Page images
PDF
EPUB

Daniel, and

Fit therefore it was that such impious pride should be abased, and that he who set From Jer. xi, himself above the rank of men, upon a level with God, nay, in an elevation superior to 7. to xiv. all God, should be made sensible of his dependant state, and taught humility and self-anni- from Ezra i. hilation, by being degraded to the condition of a brute. He "had said in his heart, to v. (for of him * is that prophecy in Isaiah), (a) I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;-I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High-but how art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning? how art thou cut down to the ground, who didst weaken the nations?-They that see thee, shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake all kingdoms, that made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof? And well they might when they saw (b) him dwelling with the beasts of the field, eating grass like oxen, and wet with the dew of heaven, with his hair grown like eagle's feathers, and his nails like the claws of birds." But then the question is, what the proper sense of these words is? or, (what is the same thing) of what kind this Divine infliction upon the king of Babylon was?

Origen (c), who was for resolving every thing that he could not comprehend in Scripture into allegory, was of opinion, that, under the name of Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel intended to give us a representation of the fall of Lucifer, being probably led to think so by the above-cited passage in the prophet Isaiah. But the account of the punishment which befel this prince, is so often inculcated in the same chapter, foretold in the dream explained by the prophet, repeated by the voice from heaven, and all this published in a solemn declaration by the king himself after the recovery of his senses,—that there is no manner of grounds to think of any figure or allegory in this piece of history. Nebuchadnezzar's real metamorphosis into an ox, both as to his outward and inward form, is a notion too gross for any but the vulgar, who may be taken perhaps with such fictions of the poets; and what we have no need to recur to (thereby to multiply miracles to no purpose) from any words in the text, which will fairly admit of another interpretation.

The metempsychosis of an ox's soul into Nebuchadnezzar's body, thereby to communicate the same motions, taste, and inclinations that are observable in that animal, is a notion unknown to all antiquity; for, according to the doctrine of Pythagoras, such a transmigration was never made until the body was actually dead; besides the manifest incongruity of supposing two souls, a rational and a brutal, animating the same prince, or the prince's soul departed from him, and become the substitute to a brute.

but one of the Assyrian dynasty. Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon appears to have been an arrogant and vain. glorious conqueror, but in no other sense an atheist than many such conquerors have been, even in Christian countries, who, elated by success, forgot in their practice the God of battles, by whom that success was obtained. Far from being a speculative atheist, or from demanding Divine worship to himself, the Baby lonian conqueror appears to have been a zealous polytheist and idolater; acknowledging, however, as most polytheists of any reflection did, that there was one God superior to all the others, and ready occasionally-perhaps always-to attribute this superiority to the God of Israel. It is probable likewise that he believed in the Metempsychosis, a doctrine, which appears from the Asiatic Researches and other ancient records to have prevailed over all the East from a period long anterior to the reign of Nebuchadnezzar; and if such was the case, there was a peculiar propriety in punishing his pride by the disease called Lycanthropy. He persisted, in opposition to his own.

repeated conviction, to worship the gods, in whom he
appears at times to have had no confidence whetever,
giving, it may be supposed, some degree of credit to
this gloomy doctrine; and therefore, with wisdom
truly Divine, he was visited with a species of mad-
ness, which, though it has been occasionally witnessed
in every age and in different countries, appears to
have been most frequent where the doctrine of the me-
tempsychosis or the transmigration of souls prevailed.]
See Warburton's Div. Leg. on this subject, and like-
wise Mosheim's edition of Cudworth's Intellectual Sys-
tem, with the authors referred to by the learned edi-
tor of that profound work.

* [This appears to me to be a mistake. The pro-
phecy seems to refer not to Nebuchadnezzar alone,
but to him and the succeeding kings of Babylon in
general; or if any individual be particularly pointed
out, Belshazzar seems to be that individual.]
(a) Isai. xiv 13, &c.

(6) Dan. iv. 32, 33.

(c) Calmet's Dissert. sur la Metamorphose, &c.

Ant Chris.

or 586.

A. M. 3417, A fascination, both in the eyes of Nebuchadnezzar's subjects, and in his own fancy and &c. or 4825. imagination, which might make them both believe that he was really changed into an 587, &c. ox, and had the figure of one, is a notion every whit as liable to exception. For besides that it is difficult to conceive, how a deception of this kind could abide upon a whole nation for the space of seven years, the scripture takes notice of no evil spirit in this whole transaction, but imputes all to the sole power of God, who can humble the proud, and chastise the wicked as he pleases.

The most general therefore. and most probable opinion is,-that Nebuhadnezzar, by the judgment of God, was punished with madness, which so disordered his imagination, that he fancied himself a beast, and was prompted to act like one.

