of
Jabweh
to
teach
them
the
worship
of
the
God
of
the
land.
Sargon
granted
their
request,
and
sent
back
a
captive
priest.
In
due
time
these
foreigners
inter-
married
with
the
Israelites
who
had
been
left,
the
cults
of
their
gods
were
merged
in
the
Jahweh
cult,
and
they
became
the
Samaritans.
Those
who
seek
for
the
"ten
lost
tribes
'
should
remember
that
they
were
never
lost
by
captivity.
Only
the
merest
percentage
of
them
were
wrenched
from
their
land.
They
were
lost
by
becoming
the
substratum
of
later
populations,
and
a
handful
still
survives
in
the
Samaritans
(wh.
see).
19.
Hezekiah
and
Isaiah.
—
The
fall
of
Samaria
made
doleful
reverberations
in
Jerusalem.
The
date
of
the
accession
of
Hezekiah
is
not
quite
certain,
but
it
prob-ably
occurred
before
the
(all
of
Samaria.
Throughout
his
reign
the
prophet
Isaiah
was
one
of
his
chief
advisers,
and
for
the
most
part
he
ruled
in
accord
with
the
pro-phetic
ideals.
About
the
time
of
his
accession,
and
apparently
before
the
fall
of
Samaiia,
another
prophet,
Micah,
began
to
prophesy
in
the
town
of
Moresheth
(Maresha)
in
the
Shephelah
on
the
Philistine
border.
His
burden
weis
consonant
with
that
of
the
three
great
literary
prophets
who
had
preceded
him.
Judah
escaped
when
Samaria
fell,
because
she
main-tained
that
submissive
attitude
to
Assyria
which
she
had
assumed
when
Uzziah
paid
tribute
to
Tiglath-pileser.
This
attitude
secured
her
peace
for
some
years
to
come,
though
it
was
not
an
easy
attitude
to
maintain.
On
Judah's
western
border
the
petty
kingdoms
of
FhiUstia
were
always
plotting
to
throw
off
the
Assyrian
yoke,
and
endeavouring
to
secure
the
co-operation
of
Hezekiah.
Such
co-operation,
however,
Isaiah
steadily
opposed.
In
the
year
711
Ashdod
succeeded
in
heading
a
coalition
which
she
hoped
would
gain
her
freedom,
but
Sargon
sent
an
arnu?
which
soon
brought
her
to
terms
(Is
20').
The
course
of
political
events
went
on
smoothly
therefore
until
after
the
death
of
Sargon
in
705;
then,
as
so
often
happened
in
Oriental
countries,
many
subject
lands
endeavoured
to
gain
their
independence
before
the
new
monarch
could
consoUdate
his
power.
Hezekiah
was
tempted
now,
not
by
the
PhiUstines
only,
but
also
by
Merodach-baladan
(Marduk-apal-iddin),
a
Babylonian
king
whom
Sargon
had
early
in
his
reign
driven
from
Babylon
and
who
now
sought
the
opportunity
to
return
(2
K
20i»-,
Is
39i«).
In
this
new
coalition
the
Eg3T)tians
also,
now
under
the
stronger
control
of
the
25th
dynasty,
had
a
part.
Although
Isaiah
still
consistently
opposed
the
move,
Hezekiah
nevertheless
yielded.
In
the
city
of
Ekron
there
was
one
i)etty
king
faithful
to
Sen-nacherib.
Him
his
subjects
deposed,
threw
into
fetters,
and
delivered
to
Hezekiah,
who
cast
him
into
a
dungeon
(cf.
KIB
ii.
93).
This
was
a
direct
act
of
rebellion,
which
Sennacherib
was
sure
to
avenge.
Affairs
in
the
East
delayed
the
blow,
but
in
701
it
finally
feil.
Sennacherib
marched
into
the
West,
defeated
the
allies
at
Eltekeh,
besieged
and
took
Ekron,
impaled
many
of
the
rebellious
inhabitants,
and
invaded
Judah.
Forty-
six
of
the
smaller
towns
were
captured,
and
Jerusalem
itself
was
invested.
Its
inhabitants
were
of
course
panic-
stricken,
but
Isaiah
came
forward,
declaring
Jerusalem
to
be
the
home
of
Jahweh,
and,
as
such,
inviolable
in
His
eyes
(Is
31*).
Hezekiah,
meantime
recognizing
that
his
rebellion
had
been
a
grievous
error,
sent
to
Lachish,
Sennacherib's
headquarters,
and
offered
to
pay
in-demnity
and
tribute.
Meantime
Sennacherib
had
sent
his
main
army
on
to
inflict
punishment
upoi^
Egypt,
the
strongest
member
of
the
alliance
against
him"
On
the
border
of
Egypt
his
army
was
attacked
with
bubonic
plague
(such
seems
to
be
the
meaning
of
2
K
19^
combined
with
Herod,
ii.
141),
which
rendered
further
operations
impossible;
he
accordingly
accepted
Hezekiah's
terms,
raised
the
siege
of
Jerusalem,
and
withdrew
to
Assyria.
This
event
had
a
profound
influence
on
Israel's
re-ligious
history.
