LrrKRATURR. — J. W. Colcnso. The Pmtateitfh and Book of Jotlnta erifuratly ftrominrt/, 7 pArla, I^indon, 1S»>2-1S70; W. R. Smith, «7Vf». K.liril.uivli, ISO;!; lirivcr, LOTi. Ijliiilwivh, isiil,". 1SU7; B. W. Bu>-u]i, The C,eiu4is of OenetU, Hartford, li'.rj ; IlisMlt. Oeru*U rriiUfd in Coloura, flartford. The I'mta- ti^u-h, Ui origin and elmirture, an ejcamination of recent theorieti, Ni'w York ; Fhnp. The C'omjxwi/ion qf the fiofut <^/ tlrtieirie, icUh F.tyilieh TrjU and Analyiet, I»iHlon, 1SV2 ; IvuciiL'ii, An Uittoricty^Titieal Inquiry into UuOriffin nf thd
376
HEZEKIAII
HEZEKIAII
llKralruth, translated (rom the Putch by P. H. Wicketeed, IahuIoii, 1SS6 : Afldis, The Vonimfntg nf thf Ufxalntch, pt. i. l^>i)i|<>ri, \vJt, pt. ii. 189S ; WuUluiu^fii, hie Coinp. ft, UexitUucfu %tti>t lUr tiUtorUchen BCtcher dejt AT. Itorlin, ISSD ; IJjieiit*-'h, DiA ISniulfjbueh, Ilalle, 1892; Cornill, KtiileHuwj in dtu AT, Frt-ihur? in B. 1S;>2 ; Kniitzsch and Socin, Die Geivgi* mit u'tjK'r'-r rnt^nh'tf^'dttivi iler QuelUntichryften ubersftzt'i. Frvi* burif in B. 18U1 ; Kautzsch onii otliirs. Die U. HcUrijt dea AT iiOrrnt'tzt, Freiburg in B. Ih'M ; Aug- Uilhnann, Kurzeg Exeqe- titchet Uandbuch. (in." ISSVi. Kll.v^, l»i)7. Xu, 1)1, Jog, 1,-io. A systematic statement of Dillni.'s views is given In the^■cA/Iw*t- abliandlunt} at the end of the lust [Eng. tr. of Gniesii, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1S97] ; Builde, Die Bibtvtche Crijesi'hichtf, Gifssen, ISSii ; llulzinger, Eitilfituiuj in den Uex. mit TabfUrn itber die Quetienscfieiduny, Freiburg m B. 1S93. These are only a selected few out of a very large number of works dealing with ditlerent aapecla. or parts, of the great critical problem. A great deal of useful infonnatioQ will be found in the com- mentaries on the separate books. Ji*. H. WoODS.
HEZEKIAH (on fomis and mcnnin^ of tlic Hcb. name see nc.\t iirticle). — 1. A kinj; of .liulali (see ne.\t art.). 2. An ancestor of tlie propliet Zepli- aniah (Ztph 1'), |ios.sibly to be identified with tlie kiii^ of tlie same name. 3. Head of a family of exiles who returned, Ezr 2>''=Neh T" (cf. 10").
HEZEKIAH ('n;pm or 'n;?'-;, also n;|3in or n-pirr ' J" hath strenjrthened ' or ' J" stren^tlieneth,' LXX 'Ef«(as, Assyr. Hnzi>ki{i)au). — A king of Judah, Bon and successor of tlie feeble and superstitious Ahaz, with whom he contrasts as favourably as with his own son and successor Manasseh. He is conspicuous in Jewish history as the first king w}u) is said to have attempted a reformation of rulij;ion on the principles which we lind formally laid down in the IJk. of Deuteronomy ("2 K IS, 2 Ch 29 S. ; see HiGll Place, ii. p. 3S2') Special in- terest also attaches to his reign on account of his close personal connexion with the prophet Isaiah, who occasionally exerted a great intiuence over him (especially in the memorable crisis which issued in the deliverance of Jerusalem from Sencauherib), and al.so because of the strong light tllro^vn upon his times by the cuneiform inscrip- tions as well as by extant prophecies. H.'s history is recorded in 2 K 18"-20", Is 36-39, and 2 Ch 29- 32. The two former are very much alike, K being on the whole more full and exact, and Is having been borrowed from it by the compiler, who added the Song of H. (Is 38"-'*), but omitted the annal- istic fragment in 2 K 18'*"'' as not suiting his purpose, which was to trace the fulfilment of the prophecies of Isaiah in connexion w'ith the siege of Jerusalem. Kings is evidently based not only on State annals, but also on prophetic narrative (derived parllj' from authentic documents, jjartly from tradition), which bears traces of the style of D in 37*- ^- ^ 38'- '■ » 39', and cannot be assigned to Isaiah (as suggested by 2 Ch 26-- 32='^) nor yet to a contemporary, in view of («) the nature of the statements in 37'- <**"■ ** 38", (6) such late words as n'-5.i; (36"- ^), (c) the apparent anachroni-sms in 30" 37^, and (d) the want of order and coherence in the narrative when carefully examined and compared with the Assyr. records.