There is a distemper (not a very common one indeed, but what is befallen several) which naturalists and physicians call lycanthropy, when, by the power of a depraved imagination, and a distempered brain, a man really thinks that he is a wolf, an ox, a dog, or the like; and accordingly, in his inclinations, motions, and behaviour, cannot forbear imitating the particular creature which he fancies himself to be. In this manner Nebuchadnezzar, imagining that he was become an ox, walked upon all four, fed upon grass, went naked, lowed with his voice, and butted (as he thought) with his horns; and, in short, did all the actions, as far as he was able, that a real ox is known to do. (a) Hereupon his subjects, perceiving this change in him, took him and bound him (as madmen are wont to be treated); but at last, he escaping out of their hands, fled to the fields, where he herded with the cattle, exposed to the dew of heaven, and the other inclemencies of the weather; where his neglected body became horrid and dreadful to behold; where his hair and his nails, in process of time, grew in the hideous manner that the prophet had described them *; and where his heart, i. e. his apprehension, appetite, and inclinations, by the continuance of his distemper, became quite brutal, and of the same cast with the beasts that graze.

The masters of the medics, who have treated of this kind of madness, have made it their observation, that the persons infected with it are generally so excessively strong, that no bands or chains can hold them. They can live a long while without eating or drinking, and endure wet and cold without any great inconvenience to themselves; and therefore Nebuchadnezzar, though bred up in the pleasures and delicacies of the court, might, by the strength of his distemper, be enabled to do what otherwise he would not; to live in the fields for seven years together, naked and exposed to the injuries of the weather, without any thing to nourish him, except either the grass on the ground, or the wild fruits on the hedges: But then, whether he retained the use of his reason whilst he continued in this disasterous state, is a question that is not so easily deter mined.

The Scripture indeed, at first sight, seems to intimate, that he had no sense of his misery, nor made any reflection upon himself, or upon what he was doing, until God was pleased to remove his afflicting hand: For these are his own words, (b) "At the end of my days, I Nebuchadnezzar lift up mine eyes unto heaven, and my understanding returned unto me." Which seem to imply, that all along before this, his reason was

*Such was the distemper of Lycaon, king of Ar-
cadia, which Ovid has described, as if he had been
turned into a wolf.

Territus ipse fugit, nactusque silentia ruris
Exululat, frustraque loqui conatur: ab ipso
Colligit os rabiem, solitæque cupidine cædis
Vertitur in pecudes; et nunc quoque sanguine
gaudet.

In villos abeunt vestes, in crura lacerti,
Fit lupus, et veteris servat vestigia formæ.

Ovid. Metam. lib. i.

(a) Dan. iv. 33.

** it seems not necessary to suppose that the prophecy was fulfilled or meant to be fulfilled in this li teral sense. It is enough that he fancied himself to be among wild beasts, and his hair and nails to have grown in this hideous manner. Such fancies constitute the chief part of the disease. But had he literally betaken himself to the society of wild beasts, he would have been torn in pieces long before the expiration of seven years.]

(b) Dan. iv. 34.

in a kind of deliquium, and without any consciousness of what he was about. But then From Jer. xl. it may be asked, Wherein would his punishment and humiliation consist, if the man was Daniel, and insensible? if he knew nothing of the matter? nay, if he took pleasure (as most mad- from Ezra i. men do) in the disorder of imagination?

To be miserable, and not to know it, by some may be thought the very height of misery; but the person in Horace who frequented the empty theatre every day, and delighted himself with the reveries of his own fancy, with plays and shows which no body saw but himself, was not so well pleased with his friends when they had recovered him to his senses.

Pol me occidistis, Amici,

Non servastis, ait, cui sic extorta voluptas,

Et demptus per vim mentis gratissimus error.

Hor. Ep. lib. ii.

To answer the ends of Providence, therefore, in afflicting in this manner this haughty and assuming prince, which was to mortify his pride, and bring him to a state of humiliation and acknowledgment of God's superior hand, we may suppose that, at certain intervals at least, he had a sense and perception of his misery; that he saw the condition to which he was degraded; but being carried away with his brutal appetite, found it not in his power to extricate himself. St Paul, in his description of a man given up to his lusts, (whereof Nebuchadnezzar in his present condition is no improper emblem) has these remarkable words: (a) “I know that in me (i. e. in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing; for to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good, I find not; for the good that I would, I do not; but the evil that I would not, that I do. For though I delight in the law of God after the inner man, yet I see another law in my members, warring against the law in my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, that is in my members. O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death!" And in like manner, if we suppose this king of Babylon in such a perpetual struggle and conflict with himself; seeing his error, but not able to avoid it; sensible of his disgrace, but not capable to redress it; committing the things which his soul abhorred, and detesting himself for what he found himslf necessitated to do, till God should think fit to restore his understanding, by allaying the fer- ment of his blood and humours. correcting his appetite, and ranging his ideas into their proper order :-If we suppose this, I say, we have before us the image of a creature completely miserable; reasons for his humiliation during his affliction, innumerable *; a fountain to supply his gratitude upon the removal of it, inexhaustible; and, from his example, this lecture of admonition to all succeeding generations: (b)" Thus saith the Lord, let not the wise man glory in his widom; neither let the mighty man glory in his might. Let not the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glorieth, glory in this, that he understandeth, and knoweth me, that I am the Lord, who exerciseth loving-kindness, judgment, and righteousness in the earth; for in these things I delight, saith the Lord."

