rufalem; and then Nahum's prophefying would coincide exactly with the reign of Hezekiah, which is the time affigned for it by St. Jerome.

But whenever it was that Nahum prophefied, he plainly and largely foretold the deftruction of Nineveh; his whole prophecy relates to this fingle event: and the city was accordingly destroyed by the Medes and Babylonians. This point I think is generally agreed upon, that Nineveh was taken and destroyed by the Medes and Babylonians; these two rebelling and uniting together fubverted the Affyrian empire: but authors differ much about the time when Nineveh was taken, and about the king of Affyria in whose reign it was taken, and even about the perfons who had the command in this expedition. Herodotus (9) affirms, that it was taken by Cyaxares king of the Medes; St. Jerome after the Hebrew chronicle (1) afferts that it was taken by Nabuchodonofor king of the Babylonians: but these accounts may eafily be reconciled, for Cyaxares and Nabuchodonofor might take it with their joint forces, as they actually did according to

that

tem patris. Ebraicum hoc Chronicon fecuti funt S. Hieronymus &c, Marthami Chron, Sæc. XVIII. p. 559.

(2) συνέβη

that which is written in the book of Tobit, (XIV. 15.) if the Affuerus in Tobit be the fame (as there is great reason to think him the fame) with the Cyaxares of Herodotus; But before Tobias died, he heard of the deftruction of Nineveh, which was taken by Nabuchodonofor and Affuerus; and before his death he rejoiced over Nineveh. Jofephus (2) who faith in one place that the empire of the Affyrians was diffolved by the Medes, faith in another that the Medes and Babylonians diffolved the empire of the Affyrians. Herodotus himself (3) faith that the Medes took Nineveh, and fubdued the Affyrians, except the Babylonian portion; the reason of which was, the Babylonians were their allies and confederates. Ctefias, and after him (4) Diodorus Siculus afcribe the taking of Nineveh, and the fubverfion of the Affyrian empire,

(2) συνέβη την των Ασσυρίων αρχην ύπο Μηδων καταλυθήναι. Affyriorum imperium a Medis everfum iri contigit. Jofeph. Antiq. Lib. 10. Cap. 2. Sect. 2. P. 435 -Mndos xai Tes Βαβυλωνίας, οι την Ασσυρίων κατελυ cav agxn. Medoset Babylonios, qui Affyriorum everterant imperium. ibid. Cap. 5. Sect. 1, P. 441. Edit Hudfon.

σαν αρχήν.

τῆς

εποιήσαντο, πλην της Βαβυλω της μοίρης. et Ninum expugnaverunt, Affyriofque, excepta Babylonica portione, fubegerunt. Herod. Lib. 1. Cap. 106. P. 45. Edit. Gale.

(4) Diod. Sic. Lib. 2. p. 78. Edit. Steph. p. 110. Edit. Rhod.

(5) Eufebius (more fuo) utramque fententiam in Canonem retulit: ad mentem Ctefiæ, Arbaces Medus, ait, Num. 1197.

και την Το Nivov Eixov, Affyriorum imperio deftructo, regAcougies Oxiginum in Medos tranftulit. Dein

(poft

pire, to Arbaces the Mede affifted by Belefis the Babylonian. I know that (5) Eufebius, and after him feveral excellent chronologers, Usher, Prideaux, and others reckon this quite a different action, and fix it at quite a different time; but it is not likely that the fame city fhould be twice deftroyed, and the fame empire twice overthrown, by the fame people twice confederated together. Diodorus, who relates this catastrophe, doth not mention the other; but faith exprefly, (6) that Arbaces diftributed the citizens of Nineveh in the country villages, leveled the city with the ground, tranfferred many talents of gold and filver to Ecbatana the royal city of the Medes; and fo, faith he, the empire of the Affyrians was fubverted. If there is fome difficulty in difcovering the perfons by whom Nineveh was taken, there is

(poft annos 213) ex autoritate Herodoti, Nu. 1410. Cyaxares Medus fubvertit Ninum. Ista autem ασέρατα funt. Marfhami Chronicon. Sæc. XVIII. P. 556.

