessing, and come out unto me, and eat ye (every) man his own vine and (every) man his own fig-tree, and drink ye (every) man the waters of his own cistern. Some explain the phrase here used, make me a present, or make an agreement with me by a present. It is possible, however, to adhere more closely to the usage of the term, by taking blessing in the sense of friendly salutation, which in the east is commonly an invocation of the divine blessing. Thus the verb to bless is often used to express the act of greeting or of taking leave. To make a blessing with one then might mean to enter into amicable intercourse. To come out is in Hebrew the common military phrase for the surrender of a besieged town. The inducements offered in the last clause are in obvious antithesis to the revolting threat or warning in the last clause of v. 12. To eat the vine and figtree (meaning to eat their fruit) is an elliptical form of speech, which has its analogies in every language.

17. Until I come and take you away to a land like your own

land, a land of corn and wine, a land of bread and vineyards. The parallel passage (2 Kings 18:32) adds, a land of oil-olive and honey, that ye may live and not die. This reference to the deportation of the people as a future event has led some interpreters to the conclusion, that Sennacherib was now on his way to Egypt, and deferred the measure until his return. It has been disputed what particular land is here meant, some saying Mesopotamia, to which others object that it was not a wine-growing country. But there is no need of supposing that the Assyrian's description was exactly true. He may indeed have intended merely to promise them in general a country as abundant as their own.

18. Let not (or beware lest) Hezekiah seduce you, saying, Jehovah will deliver us. Have the gods of the nations delivered every one his land out of the hand of the king of Assyria? The Assyrian here, with characteristic recklessness, forsakes his previous position, that he was but acting as Jehovah's instrument, and sets himself in disdainful opposition to Jehovah himself.

19. Where (ar) the gods of Hamath and Arpad? where the gods of Sepharvaim? and (when or where was it) that they delivered Samaria out of my hand? In the rapidity of his triumphant interrogation, he expresses himself darkly and imperfectly. The last clause must of course refer to the gods of Samaria, though not expressly mentioned. For the situation of Hamath and Arpad, see the note on ch. 10:9. Sepharvaim is probably the Sipphara of Ptolemy, a town and province in the south of Mesopotamia, already subject to Assyria in the days of Shalmaneser. The parallel passage (2 Kings 18:34) adds Hena and Iovah, which are also named with Sepharvaim in 2 Kings 19 13 and Isai. 37: 13. The question (where are they?) seems to imply, not only that they had not saved their worshippers, but that they had ceased to be.

20. Who (are they) among all the gods of these lands, that have delivered their land out of my hand, that Jehovah should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand? In this argumentative interrogation, he puts Jehovah on a level with the gods of the surrounding nations. This is still more frequently and pointedly expressed in the parallel passage in Chronicles. Know ye not what I and my fathers have done unto all the nations of the countries? Were the gods of the nations of the countries able to deliver their country out of my hand? Who was there among all the gods of these nations, which my fathers utterly destroyed, that was able to deliver his people out of my hand, that your God should be able to deliver you out of my hand? And now, let not Hezekiah deceive you, and let him not seduce you, neither believe him; for no god of any nation or kingdom has been able to deliver his people out of my hand, and out of the hand of my fathers; how much less shall your God deliver you out of my hand. (2 Chron. 32: 13-15.) From the same authority we learn that over and above what is recorded, Sennacherib's servants spake still more against the God Jehovah and against Hezekiah his servant (v. 16), and that they cried with a loud voice in the Jewish language, to the people of Jerusalem who were on the wall, to affright them, and to trouble them, that they might take the city; and they spake against the God of Jerusalem as against the gods of the nations of the earth, the work of man's hands (vs. 18, 19.)

21, 22. And they held their peace, and did not answer him a word, for such was the commandment of the king, saying, Ye shall not answer him. Then came Eliakim, Hilkiah's son, who (was)over the house, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, Asaph's son, the recorder, unto Hezekiah, with their clothes rent (literally, rent of clothes), and told him the words of Rabshakeh. Some of the older writers understand the rending of their garments as a mere sign of their horror at Rabshakeh's blasphemies: some of the moderns as a mere sign of despondency and alarm at the impending dangers; whereas both may naturally be included.

CHAPTER XXXVII.

THIS chapter is a direct continuation of the one before it. It describes the effect of Rabshakeh's blasphemies and threats on Hezekiah, his humiliation, his message to Isaiah, and the answer, the retreat of Rabshakeh, Sennacherib's letter, Hezekiah's prayer, Isaiah's prophecy, and its fulfilment, in the slaughter of Sennacherib's army and his own flight and murder.

1. And it was (or came to pass), when King Hezekiah heard (the report of his messengers), that he rent his clothes, and covered himself with sackcloth, and went into the house of Jehovah. He resorted to the temple, not only as a public place, but with reference to the promise made to Solomon (1 Kings 8: 29), that God would hear the prayers of his people from that place when they were in distress. Under the old dispensation there were reasons for resorting to the temple, even to offer private supplications, which cannot possibly apply to any church or other place at present. This arose partly from the fact that prayer was connected with sacrifice, and this was rigidly confined to one spot.

2. And he sent Eliakim who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and the elders of the priests, covered with sackcloth, unto Isaiah, the son of Amoz, the prophet. While he himself resorted to the temple, he sent to ask the counsel and the intercessions of the Prophet. Eliakim and Shebna are again employed in this case, as being qualified to make an exact report of what had happened, and in order to put honour on the prophet by an embassy of distinguished men. In the place of Joah, he sends the elders of the priests, i. e. the heads of the sacerdotal families. The king applies to the prophet as the authorized expounder of the will of God. Similar applications are recorded elsewhere