(a) Rom. vii. 18, &c.

What Nebuchadnezzar says of himself, with re gard to this duty, is very remarkable,-" I blessed the Most High, and praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation. All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as no thing, for he doth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What dost thou? I therefore now praise and extol, and ho

nour the king of heaven, all whose works are truth,
and his ways judgment, and those that walk in pride
he is able to abase," Dan. iv. 34, &c.
Which is e-
nough, one would imagine, to make us think charita-
bly of the conversion, and final end of this prince,
and, with St Austin, to conclude, that whatever hap
pened to him by way of punishment, was designed by
Providence for his soul's health. Hoc enim erat in
occulto judicio, et misericordia Dei, ut huic regi co
modo consuleret ad salutem.
Epist. iii.

(b) Jer. ix. 23, &c.

7. to xlv. all

to v.

CHAPTER II.

FROM THE DEATH OF CYRUS TO THAT OF NEHEMIAH.

Ant. Chris.

587, &c. or 529.

THE HISTORY.

all Esth

Hagg. 7

and Ma

A. M. 3417, CYRUS died when he was seventy years old, after he had reigned, from his first being From &c. or 4882. made commander of the Persian and Median armies, thirty years; from his taking of the Babylon, nine years; and from his becoming sole monarch of the East, seven years; and par and was succeeded by his son Cambyses, whom the Scripture calls Ahasuerus *. As soon as he was well settled in the throne, the Samaritans (instead of applying themselves secretly to the ministers and officers of his court) presented their petition (a) to him openly, desiring that the rebuilding of Jerusalem might be stopped; and though they did not prevail with him to revoke his father's decree, yet, by the several discouragements which he put upon it, he in a great measure defeated its main design, so that the work went on very heavily in his reign. But his reign was not long; it was but seven years and five months before he came to an untimely end, and was succeeded for a short time by the Magian, *2 who *3 pretended to be his brother Smerdis, and

[This seems to be a mistake. The Ahasuerus
of Esther was probably Artaxerxes Longimanus.]
(a) Ezra iv. 6.

principle having overcome the evil, they should each of them have a distinct world to himself; the good reigning over all good beings, and the evil over all *The word Magian, or Mige-gush, in the old Per- the wicked. They imagined farther, that darkness sian language, signifies a person that had his ears cut was the truest symbol of the evil, as light was of the off, and was a name of contempt given to the whole good god; and therefore they always worshipped him sect, upon account of a certain impostor among them, before fire, as being the cause of light, and before the who had the misfortune to lose his ears, and yet had sun more especially, because they accounted it the the confidence to usurp the crown of Cyrus; but, be- most perfect light. They paid divine honours, in fore this incident, they went under another name, short, to light, to the sun, to the fire, in their temand were held in great reputation among the Per- ples, and to fire in their houses; but they always hasians. They were indeed their chief professors of ted darkness, because they thought it a representa. philosophy, and, in matters of religion, made these tion of the evil god, whom they ever had in the utthe great articles of their faith :-"That there were most detestation." Such were the Magi among the two principles or gods, the one the cause of all the ancient Persians, and such are the Guebres, or wor good, and the other the cause of all the evil in the shippers of fire among the present Persians and Inworld; but in this they were divided; that some of dians. Prideaux's Connection, and Calmet's Dictionthem held both these principles to have been from ary under the word. all eternity, whereas others maintained, that the good principle only was eternal, and the evil one created, in the like manner as we believe that the devil is a creature, who is fallen from his original purity and perfection. These two principles, they believed, were in continual opposition to each other, which was to continue to the end of the world; but then, the good

*3 The manner in which this Magian came to usurp the Persian throne, is thus related by most historians-Cambyses had a brother, the only son of Cyrus besides himself, and born of the same mother. His name, (according to Xenophon) was Tanaoxares, but Herodotus calls him Smerdis, and Justin, Mergis. He accompanied him in his wars for some time; but

