placed reliance upon their help against Assyria. The chapter concludes with the oracle, 'And Yahwe said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot, for three years a sign and a portent against Egypt and against Cush; so shall the king of Assyria lead away the captives of Egypt and the exiles of Cush, young and old, naked and barefoot, and with buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt. And they shall be dismayed and ashamed because of Cush their expectation and because of Egypt their glory. And the inhabitant of this shall say in that day, Behold, such is our expectation whither we fled for help, to be delivered from the king of Assyria; and we, how shall we escape?'

.in the last verse of Isa. xx יֹשֵׁב הָאִי הַזֶּה of

The purpose of this note is to make a suggestion as to the reference This expression, rendered in R.V. the inhabitant of this coastland', is explained, I believe, by all recent scholars as referring to the smaller states of the Palestinian coastland, especially Judah, Philistia, Moab, and Edom. The explanation which I here put forward I believed at first to be entirely new, until, on referring to Dr Cheyne's Commentary (1886), I found that it had long ago been made by Chwolson (Jüd. Zeitschr. 1872, p. 306); though why it has fallen out of notice it is difficult to conjecture, since Assyrian evidence seems to prove conclusively that it is correct.

As is well known, the regular reference of, D in the Old Testament is to the islands and coastlands which lay, from the Israelite point of view, across the western sea. Apart from our passage, exception to this usage is found only in Isa. xxiii 2, 6, where the term is applied to Tyre; but even this is scarcely an exception, since it is probable that it is the island of Tyre which the writer has in mind. Thus the application of the term to the coastland of Palestine, inclusive of Judah where Isaiah himself is situated, is at least very unusual if not unparalleled, and requires substantiation.

Turning to Sargon's account of the campaign, it will be recollected that the fomenter of the rebellion, who seems to have placed himself upon the throne of Ashdod, is called Yatna (var. lect. Yamani). Modern commentators (Drs Dillmann, Duhm, Skinner, Marti, Wade) appear to regard this as a proper name; but since Yatnana clearly denotes Cyprus, there can be little doubt that Yatna (Ya-at-na-na-â?) is the corresponding gentilic form, and denotes a Cypriote. As for the variant Yamani, it simply describes the same man by another gentilic, 'Ionian', which from the Assyrian as from the Israelite point of view may very well be applied to an inhabitant of Cyprus.1 Yamani =

1 The interpretation of Yatna, Yamani here given is recognized by Winckler Sargon p. xxx note 2, and by Rogers Hist. of Bab. and Assyria p. 169 note. Cf. also Cheyne E. B. article Javan'. Winckler later on altered his opinion, and

Yavani, i. e. the Heb. " Yevāni (Joel iv 6)1 gentilic of Yāvān which corresponds to the Greek 'Iáfwv, a term which primarily refers to the Greek settlements in Asia Minor, but from the Semitic point of view has a wider denotation, and can certainly cover such a colony settled in Cyprus. In Gen. x 4 Kittim (i.e. the Kitians, inhabitants of Kiti in Cyprus) is included among the 'sons' of Yāvān.

Further evidence that Sargon came into conflict with the Cypriotes is afforded by a statement in a list of his achievements that he 'subdued seven kings of Yatnana which is situated seven days' journey into the midst of the western sea'. Indeed, he repeatedly refers to Yatnana as forming the western limit of his conquests. It is also interesting to notice that he tells us that he 'caught the Ionians (Ya-am-na-â), who are in the midst of the western sea, like fish'.

If, then, it was a Cypriote who was leader of the revolt against Sargon at Ashdod, and if the conquests of Sargon were actually extended to Cyprus, what can be more plausible than the supposition that Cyprus may have taken an important part (perhaps the leading part) in organizing the revolt, and that in Isa. xx 6 is to be rendered (as Chwolson rendered it) 'the inhabitant(s) of yonder island', i. e. Cyprus? Another possible rendering of the Hebrew is 'this inhabitant of the island', i. e. the individual Cypriote who fomented the revolt. If this latter rendering be correct, it would seem that is employed with some contempt, as it is in this steward' in xxii 15, with reference to Shebna who in all probability was leader of the Egyptian party in Jerusalem, and whose fall was very likely due to the catastrophe which resulted from his policy upon the occasion with which we are dealing.

