Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 16.djvu/561

Rh M O A B 535 the Bible we find only the curt statement that Moab rebelled against Israel after the death of Ahab (2 Kings i.); on the other hand, there is a full narrative of a later attempt on the part of Joram ben Ahab to bring Mesha again into subjection an attempt which promised very well at first, but ultimately failed completely. Joram s invasion took place not from the north but (probably very unex pectedly to the enemy) from the frontier of Edom over the Wadi l-Ahs; i ; he marched through Judah and Edom, and the kings of those countries served as auxiliaries. He defeated a Moabite army on the frontier, penetrated into the country and laid it waste ; he laid siege to the fortress of Kir-Moab so closely as to reduce it to great straits. But these straits seem to have filled the besieged with a desperate courage, for the fortunes of war suddenly changed. The Israelites were compelled to retire home ward, a great wrath (of Jehovah) having come upon them, that is, a severe disaster having befallen them, which is not described, but, from the nature of the case, must have been a sudden surprise and defeat by the enemy. 1 As the Moabites owed their liberation from Israelite supremacy to the battle of Raman that is, to the Araimuans -we accordingly find them (as well as the Ammonites) afterwards always seconding the Aramaeans in continual border warfare against Gilead, in which they took cruel revenge on the Israelites. With what bitterness the latter in consequence were wont to speak of their hostile kinsfolk can be gathered from Gen. xix. 30 sqq. the one trace of open malice in the story of the patriarchs, and all the more striking as it occurs in a narrative of which Lot is the hero and saint, which therefore in its present form is of Moabite origin, although perhaps it has a still older Canaanite nucleus. Of these border wars we learn but little, although from casual notices it can be seen (2 Kings xiii. 20; Amos i. 13; comp. 2 Kings v. 2) that they were long kept up, although not quite uninterruptedly. But when at length the danger from the Aramaeans was removed for Israel by the inter vention of the Assyrians, the hour of Moab s subjection also came ; Jeroboam II. extended his frontier over the eastern territory, as far as to the brook of the willows (Wadi 1-Alisa). (Perhaps the song of Num. xxi. 27 sqq. has reference to these events.) A vivid picture of the confusion and anguish then prevalent in Moab has been preserved to us in the ancient prophecy of Isa. xv., xvi., which indeed would have greater historical value if we were able to tell precisely what in it -depicts the present, and what is prediction of the future. 2 This utterance of an older prophet was repeated some 1 The narrative of Mesha in his inscription has, strange to say, not infrequently been regarded as parallel with 2 Kings iii. , and the con clusion been drawn that the Biblical narrative completely inverts the true state of the case, it is difficult to see for what motives, for there is no braggadocio in 2 Kings iii. But it is perfectly clear that the narrative of 2 Kings iii. presupposes the revolt of Mesha as an old affair ; while, on the other hand, Mesha s story on the stele in the Louvre is a narrative of this very revolt and its immediate consequences ; it is accordingly to be regarded as parallel with 2 Kings i. 1. Elisha s miracle in Wadi 1-Ahsa (2 Kings iii. 16) is explained by the locality ; Ahsa means a sandy ground with moist subsoil, where, by digging trenches, water is always obtainable. The (probably compulsory) par ticipation of the king of Edom in Joram s expedition against Moab may perhaps be brought into connexion with the fact that the Moabites burned to lime the bones of a king of Edom (Amos ii. 1). - In Isa. xv. xvi. it is presupposed that the attack upon Moab has been made from the north, at a time when Judah is a comparatively powerful kingdom, exercising sovereignty over Edom also, and in a position to afford shelter to the fugitive Moabites, thus not being itself at war with them. These marks taken together can only apply to the period of Jeroboam II. and Uzziah. Hitzig will have it that Jonah ben Amittai wrote Isa. xv. xvi. ; but according to 2 Kings xiv. 25 that prophet preached prosperity to Jeroboam, and not disaster to the Moabites. decennia later by the prophet Isaiah, with the addition of a clause adapting it to his time, to the effect that the Assyrians would carry out in all its fulness the hitherto imperfectly-executed threat. The Assyrians actually sub jugated the Moabites, as well as the other small peoples of that region ; but the blow was apparently not so grave as Isaiah had predicted. They lay more out of the way than their western neighbours, and perhaps their resistance to the scourge of God was not so obstinate as to demand the sharpest measures. What made it all the easier for them to reconcile themselves to the new situation was the fact that the Israelites suffered much more severely than they. From these their deadly enemies they were henceforth for ever free. They did not on that account, however, give up their old hatred, but merely transferred it from Israel to Judah. The political annihilation of the nation only inten sified in Jerusalem the belief in its religious prerogative, and against this belief the hostility of neighbours was aroused more keenly than ever. The deepest offence at the reli gious exclusiveness of the people of Judaia, which then first began to manifest itself, was, as is easily understood, taken by their nearest relatives, Edom and Moab. They gave terrible expression to their feelings when the dial- damans urged them on like uncaged beasts of prey against the rebellious Jews ; and they joined loudly in the general chorus of malignant joy which was raised over the burning of the temple and the ruin of the holy city. 3 &quot; Because Moab saith : Behold the house of Judah is like all the other nations, therefore do I open his land to the Bne Kedem,&quot; says the prophet Ezekiel (xxv. 8 sqq.). His threat against the Moabites as well as against the Edomites and Ammonites is that they shall fall before the approach of the desert tribes. Probably in his day the tide of Arabian invasion was already slowly rising, and of course it had first to overtake the lands situated on the desert border. At all events the Arab immigration into this quarter began at an earlier date than is usually supposed ; it continued for centuries, and was so gradual that the previously - introduced Aramseizing process could quietly go on alongside of it. The Edomites gave way before the pressure of the land-hungry nomads, and settled in the desolate country of Judah ; the children of Lot, on the other hand, appear to have amalgamated with them, the Ammonites maintaining their individuality longer than the Moabites, who soon entirely disappeared. Israel and Moab had a common origin, and their early history was similar. The people of Jehovah on the one hand, the people of Chemosh on the other, had the same idea of the Godhead as head of the nation, and a like patriotism derived from religious belief, a patriotism capable of extraordinary efforts, and which has had no parallel in the West either in ancient or in modern times. The mechanism of the theocracy also had much that was common to both nations ; in both the king figures as the deity s representative, priests and prophets as the organs through whom he makes his communications. But, with all this similarity, how different were the ultimate fates of the two ! The history of the one loses itself obscurely and fruitlessly in the sand; that of the other issues in eternity. One reason for the difference (which, strangely enough, seems to have been felt not by the Israelites alone but by the Moabites also) is obvious. Israel received no gentle treatment at the hands of the world ; it had to carry on a continual conflict with foreign influences and hostile 3 Zeph. ii. 8 sq. ; 2 Kings xxiv. 2, and Jer. xii. 9 sqq.; Ezek. xxv. 8 sqq. It need hardly be said that the Moabites shared the fate of all the Palestinian peoples when supremacy passed from the Assyrians to the Chalda?ans, and that, notwithstanding their hatred of the Jews, they had no difficulty in seeking alliances with them, when occasions arose on which they could be made useful (Jer. xxvii. 3).