(6) ὁ δ' εν Αρβακης της κατα πολιν ETTISINUS TROCEDEX, αυτές μεν κατά napas dienos, - την δε πολιν εις εδαφος κατε σκαψεν. τον το άργυρον πολλων οτα

n

more

εις Εκβατανα. ή μεν εν ηγεμονία των Ασσυρίων- τύπο Μήδων και Ten τον προειρημένον τρόπον. Similiquoque lenitate erga cives ufus, quamvis in pagos eos diftraberet; urbem autem folo æquavit. Tum argentum et aurum-(multa certe talenta erant) in Ecbatana Medorum regiam tranftulit. Hoc ergo modo Affyriorum imperiuma Medis everfum eft. Diod. Sic, Lib. 2. p. 81. Edit. Steph. (7) Kas

ταλαντών, αποκομιση της Μηδίας P. 115- Edit. Rhod.

S 4

more in ascertaining the king of Affyria in whofe reign it was taken, and more ftill in fixing the time when it was taken, fcarce any two chronologers agreeing in the fame date: but as thefe things are hardly poffible to be known, fo neither are they neceffary to be known, with precifion and exactnefs; and we may fafely leave them among the uncertainties of ancient history

and chronology.

It is fufficient for our purpose, that Nineveh was taken and deftroyed according to the predictions: and Nahum foretold not only the thing, but also the manner of it. Herodotus promised to relate in his Affyrian history how Nineveh was taken; (7) the Medes took Nineveh, faith he, but how they took it, I will show in another work. Again afterwards. he mentions his defign of writing the Affyrian hiftory. Speaking of the kings of Babylon he faith, (8) of these I shall make mention in the

(7) Και την τε Νίνον εἷλον (ὡς δε εἷλον, εν ετέροισι λόγοισι nawow.) et Ninum expugnaverunt: (ut autem ceperint, in aliis mox fcriptis indicabo.) Herod. Lib. 1. Cap. 106, P. 45. Edit. Gale.

(8) των εν τοισι Ασσυρίοισι λογοισι μνήμην ποιήσομαι. quorum in exponendis rebus Af

3.

Affyrian

fyriis mentionem faciam. Lib. 1. Cap. 184, p. 76. Edit. Gale, Voffius de Hift. Græc, Lib. 1. Cap. 3, Fabricius Bib. Græc, Lib, 2. Cap. 20.

(9) διαπερ της δυναμεως ἂν πασης εγνωμένης, δι περι του Αρβακην παρα TINY αυτομο λων πυθόμενοι την EV τη παpeuborn an πολεμίων ξαν

μιας

Affyrian hiftory. But to our regret this history was never finished, or is loft. More probablyit was never finifhed, for otherwife fome or other of the ancients would have mentioned it. If it had been extant with his other works, it would in all probability have been of great service in illustrating several paffages in Nahum's prophecies. It is however something fortunate, that we can in fome measure fupply this lofs out of Diodorus Siculus. Nahum prophefies, that the Affyrians should be taken while they were drunken, (I. 10.) For while they be folden together as thorns, and while they are drunken as drunkards, they fhall be devoured as ftubble fully dry; and (9) Diodorus relates, that it was while all the Affyrian army were feafting for their former victories, that those ⚫ about Arbaces being informed by fome defer⚫tors of the negligence and drunkenness in the of the enemies, affaulted them unex

camp

pectedly

ligentia et ebrietate hoftium edoctus,noctu eximprovifo illos opprimit. Et quoniam com. pofiti incompofitos, parati imperatos invadebant, facile et caftra expugnant, et vaftam hoftium ftragem edunt, et reliquos in urbem compellunt. Diod. Sic. Lib. 2. p. 8c. Edit, Steph. p. 112. Edit. Rhod.

(1) 1