M. afterwards recovered his freedom, and in B.C. 702, after the death of Sargon, he returned to Babylon, and reigned there a second time for about six months; though the Annalistic Tablet seems to imply that this M. was not identical with the Kalda jigatte (as it calls him ‘an Assyrian soldier’). any rate, the usurper was over- thrown by Sennacherib at Kish, and Bel-ibni was made king of Babylon by the Assyrians. For some time M. defended himself in the marshes ; but after a time, growing weary of the struggle, he embarked for the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf, with his followers and gods, and settled in the Elamite city of Nagitu. To this retreat, in B.C. 695, he was pursued by Sennacherib, who stormed the Chaldean colony. M. himself seems to have been already dead, but at a subsequent date we hear of his son Nebo-sum-iskun assisting the Elamites in a war against the Assyrians.
A. H. SAYCE.
MEROM, THE WATERS OF (οὐ Ὁ, τὸ ὕδωρ Μαρρών or Μερρών), where Joshua overthrew the donfederation of the northern kings, are commonly identified with the highest of the three lakes in the Jordan Valley, now called Baheiret el-Huleh, ‘the
*So Driver, Jsaiah2, 14, 45, 49; Skinner, Isaiah, vol. L p. 283; Tiele, Bab.-Assyr. Gesch. ae 849; εἰ al. On the other hand, Schrader, KAT? p- 344 [ ii, 23), prefers to date the visit of Merodach-baladan’s envoys ¢, 704 ΒΟ. ; so also W. B, Smith, Proph. of Jer. Ὁ. 318—at a time, however, when he was not king of Babylonia.
348 little lake of el-Huleh.’ The height of the waters here relatively to those of the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea possibly accounts for the name Οὐ Ὁ used by the ancient historian (Jos 11°7). Several of the places mentioned in the chapter have been identified with tolerable certainty, e.g. Hazor and Achshaph; while Mizpah, from the position as- signed to it, must have lain immediately to the north of el-Huleh. The open land in the neighbour- hood of ‘Ain el-Melldha would therefore atlord an excellent rallying-ground for the hosts assembling for one supreme etlort to stay the progress of the victorious invaders.
No absolute proof of this identification can be offered, and certain objections have been raised, none of which, however, is insuperable. (1) The word mé [constr. of mayim, ‘waters’] is nowhere else applied to such a large body of standing water; in such cases the term ydm (‘sea’) is commonly employed. Too much may easily be made of this objection, which, being only of a negative character, must give way to more positive considerations. (2) Josephus places the camp of the kings at Beroth in per Galilee, and makes no mention of waters. ere, therefore, we are told the scene of the battle must be sought, and not in the Jordan lowlands (Socin’s note in Schumacher’s Jauldn, 102). Josephus says (Ant. vy. i. 18) that Beroth was ‘not far from Kadesh’: this fixes the locality, Kadesh lying on the heights west of the valley, But the battle was not neces- sarily fought at the spot where the camp stood. Long afterwards, in this same district, Demetrius pitched his camp at Kadesh, and fought Jonathan in the plain below (Jos. Ané¢. XIII. v. 7). Why should not the kings have followed a similar course? (3) By giving battle in this plain the
MEROM, THE WATERS OF
acini would have exposed themselves to grave er
in the event of defeat, since it is so hemmed in by hills and marshes as to make es-ppe ex- tremely difficult ; immense natural barriers lying expecially between it and great Zidon, tvwards which a great part of the routed army fied (Jos 118). In reply to this, it may be pointed out that for the evolutions of the chariots on which the Canaanites so much relied, there was no ground anywhere near so suitable as the com- paratively easy downs south of ‘Ain el-Melldha.
o secure this advantage, they were doubtless willing to take some risk. It should also be remembered that the Canaanites were at home amid the intricacies of mountain and marsh, of which their pursuers were largely ignorant. In their flight to great Zidon, the fugitives would probably follow the course of the ordinary route from Banids to the sea, and familiarity with these wild uplands would greatly facilitate their efforts to escape.
Baheiret el-Huleh is a pear-shaped basin, pointing southward, and having a distinct bulge to the north-west. It lies 7 ft. above the level of the Mediterranean, and is from 10 ft. to 16 ft. in depth. Its greatest breadth is about 3 miles, and its length from the edge of the marshes to the exit of the Jordan is 34 to 4 miles. Measurements vary somewhat with the amount of rainfall and the condition of the muddy banks. The N. limit is especially ill defined, as the waters of the upper Jordan, forcing their way in different channels through the swamp, are constantly changing the line. Owing to the formation at the southern end, the lake might be drained or enlarged with almost equal ease. Probably it was once much larger than it is now (ΠΗ, p. 481, note). To the means taken for this extension, possibly Mukaddasi (A.D. 985) refers in the following sentence: ‘In order to form the lake they have built a wonderful embankment of masonry along