C. F. BURNEY.

supposed that Yamani in our passage denotes a man from Yemen in South Arabia (cf. Musn, Meluḥha, Ma'in p. 26 note 1). This view, which is closely bound up with the theory of a North Arabian Musri, can scarcely be maintained in light of the evidence above cited.

1 Yamani is in all probability the exact transcription of the man's actual Canaanite designation, of which the proper Assyrian equivalent would be Ya-am-na-â. For the interchange of m and v(w) in Hebrew and Assyrian, cf. Marḥešwān= Waraḥ samna; Evil-Merodach Amel-Marduk. 2 XIV 17; cf. 22; Pr. 16, 145, Pp. i 7, ii 4, iii 5, v 15, iv 43, 63. 3 XIV 15, Pp. iv 34 f.

THE JUDGE SHAMGAR.

WHAT Our Biblical dictionaries and commentaries are able to say about this man I do not wish to discuss or repeat (see Sayce in D. B. iv 475; Cheyne in E. B. 4424 ff; Moore in I. C. C. on Judges 104 ff; the same in S. B. O. T. p. 59). Moore points out that some authorities of the Septuagint place Judges iii 31 after xvi 31, and thinks it perhaps not too bold to conjecture that this is the original position of the brief account of his exploit; further that in v 6 Shamgar benAnath, with his foreign and heathenish name, was not a deliverer but an oppressor of Israel (Comm. p. 143). What the same scholar wrote in the Journ. Amer. Orient. Soc. 19, 159 f is not at my disposal.

Now compare with these two points (Shamgar of Judges v as oppressor of Israel and the original place of the judge after Samson) the chronological work published by Lagarde as far back as 1892 in the second part of his Septuaginta Studien p. 21 ff.

'deinde iudicavit eos Aoth (= Ehud) ambidexter annis octoginta (Judges iii 30). ...

'deinde servierunt regi Semegar (= Shamgar) annis 20. hic occidit ex alienigenis in aratro boum octingentos viros et defendit filios Israel.' Here we have a combination of iii 31 with iv 3, 'twenty years', and v 6 Shamgar as oppressor of Israel (servierunt regi S.).

After the other judges the chronicler comes to Sampson :

Deinde Sampson filius Manoe . . . qui plus occidit in morte sua quam quod in vita sua. deinde Samera iudicavit eos anno uno. hic percussit ex Allophylis sescentos viros praeter iumenta et salvum fecit et ipse Israel. deinde pacem habuerunt annis xxx.'

This chronicle originated in the Vandalian Church of Africa in A. D. 463; see Lagarde, p. 44.

But its statements are much older.

The chronicler Q. Julius Hilario (or Hilarianus) writes in the year A. D. 397 in his Chronologia sive de mundi duratione (better title: de cursu temporum in Chronica minora, ed. Frick, Teubner, 1892, p. 164) :'Samson qui victis allophylis iudicavit annis xx. Mortuo eo iudicavit Semegar anno I. Post hunc fuit populus in pace

per annos xxx.' As H. Gelzer has shewn (Sextus Julius Africanus ii 1 p. 125): 'the one year of Semegar and the thirty years of peace are taken over from Africanus.'

The chronography of Africanus is lost, but just about the one year of Shamgar after Samson we are quite certain; see Gelzer, i p. 90, who

gives from Leo Grammaticus, Theodosios Melitenos, and Georgius Cedrenus the following list, going back on Africanus :

Leo. Gr.

:

Theodos. Mel. Georg. Cedr.

Still more explicit is the statement of Syncellus (331, 13), that the Apostle Paul gives to the time of the Judges 450 years, which fill out the period from the year of the world 3902 to the first year of Eli : ἑνὸς ἔτους ὑπολειπομένον· ὅπερ ̓Αφρικανὸς τὸν Σεμεϊγὰρ λέγει κρατῆσαι τὸν Ἰσραήλ, τῆς γραφῆς οὐκ εἰπούσης χρόνον. Thus it is quite certain that already Africanus († after A.D. 140) placed Shamgar after Samson and gave one year to him.

