these sepulchres would refer the excavations to a much later period of the Jewish history, we may observe, without admitting or disputing the correctness of this assertion, that the same reasoning cannot apply to such excavations as to constructed edifices. In the former, the façade is no essential or necessary part of the plan, and may therefore, in the present instance, have been sculptured at a comparatively late period, by some prince or ruler who wished to distinguish and adorn the last earthly home of the ancient kings.

ziah king of Judah, saying, 'The "thistle that was in Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife: and there passed by "a wild beast that was in Lebanon, and trode down. the thistle.

19 Thou sayest, Lo, thou hast smitten the Edomites; and thine heart lifteth thee up to boast: abide now at home; why shouldest thou meddle to thine hurt, that thou shouldest fall, even thou, and Judah with thee?

20 But Amaziah would not hear; for it came of God, that he might deliver them into the hand of their enemies, because they sought after the gods of Edom.

21 So Joash the king of Israel went up; and they saw one another in the face, both he and Amaziah king of Judah, at Bethshemesh, which belongeth to Judah.

22 And Judah was put to the worse before Israel, and they fled every man to his tent. 23 And Joash the king of Israel took Amaziah king of Judah, the son of Joash, the son of Jehoahaz, at Beth-shemesh, and 19 Or, furrebush, or, thorn. 11 Heb, a beast of the field. 15 Heb. conspired a conspiracy.

brought him to Jerusalem, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem from the gate of Ephraim to the corner gate, four hundred cubits.

24 And he took all the gold and the sil ver, and all the vessels that were found in the house of God with Obed-edom, and the treasures of the king's house, the hostages also, and returned to Samaria.

25 ¶ And Amaziah the son of Joash king of Judah lived after the death of Joash son of Jehoahaz king of Israel fifteen years.

26 Now the rest of the acts of Amaziah, first and last, behold, are they not written in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel?

27 Now after the time that Amaziah did turn away from following the LORD they made a conspiracy against him in Jerusalem; and he fled to Lachish: but they sent to Lachish after him, and slew him there.

28 And they brought him upon horses, and buried him with his fathers in the city of 16Judah.

12 Heb. smitten. 13 Heb. the gate of it that looketh.
16 That is, the city of David, as it is 2 Kings 14. 20.

14 Heb. from after.

Verse 12. "Cast them doum from the top of the rock."-If we were correct in our considerations relating to Joktheel, as stated in the note to 2 Kings xiv., the situation of Petra, with which we supposed that town might be identified, very well illustrates the present transaction. The area or valley in which the town stands, is surrounded by steep mountains and rocky cliffs, from many of which most certainly no one could be precipitated without being "broken afl in pieces." To the south of the town there is one very steep and high mountain, the ascent of which is assisted by steps; and the summit of which affords a commanding view over the neighbouring masses of rock. Remains of a fortification of stone attest the importance which the ancient inhabitants attached to this post. If it were necessary to point to a particular place, one might perhaps venture to point to this mountain as possibly "the rock" in question. But we rather think this designation does not refer to any one particular rock; but, collectively, to any of the cliffs in this region of precipices adapted to such an execution. The name of "Selah," which Amaziah took and called Joktheel, means, as well as that of Petra, "a rock"-as stated in the note referred to. The taking of any town is not mentioned here expressly; and after all it is not clear that the rock spoken of in this place is the same as the town, which bore a name of the same import. If not, the rock may have been any remarkable rock near or in the Valley of Salt, where the battle was fought; but if otherwise, we are to suppose that the Hebrews took their captives to the vicinity of their own capital and there destroyed them, to intimidate the town into a surrender, or for some other purpose not explained. It might be indeed that this awful immolation took place after the town was taken; and that the ten thousand destroyed, included not only the captives taken in the previous battle, but a proportion of those captured in the town.

14. "The gods of the children of Seir."-The English translator of Laborde's 'Voyage de l'Arabie Pétrée' has prefixed an interesting preliminary view of ancient Edom: but in his account of their religion he has overlooked this passage, and draws his statement entirely from the book of Job. Now, although it is very probable that the descendants of Esau did for a considerable time retain such patriarchal ideas of religion as that book exhibits, it is very certain that, when they became a flourishing people, their religion was an idolatry which the Lord beheld with abhorrence. We see here that Amaziah's participation in it, provoked the Divine anger against him, and produced a denunciation of those calamities which marked the subsequent history of that weak monarch. The Scripture does not describe the idolatry of the Edomites; but we may suppose it to have been the same with that of their neighbours, or but slightly diversified from it. The great object of idolatry was the sun, under various representations and with different forms of worship. Accordingly the ancient writers, when they have occasion to mention the Nabathæi (the Edomites mixed with Arabians), describe them as people who worshipped the sun, burning frankincense to him upon an altar. This agrees with all we can gather from the present text which describes the sin of Amaziah as this very act of worshipthe bursing of incense before the gods of Edom.

