MENAHEM 339
fully ae toa for splendid buildings. Yet M. con- tinued to the most populous city, and became again the residence of the Pharaohs until the end ot Egypt’s independence (525 B.c.), although it was frequently ravaged by war, e.g. when the Ethio- pian conqueror P(i)'ankhi (about 750) took it by storm. It experienced the woes threatened by the prophets of Israel repeatedly at the hands of the Assyrians under Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal, last and worst in 525 B.c. at the hands of the Persian king Cambyses. Under the Persian rule it was the stronghold of a powerful Persian garrison, and Prored to be the key of Egypt in the various rebellions against the Persians, suffering especi- ally from the Persian king Ochus after the last revolution. The foundation of Alexandria made M. the second city of Egypt, but the Ptolemies and the governors of the ie and Byzantine lords used it as a second capital. The deathblow was dealt to it by the Arab conquest and the founda- tion of Old Cairo (Fostat) in 638 A.D. The Arabs employed the stones of the ruins (which are described by Abulfeda in the 14th cent. as still being very extensive) for building up the new city, and, later, Cairo. Therefore the present site does not indicate the former size (marked by Kum el- Azizyeh in the N., Bedrashen in the 5.) and splen- dour. That the poor modern village of Mitrahineh occupies the centre of M. and the site of the cele- brated temple of Hephestus, is indicated only by the fallen stone colossus of Ramses Π. (originally 43 feet high). Mariette’s excavations produced only insignificant fragments of this temple, and showed that the destruction of the whole city has been very complete. But the immense necropolis at the west of M., on the borders of the Libyan desert, still extends from Abu-Rosh in the N. to Dashur in the 8. The gigantic royal tombs, the pyramids, attract numerous visitors from the whole world. Usually, only the most remarkable group of pyramids (those of Khufu, Khafré, and Uenkaré ot Dyn. 4 [in Herodotus, Cheops, Cheph- ren, and Mycerinus)}) at Gizeh are visited ; about 50 other pyramids of smaller size or still more dilapi- dated are less known (those at Sakkara, belonging to Dyn. 6, and of Dashur of Dyn. 4, being most remarkable). The immense sphinx at Gizeh (prob. awork of Καὶ paps Charen, although recently some scholars place it in . 12), and many private tombs, the latter much destroyed, contribute to make the site of ancient M. still remarkable. W. MAx MULLER.
MEMPHITIC YERSION.— See EaypTian VER-
SIONS.
MEMUCAN (Est 1+ 1&2 pin, yam v.16 Kethibh ; in vy.’ 21 BA have Movyaios; in v.16 N° * Mayouyaios ; in v.21 x* has εὐνοῦχος, N* * Μούχεος, N°” Μαμούχεος ; in ν. LXX om.; Mamuchan).—One of the seven pn of Persia who held the highest rank in the
ingdom, and had access to the royal presence (see ADMATHA). These men, who formed the king’s council, are represented both as astrologers (‘ wise men, who knew the times’) and as authorities on all questions of law and custom. When Ahasuerus consulted his counsellors with regard to the con- duct of Vashti in refusing to come to the banquet at his bidding, Memucan was the first to speak. He represented that the queen’s example was likely
to be followed by all the princesses of Media and Persia, and recommended that she should be de- posed from her royal dignity, and that a decree should forthwith be published enjoining upon al) wives to give due honour to their own husbands.
This advice pleased the king, and was at once carried into etfect (Est 1'5-*), H. A. WHITE.
MENAHEM (o5x2=‘ consoler’ ; Mavarju, A Μαναήν,
340 MENAHEM
MENE MENE TEKEL UPHARSIN
the latter form being the same as is found Ac 13}). —The history of Menahem is recorded 2 Καὶ 1515: He is there called ‘son of Gadi’ (Heb. "3, LXX
Γαδδεί). Gadi is most likely the name of his father, but it is possible that ‘son of Gadi’ may mean that he was a member of the tribe of Gad, many of whom had become regular soldiers in consequence of the harrying of the East Jordan land in the long course of the Syrian wars (see 2 K 15”, and cf. Stade, Gesch. des V. Isr. i. 576). During the six months’ reign of Zechariah, the last king of the house of Jehu, Menahem seems to have been one of the foremost generals; and when Shallum con- spired against and murdered Zechariah, Menahem was in command at Tirzah, once the capital of the northern kingdom and still an important military post. Menahem did not acquiesce in Shallum’s usurpation. He marched from Tirzah to Samaria, defeated and slew his rival, and mounted the throne. According to the MT of vy. his next move was against Tiphsah, which refused to admit him. He tookit by storm, slaughtered the inhabit- ants, and treated the unhappy women with the atrocious cruelty too common in those days. In several particulars the text of this sixteenth verse is corrupt, and there can be little doubt that it is so in respect of the town-name. The only city of this name mentioned in the Bible is the well-known Thapsacus, on the Euphrates (1 Καὶ 45 [Heb δ}. Rawlinson’s suggestion (Speaker's Comm. in loc.) that an expedition thither by Menahem would be the natural sequel to Jeroboam I.’s occupation of Hamath, is condemned by the fact that Menahem’s position at home was too insecure for him to venture tar afield. On the other hand, we need not assume the existence of a Tiphsah in the land of Israel, unmentioned in any other passage. The LXX, which has Θαρσειλά in v.44, here reads Θερσά (A Θαιρά). It is not difficult to believe that in those disturbed times, when no one knew who would ulti- mately come out at the top, Tirzah closed its gates behind Menahem as soon as he marched out against Shallum, and was therefore visited with bloody vengeance when he forced them open again. On this view we should read 7y7A instead of non, and omit 7yQA> as a clerical error. The other alterna- tive is to adopt Thenius’ conjecture, and, with the minimum of alteration, read m5a for no=n; the town thus named, Tappuah, being on the bounda between Ephraim and Manasseh, Jos 16° 177-8 (ef. Benzinger, Kénige, in Marti’s Handkomm.). A keen sense of the evil and misery of these days of internal strife is best gained from such writings as Hos 7? 84, Is 919-21,