The one year is in agreement with Jewish tradition; see Josephus, Ant. v § 197 καὶ μετὰ τοῦτον (Ἰούδης = Ehud) Σαάγαρος (varr. Σανάγαρος Σάγαρος, Σαγαροσμές, Σαμέγαρος, Sanagar) ὁ ̓Ανάθου παῖς αἱρεθεὶς ἄρχειν ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ τῆς ἀρχῆς ἔτει κατέστρεψε τὸν βίον. After Samson Josephus immediately goes over to Eli (§§ 317, 318). Whether Julius Africanus was the first who placed Shamgar after Samson, and whether he was followed by Lucian-for it is Lucian's recension of the Septuagint which has Shamgar after xvi 31-I do not know. When Moore writes: 'Differences in the translation show that it (the verse on Shamgar) was not brought over to this place (xvi 31) from iii 31 in the & text, but was found here by these translators or revisers in their copies of M', I cannot see the cogency of the latter part of the conclusion. A reviser (say Lucian) may have read it in Hebrew at iii 31 and may have brought it over in his own Greek to xvi 31. As far as I know there is no copy which omits iii 31; even Lucian read the verse there, without èv Tậ aporрómod, which is an intrusion in the codex Alexandrinus.

Our result is, therefore, that both modern assumptions about Shamgar were anticipated in the early Church; the one that his right position is after Sampson as early as in the second century by Africanus; the other that Shamgar was an oppressor of Israel, in the fifth century, though in strange combination with his recognition as Judge.

EB. NESTLE.

THE ACCENTUATION OF WAYYOMAR IN JOB.

WHAT is the reason for the frequent occurrence of (accented on the penultimate) in Job?

(always accented

(1) The word is, of course, the pausal form of on the penultimate), and seems to differ from it only as e.g. inquit from his verbis locutus est. Sometimes both forms occur close together, e.g. Gen. xviii 29, xxvii 36, xxxiii 5, xliii 29, xlviii 9, Exod. ii 14. A question or exclamation is introduced by ", the answer or rejoinder by "N". In Isa. vi 11" has perhaps the effect of a quick reply. The pausal form invariably introduces oratio recta immediately; in 19 passages it is the first word in the verse.

(2) This pausal form occurs 86 times in the O.T. excluding the "s where it is found 37 times, making a total of 123 occurrences in the O.T. The distribution is varied. Apart from the n" it comes oftenest in Gen.-21 times. Kings is next with 15, Num. 11, Sam. 20, Judges 7, Exod. 6, Chron. 4, Deut., Jonah, Zech., Dan. 2 each, Joshua, Isa., Amos, Ruth 1 each. In the n" it occurs once in Ps., never in Prov., and no less than 36 times in Job.

(3) The accent, in all books except the n"-and sometimes there also is on the ultima. It is marked by 'Atnâh 43 times prose and 4 poetic; by Zaķēp Gādôl 14 times prose; by Zāķēp Ķāṭôn 12 times prose and 2 poetic; by Segôltâ 8 times prose and 2 poetic; by Rebîă' 7 times prose; by Šalšelet Gādôl 2 times prose; by Pāzēr 1 poetic; by 'Ôle woyôred I poetic. In these 96 occurrences the accent is on the

ultima.

(4) But in the following 27 verses in Job the accent is on the penultimate, i.e. in precisely the same position as in the non-pausal form: iii 2, iv 1, vi 1, viii 1, ix 1, xi 1, xii 1, xv 1, xvi 1, xviii 1, xix 1, xx I, xxi 1, xxii 1, xxiii 1, XXV 1, xxvi 1, xxvii 1, xxix 1, xxxiv 1, xxxv 1, xxxvi 1, xxxviii 1, xl 1, 3, 6, xlii 1. The form here always occurs just before Sôp Pasûk, and the penultimate has Sillûk. The preceding accent is always Rebia, which according to Wickes (n" "Dy p. 33 note 25, and p. 75) should be Rebîǎ Mugrash.

(5) Can the received text be correct in these 27 passages? I am much indebted to the Rev. G. Margoliouth, of the British Museum, for some interesting facts as to the evidence of certain fifteenth- and sixteenth-century MSS and early printed editions where the accent is usually on the ultima. To this may be added the remarkable fact