4 Or, in the country of Ashdod.
Heb. ground.
10 Heb. the power of
14 Exod. 30. 7.
15 As Esth. 6. 12.

Verse 10. "Towers in the desert.”—These were probably such towers as are mentioned in the note to 1 Chron. xvii. 7. They seemed to have served various purposes-to shelter the flocks in time of danger-as watch-towers for the shep

herds-and as a sort of fortress, to afford them protection and to maintain the right of occupation or pasturage in these desolate regions. Not perhaps that any of them served all these purposes, but that the name tower or castle ( migdol) seems equally applied to them all. Indeed it may possibly be traced in Scripture, that some of them, which were originally mere flock-towers, became in time fortresses, and at last fortified cities. This perhaps may explain the origin of several towns mentioned in Scripture by such names as Migdol and Mizpah-by which such towers are denoted. These towers appear generally to have been erected upon sites naturally or artificially elevated, like that round castle of which a cut has been given at 1 Chron. xxvii., and which we take to afford as probable a general illustration as can be furnished of the towers of safeguard or defence so often mentioned in Scripture, whether it mentions them as near towns or abroad in the desert, and perhaps also including towers in a city, or forming part of its immediate fortification.

15. "Engines...to be on the towers, and upon the bulwarks, to shoot arrows and great stones."-It would be interesting to feel assured that these engines were really the "invention," in the proper sense of the word, of Uzziah's "cunning men." The peculiar system of life among the Jews was so little adapted to the development of inventive genius in the mechanical arts, that this has been doubted; but it is certainly a remarkable circumstance that Pliny does assign a Syrian origin to such engines as now come under our notice. Other circumstances seem to strengthen the claim of Uzziah to the invention of such machines. There is not the least trace of their existence anywhere at an earlier period. Homer has not the slightest allusion to projectile engines, though he must have mentioned them if they had existed in his time; nor indeed do the Greek writers profess that anything was known about them until shortly after the Old Testament history had closed. And although the eastern origin of such engines is admitted, at least by Pliny, it is probable that they did not originate in a more eastern country than Palestine; for Diodorus, in speaking of the siege of Nineveh in the time of Sardanapalus (considerably posterior to Uzziah), and which lasted seven years, attributes its long duration to the want of battering rams, balista for throwing stones, and other military engines; the use of which was known in his own time to have operated in bringing sieges to a far more speedy conclusion than had been usual in more ancient times. The engines of Uzziah were doubtless analogous to the catapultæ and the balista of the Greeks and Romans. There is some difficulty in distinguishing these, because, although they seem to have been properly distinct, one to cast arrows and javelins, and the other stones and other blunt missiles, they are often confounded under one name. The Greek writers describe both sorts under the name of catapulta; and the later Roman writers, under that of balista; but the early Roman writers distinguish the catapulta from the balista. There are several descriptions of these engines extant; and from these various representations have been drawn, and explanations given of their mode of action; but the result has generally produced machines far too complex in their construction and manner of operation, or inadequate to the production of the required effect.

Perhaps the amount of our real knowledge as to the construction of the ancient projectile machines is only, that the three leading principles employed were those of the cross-bow, the recoil of twisted ropes, and the sling. It is probably the diversified applications of these principles, to machines differently constructed for adaptation to modified purposes, which has involved the subject in perplexity. Our cuts exhibit some applications of the two first principles mentioned. According to these, the acting power lies in two perpendicular coils of twisted rope, set apart from each other. Into these coils are inserted, horizontally, the ends of two strong levers, the remoter ends of which are connected by a rope or other strong ligature. Thus is formed a gigantic broken cross-bow, which cannot be bent, by drawing the two arms towards each other, without increasing the tension of the ropes, so as to give a tremendous recoiling power, applicable, by means of the cord, to the discharge of either a dart or a stone. Our cuts show these respective applications too clearly to render further explanation necessary. There was, however, the other principle, of the sling, which we must not leave unnoticed. In this (the Onager) the power was still supplied by ropes; that is, two perpendicular beams set apart from each other were connected at the top by two very strong cables, between which was inserted a large tapering beam, rather crooked; and the small end of this beam being drawn down towards the ground, had of course a most violent tendency to recoil upward. When a heavy pear-shaped bag of stones had been 3 c 2 379

Head of the Catapulta, showing the rope, levers, and springs of twisted rope, by which the discharge was effected.

hung at this end, the beam was released, and flew up, discharging its burden with immense force at the enemy. Our last cut represents what was called a scorpion, being a smaller and portable kind of catapulta, but with the bow entire, and therefore without any rope coil being employed. It was essentially the same as the cross-bow, being a small machine, or rest, which enabled a strong bow to be drawn with comparative ease, and to discharge the arrow with much greater force, and less erring aim, than would have been otherwise practicable. It seems that the same name was also borne by one of the machines for throwing pebbles and small stones.