The chronology of Hezekiah's reign is beset with special difiiculty. According to 2 K 18'° the Fall or Samaria (722 as determined by Assyriologists) took place in the 6th year of H., which would give 728-7 as the date of his accession (Ewald, Breden- kamp, Delitzscli, Orelli, Strack, Driver, Kirk- patnck, Duhm, Skinner. Ussher, Winer, W. K. Smith make it 725). In 2 K 18'^ on the other hand, the invasion of Jerus. by Sennacherib (701) is said to have taken place in the 14th year of H., who must thus have commenced to reign in 715-4 (Kamp- hausen, Wellliauscn, Kd. Meyer, Kittel, Guthe, Stade, Cornill, Hommel, Clieyne).
An attempt has been made to reconcile the earlier date with 2 K 18" bj' supposing 14th to be a mistake for 24th (Bredenkamp), 27th (Rawlin-
son), 29th (Oppert), also by taking w."-" to refei to a campaign of Sargon in 711 (the name 'Sen- nacherib' being considered a late and erroneous insertion), a theory first advanced by E. Hinckj (who conlined the reference to Sar"on to v.") ; but for rea.sons stated by Kiienen, \\ . K. Smith, and others, the theory of such an invasion by Sargon is now generally abandoned, and the best solution is probably to be found in a rearrangement of the narrative. We have a clue to such rearrange- ment in 2 K 20 (Is 38), which records a sickness of H. that must have taken place in the 14th yeai of his reign if the latter extended to 29 years, and if H. lived 15 years after his recovery (2 K 18- 20°, Is 38'). This sickness the compiler seems to have connected with the invasion bj' Sennacherib (2 K 20"'', Is 38"), ai>plying to the invasion the note of time (14th year), which properly belonged to the sickness, and introducing the latter with the words ' In those days,' which may have originallj' be- longed to the invasion. This view is supported by the fact that the account of Mcrodach-Daladan'.'i embassy, which took place after the sickness (2 K 20'-', Is 39'), ought certainly to have come before the invasion, as after that event Merodach-baladan was not in a position to send ambassadors, his downfall having taken place the year before (702) j nor was H., after being impoverished by the war (2 K 18'^-"), possessed of such treasures as would be likely to excite the admiration of his visitors (2 K 20'-', Is 39'-). A middle date is suggested by Winckler (followed by JlcCurdv), who takes 2 K 16- as his guide, setting aside both 18'° and 18'^, and fixes H.'s accession at 720-19. The earlier date, however, besides having 18'° to rest on, fits in with the subsequent chronology of the kings of Judah, and agrees with Jer 26'*'-, which represents H. as under the influence of the prophet Micali, who is known to have prophesied before the Fall of Samaria (Mic 1"). On the other hand, it agg.a- vates the discrejiancy between the age of Ahaz at his death (by reducing his reign from 16 to 8 years, while the 715 date gives him 20 years of a reign) and the age of H. at his accession, which is stated in 2 K 18^ to be 25 years (but in LXX 20),— a difficulty which Whitehouse meets by supposing that II. was co-regent with his father from 727 to 715, and that his 14th year is to be reckoned from the latter date, when he was in a position to initiate a new policy following the counsels of Isaiah.