• I'oaaitjly. tlio wcoiint here i:\vvn in iiiooinplcto. Wflllmiififri (liiii-h. Sam. :i&) i)oiiitM 'tut Ihut tho sniia of Kli are niftitixrird Defort' he hiniHrlf hivn been in rotinced. Thoniim ftiid Kloslcr- mAtiii inuert ' Kli ami ' with tin- I.XX ; more prolialdy we Hliould rfad simply * and Kli, priest unto tbe LORD, woa there' (Uudde, Riehtrr u. Samuel, p. lOfl)
privileges as priests, in that they claimed more than the customary share of the sacrifices, and further insisted on having it when, and as, they pleased, so that ' men abhorred the ollering of the Loud' (see Driver, Deut. p. 216; Wellhausen, Prohfj. pp. 68, 153 f.). The further charge of licentiousness which is brought against them (1 S 2--'') is most probably due to a later editor ; the clause is wantiii'' in the LXX, and is omitted by \\'ellh., Hudde, Driver, and Klosterm.ann. The mild rebuke of their father had no ellect on their evil practices, and, in conse<iuence, a curse is pronounced against the house of Eli, first by an unknown prophet (1 S 2-'''^), and afterwards by the youthful Samuel (1 S 3"-'^- '*). In accordance with the sign given in the former prophecy, Hoplini and Phinehas both perished in the battle with the Philistines at Aphek, whither they had accom- panied the ark of God (1 S 4"; in 4'' read 'and the two sons of Eli, H. and P., were with the ark of the covenant of God ').
The history of the house of Eli which is given in 1 S 1-4 clearly belongs to the later (E) of the two documents from which the books of Samuel (see Samuel, Hooks of) aie mainly compiled ; but it is probable that the narrative has in [)arts been expanded (esp. in I S 2-'''**) by a later Deutero- nomistic editor. J. F. Stknnino.
HOPHRA (Ileb. nf^:}; LXX 0!ia4,pr,; Herod. 'kirpitfi ; Manetho OCaippis). — The Egyi)tian origi- nal, whence the other forms were derived, is W h-ili-r (see p. 656" note, vol. i. of this DB). The name of this king — the fourth of the 26th or Saite Dynasty — occurs but once in the Bible (Jer 44'°) ; yet his influence upon Jewish history was considerable. He Avas the .son and successor of Psarametichus II, and reigned from 5S8 to 569. Although Hojihra-Apries is mentioned on numer- ous Egyptian monuments, there is an almost com- plete dearth of native documents from which to reconstruct his history. Material, however, for the two chief episodes of his reign is supplied, on the one hand by the contemporaiy prophecies of Jeremiah an(f Ezekiel, and on tlie other bj' Herodotus, who visited Egypt not much more than a century later.
The constant ambition of the Saite Pharaohs was the recovery for Egypt of her ancient position of suzerainty in Asia. In this n(me of them had hitherto been more than temporarily successful ; the Syrian conquests of Neclio had been cancelled by the revival of Babylonian power under Nebueliad- rezzar, while in the ne.\t reign — that of Psamine- tichus II — we hear of no campaig^ns except in Nubia. But, on the acces.sion of Aprles, an Asiatic policy became again the king's main interest. A favourable opportunity seemed to be oH'cred by a return to power of the patriotic faction in Judah, and the consequent rev<dt of Zedekiah. The Babylonian force sent to punish this display of independence was compelled, by the appearance in the .south of an Egyptian army, to desist from the siege of Jerusalem (586). The check, however, was but momentarj'. Apries does not appear to have ventured a battle, and the Jews once more le.irned the value of Egypt's friendship. While their ICgvptiaii allies witlntrew, .leru.silem fell, and the llabylonians wreaked their vengeance on
" The text of this sivtion is in ronnidenihle confusion, and Uiu ini-aninir can he cxtraot«,tl only with dittlculty. The two c\ entJ* which are foretold are : (I) the almost entire destnirtion of Kli's house (v.. 11, referrintf to the massacn* of the priests at Noh. 1 S 2ii7-«>; (i) the raisinir up of a faithful priest (\.», referrinx to the apixiinlllv^nt of Zadok in the place of Altiathar, the jfreiit-tfreat-cnindson of Kli, by Solomon. 1 K 2 '). The sii;n ^:iven in atteslatioii of the prophei-y (v.*<) Is the death of Ilophni and rhlnehos in one dav. See Wellhaus4-n. /Vr Tfst drr Hiichrr Sam. p. 48 f. ; Drlror, Uib. Trit u/ Sam. p KIL I Dudde, op. cil. p. \9tt.
114
HOR
HOR
the nation. Nevertheless, the succeeding years of anarchy and bloodslied in Judah induced many of the remaining inliabitants to quit their homes and fly to Egypt lor protection. A pries received tliem and settled them in the frontier fortress of Daphnje (Tahpanhes, Tell Defeneh), in the eastern Delta, the station of one of the mercenary corps of lonians and C'arians who formed at the time the strength of the Egyptian armies. Certain remains of build- ings on this site have been identified with the pave- ment, etc., referred to by Jeremiah (43"), who him- self shared the Egj-ptian exile of his countrymen.
The much discussed inscription, in which some have recognized a reference to Nebuchadrezzar's punitive expedition to Eg-\-pt and to the reign of A pries, more jirobably relates merely the repres- sion of some internal revolt (see A^g. Zeitschr. 1884, 87, 93) ; while the cuneiform fragment, claimed as corroborative evidence for the .'<ame event, can be so regarded only on the hypothesis — otherwise unsupported — of a temporary co - regency of Apries and Amasis, since the war it relates appears to have been directed against the latter king. It is curious, though scarcely im- portant, that a tradition of Nebuchadrezzar's in- vasion should have survived even into Moham- medan times.*