In
the
time
of
David
and
Solomon
Jerusalem
was
a
new
town
to
the
Israelites,
and
a
town
without
reUgious
associations.
The
real
home
of
Jahweh
was
on
Mount
Sinai,
but
the
land
contained
scores
of
shrines
more
dear
to
Him
than
Jerusalem,
because
He
had
longer
dwelt
in
them.
Solomon's
innovations
had
tended
to
increase
this
feeling,
and
although
the
lapse
of
three
hundred
years
had
given
Jerusalem
an
important
place
among
the
shrines,
especi-ally
as
the
capital
of
the
kingdom
of
Judah,
nothing
had
occurred
until
now
to
make
men
think
that
it
was
the
home
of
Jahweh
par
excellence.
Now
He
had
palpably
abandoned
the
shrines
of
the
Northern
Kingdom,
and
by
this
victory,
vindicating
as
it
did
the
word
of
His
prophet,
He
had
shown
that
He
had
chosen
Jerusalem
as
His
permanent
abode.
Thus
this
event
introduced
Jeru-salem
to
that
place
in
the
reverence
and
affection
of
the
Hebrews
which
has
made
it
the
Holy
City
of
three
great
reUgions.
According
to
2
K
18'
iW>),
Hezekiah
attempted
to
abolish
the
country
shrines
and
centralize
the
worship
in
Jerusalem.
Some
have
doubted
this
statement,
and
others
have
thought
that
it
is
confirmed
by
an
older
document
quoted
in
2
K
18*".
It
seems
in
accord
with
historical
probability
that,
prompted
by
Isaiah,
Heze-kiah
should
in
his
closing
years
have
made
such
an
effort.
Hosea
had
seen,
a
generation
before,
that
the
worship
of
Jahweh
could
never
be
socially
pure
till
separated
from
the
elements
which
he
believed
had
been
introduced
from
the
cult
of
Baal,
and
now
that
Isaiah
had
become
convinced
that
Jerusalem
had
been
Divinely
proved
to
be
Jahweh's
special
abode,
it
is
certainly
within
the
realm
of
probabihty
that
he
prompted
the
king
to
do
away
with
all
other
demoralizing
shrines.
If
Jahweh
could
have
only
one
temple
and
that
under
prophetic
control.
His
cult
would
be
for
everdiflerentiated
from
that
of
the
Baals.
What
time
could
be
more
opportune
for
such
a
movement
than
the
beginning
of
the
7th
cent.,
when
first
the
captivity
of
the
Northern
Kingdom,
and
then
the
reduction
of
the
territory
of
Judah
to
narrow
limits
by
Sennacherib,
left
at
a
minimum
the
number
of
shrines
to
be
destroyed?
20.
Manasseh
and
Amon.
—
From
the
time
of
Amos
to
the
accession
of
Manasseh
the
prophetic
vision
had
made
steady
progress,
and
the
elevation
of
the
reUgion
of
Jahweh
and
of
the
recognized
standard
of
morals
had
gone
steadily
forward,
but
in
the
long
reign
of
Manasseh
(696-641)
a
strong
reaction
occurred.
It
is
difficult
to
account
for
this
reaction
unless
some
attempt
to
destroy
the
village
shrines
had
been
made
by
Heze-kiah,
but
if
this
be
presupposed,
all
that
occurred
is
natural.
The
superstitious
prejudices
of
the
village
people
had
been
outraged.
They
clamoured
for
liberty
to
worship
at
the
village
shrines
consecrated
by
the
usage
of
unknown
antiquity,
and
the
king,
when
Isaiah
was
gone,
had
no
real
motive
for
resisting
them.
Then,
too,
the
period
seems
to
have
been
a
time
of
distress,
Manasseh
seems
to
have
quietly
remained
in
vassalage
to
Assyria,
so
that
the
armies
of
Esarhaddon
and
Ashur-banipal,
which
four
times
marched
along
the
coast
and
accomplished
the
reduction
of
Egypt
during
his
reign,
did
not
disturb
Judah,
though
she
may
have
been
com-pelled
to
contribute
to
their
support.
Perhaps
there
was
civil
war
in
Jerusalem,
for
we
are
told
that
Manasseh
shed
much
innocent
blood
(2
K
21").
At
all
events,
whether
on
account
of
war,
or
famine,
or
unjust
rule,
his
reign
was
a
time
of
distress,
and
Judah
sought
escape
from
her
trouble,
not
through
prophetic
reform,
but
by
the
revival
of
half
-heathenish,
outworn
forms
of
worship.
Jahweh
was
worshipped
as
Melek,
or
king,
and
to
Him
in
this
capacity
child
sacrifice,
which
had
been
prev-alent
among
the
Semites
in
early
days,
was
revived.
The
Ammonites
called
their
god
Melek
(Molech
[wh.
seel),
and
human
sacrifice
was
still
practised
at
times
by
Judah's
heathen
neighbours,
especially
by
the
Phoenicians.
The
prophets
accordingly
combated
this
form
of
worship
as
displeasing
to
Jahweh,
and
tried
