RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Nimes Nimrod
Catholic France, even by the finer spirits, such as Fehelon, Massillon, La Fontaine, La Bruyere, and Mme. de Sevign£, while the pope applauded it in a special brief of Nov. 13. Its awful consequences were visible long after.
While Louis XIV. and his cohorts of the Roman Catholic Church succeeded in annihilating the Protestant Church as a recognized ecclesiastical body, and while the blood of Protestants flowed like water,
nevertheless thousands of Protestants 6. Results remained faithful, steadfastly worshipto Protes- ing (even if under cover) according to tantism and the dictates of conscience. Despite all France, the persecution, harassings, persistent
and malignant oppression, importunities and tortures to which all Protestants, no matter where found, were subjected, the fanatical followers of the Roman Church did not succeed in destroying Protestantism itself. Nor did they succeed in annihilating all the witnesses of the Protestant faith, as is fully attested by the lives and doings of such men as Brousson, Court, and Rabaut (see Court, Antoine; Rabaut, Paul). When in 1787 Louis XVI. issued his edict of toleration, the number of Protestants in the kingdom, estimated in 1660 at 1,600,000 to 1,700,000, was not more than 600,000; and their influence on the national life had been lost. The general level of French piety was lowered by the proportion of lives of compulsory hypocrisy entailed by forced conversions; French theology, with the annihilation of an opposition, lost its seriousness and depth, and the place of the great divines of Louis XIV 's reign was taken by the courtly abbes of the regency. Even more obvious was the loss to the nation at large by the emigration (estimated at over 300,000 between 1680 and 1700) of so great a number of intelligent and industrious subjects; French commerce and manufacture received a blow from which they have never wholly recovered. Taking also into account the political sequels, such as the suppression of Roman Catholicism in England by the revolution and the placing of William of Orange in a position to make head against France, the year 1685 may safely be called the turning-point in the fortunes of Louis XIV., which began to decline from that time. (Theodor ScHorrf.)
Bibliography: Consult the literature under Huguenots; Nantes, Edict of, particularly Baird's Huguenots and the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. The chief work is still, E. Benoit, Hist, de Vidit de Nantes, vols, i.-iii., Delft, 1693-95. Consult further: C. C. de Rulhiere, Eclaircissements historiques sur les causes de la revocation de Vedit de Nantes, vol. i., Paris, 1788; G. von Polenz, Geschichte des franzosischen Calvinismus, vols, iv.-v., Gotha, 1864-69; E. Stahelin, Der Uebertritt Heinrichs IV. zur romisch-katholischen Kirche, Basel, 1865; F. Sander, Die Huguenotten und das Edikt von Nantes, Breslau, 1885; T. Schott, Die Aufhebung des Ediktes von Nantes, Halle, 1885. A resume of the material educed by the Bicentennial of the Edict of Nantes is given in Bulletin de la societe de Vhistoire du protestantisme francais, 1885, pp. 565 sqq., 609 sqq., 1886, 182 sqq.; C. Tylor, The Huguenots in the Seventeenth Century, London, 1892; J. Lemoine, Mimoires des Svlques de France sur la conduite a tenir a regard des Reformes, Paris, 1902; Documents and readings illustrating the period are given in Reich, Documents, pp. 349-386; Robinson, European History, pp. 268 sqq.
NIMROD: According to Genesis, a son of Cush, a mighty hunter, and a founder of kingdoms. All
known of Nimrod is contained in the verses Gen. x. 8-12. It is clear that the recital falls into two parts: verses 8, 10-12, describe Nimrod as the founder of two great kingdoms (verse 11 should read " Out of that land he went forth to Asshur ") ; verse 9 declares that he was a mighty hunter. The passage therefore probably contains two traditions and shows the hand of an editor, since verse 9 would naturally find its place at the end. While it would be incorrect to attribute the foundation of both a Babylonian and an Assyrian kingdom to any such single personality as Nimrod, it is quite possible that the principal cities of Assyria were established by Babylonian colonists (see Assyria, VI., 3, § 1). The earliest Babylonian and Assyrian cities are correctly named by the writer. After Babylon, Erech (the modern Warka) occupies the first place (see Babylonia, IV., § 5); here Ishtar was worshiped from ancient times, and it is the scene of the Gilgamesh epic (see Babylonia, VIII, , 3 § 2). Accad follows, probably Agade (Akkad), the birth-place of Sargon I. (see Babylonia, IV., § 11), although Accad commonly signifies Northern Babylonia. Calneh is perhaps Nippur (see Babylonia, IV., § 11; cf. H. Hilprecht, Excavations in Bible Lands, pp. 410 sqq., Philadelphia, 1903). In Assyria, after Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir (A. V " the city Rehoboth ") is named, probably meaning " open city." Calah, southeast of Nineveh (see Assyria, IV., § 3), was for a long time the residence of the Assyrian kings. Resen can not easily be identified and the addition, " the same is a great city," is somewhat obscure (see Assyria, IV., § 4). The fact that Asshur, the oldest Assyrian city, is not mentioned, shows that the passage is not very early. Who was this founder of the cities of the Babylonian empire? The Biblical writer seems to have derived the name from marad, " to rebel "; the founding of the Babylonian empire is combined with the building of the Tower of Babel as a revolt against God's supremacy. Association of Nimrod with the Gilgamesh of Babylonian legend is doubtful; another hypothesis connects him with the national god of Babylonia, Marduk (J. Wellhausen, Composition des Hexateuchs, p. 308, Berlin, 1889). An Egyptian or Ethiopian origin based on Nimrod's descent from Cush is unlikely and the better reference is to an Asiatic Cush connected with the Kosshites or Kasshites who settled in Babylonia about 1700 and ruled the land until the twelfth or eleventh century B.C. (see Cush, Cushites).
Nimrod as a hunter was probably an independent figure. Hunting-scenes are often depicted in Babylonian sculptures, both in connection with historical and with mythological personages. This would be significant if it* were possible to identify Nimrod with Gilgamesh, for the latter is represented as a great hunter. Gen. vi. 1-^ speaks of " giants . . men of renown " (see Giants); the similarity of the expression makes it likely that the writer of Gen. x. 9 regarded Nimrod as one of these giants. In this way might be explained the term " before the Lord," as these beings sprang from a divine race and stood nearer to God. Nimrod might be, and indeed was, compared with the Greek hunter Orion who drove the Pleiades before him. (R, Kittel.)
Ninck Nitschmann