Scorpion,

Authors are not even now agreed about the separate uses of the catapultæ and balista as distinguished from each other. The question is not of much importance; but we see reason to prefer the conclusion that it was the former which threw the heavy javelins and arrows, and the latter the stones, although it is probable that the same engine was sometimes adapted to both uses. The balista, as might be expected, seems to have been the more cumbersome engine of the two, as its proportion in armies and fortified towns is always much inferior to that of the catapulta, when the two sorts of engines are discriminated. Livy says that the Romans took in Carthage 120 large, and more than 200 small catapulta, and 33 large and 53 small balista. This is interesting, in connection with the present text, as showing the number of these engines required by a well-fortified city.

These engines varied greatly in size and power. The largest catapultæ discharged enormous javelins, or beams headed with iron, while the smaller gave immense power to lighter missiles; and the larger balista are reported to have cast enormous stones, which crushed whole houses where they fell, and, both together, beat down, swept away, and destroyed, with an effect which we cannot well understand, and which only the united voice of antiquity could induce the modern world to believe. These engines were used both in the attack and defence of fortified places. In Josephus there are abundant references to their uses and effects, as employed in the last fatal siege of Jerusalem by the Romans. The defenders themselves had three hundred engines for throwing darts, and forty for stones-which they had taken from the Romans, and which practice taught them how to use. Some of the Roman engines were, however, far more powerful, particularly those of the tenth legion. Some of these discharged a stone weighing a talent to the distance of two furlongs, and that with such tremendous force, that not only did it destroy the foremost men, but with unspent power rushed through their masses, sweeping away whole files of them in its course. The same author, in describing the siege of Jotapata, where himself commanded, says, the darts and stones were thrown by the Roman engines with such power, that numbers of people were destroyed at once. stones, in particular, was such, that they broke down the battlements and carried away the angles of the towers; and no body of men could be set so thickly, but that one of these stones would sweep a whole file of it from one end to the other. He adds, that once a man who was standing near him, had his head knocked off by one of these stones, thrown from a machine nearly three furlongs distant.

The force of the

We have scarcely a better account of the operation of military engines than that given by Lucan; which is the more valuable for our present purpose as describing their use for the defence rather than the assault of towns.

"Nor hands alone the missile deaths supply,

From nervous cross-bows whistling arrows fly;
The steely corslet and the bone they break,
Through multitudes their fatal journeys take;
Nor wait the lingering Parcæ's slow delay,
But wound, and to new slaughter wing their way.
Now by some vast machine a ponderous stone,
Pernicious, from the hostile wall is thrown;
At once, on many, swift the shock descends,
And the crush'd carcases confounding blends.
So rolls some falling rock, by age long worn,
Loose from its root by raging whirlwinds torn,
And thundering down the precipice is borne;
O'er crashing woods the mass is seen to ride,
To grind its way, and plain the mountain's side.
Gall'd with the shot from far, the legions join,

Their bucklers in the warlike shell combine;
Compact and close the brazen roof they bear,
And in just order to the town draw near:
Safe they advance, while with unwearied pain
The wrathful engines waste their stores in vain;
High o'er their heads the destined deaths are tost,
And far beneath in vacant earth are lost;
Nor sudden could they change their erring aim,
Slow and unwieldy moves the cumbrous frame.
This seen, the Greeks their brawny arms employ,
And hurl a stony tempest from on high:
The clattering shower the sounding fence assails.
But vain, as when the stormy winter hails,
Nor on the solid marble roof prevails:
Till, tired at length, the warriors fall their shields;
And, spent with toil, the broken phalanx yields."
Pharsalia, lib. iii. (Rowe.)

The lines we have put in italics denote, with the context, that it was a work of time and labour to alter the aim which had been given to one of these engines. The testudo, or tortoise, being a roof which the soldiers made by joining their shields over their heads, to protect themselves from the missiles thrown from the town against which they acted, is represented in a cut in vol. i. P. 610. Under this shelter the besiegers often carried on operations fatal to the town, and it appears to be alluded to in Job xl. 15 (margin), and Ezek. xxiii. 24.

16. "Went into the temple...to burn incense.”—In many ancient countries, and some modern, the kings by virtue of their office had a right to exercise sacerdotal functions; and it best explains Uzziah's conduct to suppose that he was stimulated by foreign example to aspire to the same privilege.

21. “And dwelt in a several house.”—The Jewish writers conclude that this house was outside the town, according to the law which excluded lepers from towns. We see from this that a leper was incapable of reigning, at least while he remained a leper. It does not appear that Uzziah was properly deposed, but only deprived of the exercise of the sovereign power, which was administered by his son, as regent, and probably in his father's name. the ceremonially unclean character of the disease which occasioned this regulation.

It was probably