66

7. to the end;

whom the history of Ezra † calls Artaxerxes. To him the Samaritans in like manner From Ezra iv. addressed themselves, and, in a memorial, represented, That the Jews were re- all Esth. Neh. building their city and temple at Jerusalem, which might be a matter of pernicious con- and part of sequence to his empire; that these Jews had always been a rebellious people, as he would Hagg. Zech. find, if he consulted the records of his ancestors; that therefore there was reason to sus-pect, that in case they were permitted to go on, when once they had finished the work, they would withdraw their obedience, or refuse to pay tribute †3; and that by their example, very probably, all Syria and Palestine would be tempted to revolt; so

upon a pique of jealousy, the king sent him back into Persia, and there caused him to be murdered privately. The king, when he went upon the Egyptian expedition, had left the supreme government of his affairs in the hands of Patizithes, one of the chief of the Magians, (for the king was addicted to that sect of religion) who had a brother that did very much resemble Smerdis, the son of Cyrus, and was for that reason perhaps called by the same name, Patizithes, hearing of the young prince's death, and supposing that this, and some other extravagances of Cambyses, had made him odious to his subjects, placed this brother of his on the throne, pretending that he was the true Smerdis, the son of Cyrus, and so sent heralds through the empire to proclaim him king. It was the custom of the eastern princes, in those days, to live retired in their palaces, and there transact all their affairs by the intercourse of their eunuchs, without admitting any else, unless those of the highest confidence, to have access to them. This conduct the pretended Smerdis exactly observed: but Otanes, a Persian nobleman, having a daughter (whose name was Phedyma) who had been one of Cambyses's wives, and was now kept by Smerdis in the same quality, and being desirous to know whether he was the real son of Cyrus or no, sent her instructions, that the first night she lay with him, she should feel whether he had any ears, (because Cyrus, for some crime or other, had cut off this Magian's ears) and she acquainting her father that he had none, he immediately took six others of the Persian quality with him, (among whom Darius was one) and entering the palace, slew both the usurper and his brother, who had been the contriver of the whole plot. Prideaux's Connection,

Anno 522.

That Cambyses was the Ahasuerus, (as we said before) and the false Smerdis the Artaxerxes who obstructed the work of the temple, is plain from hence, -That they are said in Scripture (Ezra iv. 5, &c.) to be the kings of Persia that reigned between the time of Cyrus and the time of that Darius, by whose decree the temple was finished: but as that Darius was Darius the son of Hystaspes, between whom and Cyrus there reigned none in Persia but Camby. ses and Smerdis, it must follow from hence, that none but Cambyses and Smerdis could be the Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes, who are said in Ezra to have put a stop to this work. Prideaux's Connection, Anno 522. [In questions of this kind there is no writer to whom greater deference is due than Dr Prideaux; but his opinion that Cambyses was the Ahasuerus, and VOL. II.

Smerdis Magus the Artaxerxes of Scripture, rests entirely on the supposition, that the reigns of Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes intervened between those of Cyrus and Darius. This however is not said by Ezra, in the passage to which he refers; and from that passage Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes appear to me to have reigned after Darius there called the king of Persia. The words of Ezra are-" Then the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and troubled them in building; and hired counsellors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia." Here it is said plainly that the interruption began before the death of Cyrus, and was continued (through the reigns of Cambyses and Smerdis, amounting only to eight years) even to the reign of Darius Hystaspes king of Persia. During his reign of thirty-six years they seem to have met with little molestation, for Darius favoured the Jews; but at his death their enemies renewed their opposi tion, and, as the sacred historian says, in the reign of Ahasuerus, in the beginning of his reign, wrote they unto him an accusation against the inhabitants of Judah and Jerusalem." If Ahasuerus and Artaxerxes were different sovereigns, which I think far from evident, the Ahasuerus of Ezra must have been Xerxes, and his Artaxerxes the Ahasuerus of Esther, during both of whose reigns the Jews met with much trou ble and opposition from their enemies.]

+ After the return from the captivity, the people in general came to be called Jews, because, though there were many Israelites among them, yet they chiefly consisted of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin; and though the edict of Cyrus gave all permission to return when they pleased, yet the sacred writers take notice only of those who returned in a body. Patrick's Commentary on Ezra.

+3 For this there are three expressions in the text, toll, tribute, and custom. By the first of these, Grotius understands that which every head paid to the king, which we call poll-money; by the second, the excise, (as we now speak) that was upon commodi. ties and merchandise; and by the last, the land-tax. But Watsius (in his Miscel. part ii.) is of opinion, that the first word rather signifies that part which every man paid out of his estate, according as it was valued; the second, that which was paid for every head; and the third, that which was paid upon the highways, by every traveller that went about the country with any kind of merchandise. Patrick's Commentary.

3 X

and Malachi.

« PreviousContinue »