The Pulpit Commentary — Joshua — Section 41

he hacl accepted. To strengthen himself he made an alliance, not with Hezekicth, who also was revolting, but one forbidden by the law, with So king of Egypt, probably the Sa,baco of Herodotus or the Sevechus (Sevichos) of M1111etho. Thus the sRme dark po"-·er which had tried to strangle the Chosen People o.t its birth, which had lent its sinister aid to the founding of the schisma.tical kingdom of Israel, now by once more lending aid contributed to its final overthrow. So truly wns Egypt like the reeds of its own river, "on which if a man lean, it will go into his hancl and pierce it" (2 Kings xviii. 21). The alliance was ma.de known to Shalma.neser, who at once called Hoshea to account and put him in prison. And thus Snrnnria's king "is cut off, like a chip upon the water" (Hosea x. 7). Sa.maria held out stubbornly, like Jerusalem after it, defending its walls, its " crown of pride" (Isa. xxviii. 3), with the courage of despair. This death-struggle, the last of an expiring people, lasted three years; at the end of which the place was to.ken by Sargon, the successor of Shalmaneser. His" veni, vidi, vici'' is still in existence: "Samario. I looked at, I captured: 27,280 who dwelt in it I carried away." This was the common policy of Oriental conquerors-to transplant the inhabitants of conquered territories, and occnpy their land with other populations. This served various purposes. It weakened both of the nations interchanged, and kept them for a time at least submissive; for their energy would be expended in settling in their new home- Sometimes a trustworthy people near at home was exchanged with a troublesome nation near the frontier: this was precisely the case with the Israelites. Sometimes a more advanced people were planted as a centre of civilisation in the midst of ruder tribes. The Israelites were not only transpodecl but dispersed, no donbt with a view to prevent concerted action in the future, a policy which has been entirely successful (2 Kings xvii. 6; xviii. 11). A few may have escaped the Assyrian net and remained in Samaria, or have returned thither afterwards, to mingle mth the Samaritans. A few returned with the Jews and became merged with them in Judrea. Many would coalesce with the Jews in Babylon and. become part of the " Dispersion." It is worth noting in reference to the last two cases that Ezekiel, after the captivity of Judah, Rpeaks of the captives as Israel (eh. ii. 8; iii. 1-7; iv. 3, 13, &,,:.). The bulk probably carried their habitual love of idolatry with them into exile, and beca~e lost by intermarriage with the heathen popula- tions of Assyria. The imagination of Jews and Christians alike has tried to pierce the veil which history ha,s drawn over their ultimate fate. The black Jews of Male.bar, the Red Indians of North America, Afghan tribes, Himala,yan tribes, the :t,;'estoria,ns, have all had their advocates as the representativtis of the lost tribes. It was reserved for the present generation to suggest and maintain almost as an article of faith, or even as the announcement of a, new gospel, the most wildly impossible theory of all, that the present descenda11ts.of these Semitic ancestors are the Aryan inhabitants c;f Great Britain. To some persons this astonishing hypothesis .seems too absurd to l,e worth combating, while others allow it to pass as a harmless delusion. The following questions demand a clear and. reasonable answer from a,ll those who advocate the.doctrine: rI) If Anglo - Israelism is tnie, how is that not a single theologian, or hutorim,, or philologist of any eminence has accepted it, or even admitted. its possiriility ? True that the Gospel was in the first instance hidden from the wise a,ncl. prudent and revealed to babes ; but it does not therefore follow that what the wise and prudent reject, and babes accept, is true. Moreover, the wise and  JOSHUA TO NEHEMIAH. xlvii