This is effectively Part Three of the previous article on Sargon/Sennacherib.

The Douay and Greek versions of the Book of Judith are unanimous in saying that the King of Nineveh made war against the Chaldean foe in his Year 12. They diverge in assigning the destruction of the latter's city [1] to, respectively, Year 12 and Year 17. This may be explained to some degree by the fact that Sargon/Sennacherib twice conquered Babylon. The destruction of Babylon in Year 17 though accords well with the sequence outlined in Part Two, which took us as far as Sennacherib's Seventh Campaign.
For, in his Eighth Campaign, against the Elamite king, Umman-menanu, he ravaged the southern capital.

Sennacherib by now had much about which to be self-congratulatory. His Eighth Campaign, though, is about as far as the Great King's war records take us. And we could be left feeling very empty.

Where is the account of that most notorious of all wars of his, the one against the west all the way to Egypt - as recorded by Herodotus in The Histories, in the Scriptures and in the pseudepigrapha (Judith, Tobit, Maccabees) - when Sennacherib's army of almost 200,000 was humiliated?

So catastrophic a defeat for Assyria cannot by any means be accommodated during Sennacherib's Third Campaign, against the west, which as we saw was a stunning success for Assyria.

Historians have agonised over this. Was there a further western campaign after Hezekiah of Judah had initially been brought into submission? [2].

And, I must add, what about the showdown between Judith and the Assyrian Turtan, "Holofernes", who completely lost his head over this Jewish beauty? No indication in what we have already read about the incursion of Sargon's Turtan into Judaean territory that he came under even the least pressure from Hezekiah's subjects.

By contrast to this, the impressive Greek version of Judith, in particular, records a massive military campaign - ultimately disastrous - first envisaged by the Great King of Assyria in his Year 18, and to be led by a commander of enormous prestige:

In the eighteenth year, on the twenty-second day of the first month, there was talk in the Palace of [the] king of Assyrians about carrying out his revenge on the whole region, just as he had said. (Judith 2:1; Septuagint). [10]

... When he had completed his plan, Nebuchednezzar, king of the Assyrians, called Holofernes, the chief general of his army, second only to himself ... " (v.4).

The Turtan duly raised an army of 120,000 picked troops by divisions [30], together with 12,000 archers on horseback, plus immense numbers of animals for baggage and food, ample rations and a huge amount of gold and silver from the royal palace (vv.14-18).

Sheer revenge is given as being the Great King of Assyria's motivation for this campaign (probably series of campaigns again), especially against the west, because the nations from Cilicia as far as the borders of Ethiopia had refused to support him upon his request during his Year 12 war against the Chaldeo-Aramaean coalition (1:7-12). "... they were not afraid of him, but regarded him as only one man. So they sent back his messengers empty-handed and in disgrace" (v.11).

A desire to conquer wealthy Egypt was probably also a major motivational factor for Sennacherib.

The Turtan went forth with his huge army, and by the time that he had brought the west into quaking submission, and had come "toward Esdraelon, near Dothan, facing the great ridge of Judaea" (3:9), his fighting forces had swollen to "one hundred seventy thousand infantry and twelve thousand cavalry, not counting the baggage and the footsoldiers handling it, a very great multitude" (7:2). This overall total equates strikingly to the 185,000 men of Sennacherib's defeated army. It was down upon such an immense host, encamped before Dothan, that there gazed in awe the northern Israelites, including Judith, a 16th generation Simeonitess, and her townspeople of Bethulia [40].

The Israelites commented: "They will now strip clean the whole land; neither the high mountains nor the valleys nor the hills will bear their weight" (7:4).

Nonetheless, urged on by their high priest in Jerusalem, Joakim (var. Eliakim) - whom I have previously identified as Akhimiti of Ashdod of the Assyrian records - they had resolved to resist (Judith 4) and live with the consequences.

Who was Assyria's Ill-Fated Commander-in-Chief?

The Turtan named "Holofernes" in the Book of Judith was unlikely the same person as the Turtan whom Sargon/Sennacherib had previously sent against "Ashdod", who would by now, about a decade later, have been well familiar with the various nations of the west. For the Turtan in the Judith narrative has to ask the locals: 'Tell me, you Canaanites, what people is this that lives in the hill country?' (Judith 5:3). To identify these as the one Turtan would also make for a very tight chronology indeed in the context of this revision. Sennacherib, according to Roux, employed both "a turtānu 'of the right' and a turtānu 'of the left'" [50].

Which one, if either, was the mighty "Holofernes"?

The Book of Judith is quite specific: "Holofernes" was "second only to [the king] himself ..."; he commanded an army of epic proportions; he cleaned up the west, preparing the way for the king himself (just as was the pattern in regard to Sennacherib's Third Campaign]. He was eventually stopped dead in his tracks by some mountain folk in Samaria, before he could penetrate as far as Jerusalem.

History apparently knows of no such Turtan. At a later time, presumably in 352 BC during the reign of Artaxerxes III 'Ochus', a Cappadocian prince named "Holofernes" is said to have fought against the Egyptians [60]. This is one of various examples of the unwarranted intrusion of Medo-Persian elements into the Book of Judith [70].

However, there was a notable Assyrian blue blood at the time of King Hezekiah who is a most appropriate candidate for "Holofernes" inasmuch as he was a potent leader, who invaded even Egypt, and who died mysteriously on campaign. And he fits exactly the description given in Judith of "second only to [the king] himself". I refer to Sennacherib's favourite son and heir, ESARHADDON [80 & 82].

I would naturally expect immediate, strong objections to this identification of Esarhaddon with "Holofernes" considering that Esarhaddon (680-669 BC, conventional) is universally thought to have outlived - and reigned subsequently to - his father, Sennacherib. Esarhaddon, after having presumably put down a revolt by Sennacherib's patricidal sons, began by rebuilding the Babylon that his father had destroyed. His records tell that he was "still a youth" when his father secured his accession [90]. The young Viceroy had made his famous march from Babylon northwards to Nineveh against the brothers who had rebelled against him, who blocked his path: "The terror of the great gods, my lords, overwhelmed them", he said [100].

As for those villians who instigated the revolt and rebellion, when they heard of the approach of my army, they abandoned their regular troops, and fled to parts unknown. I reached the dyke of the Tigris. [At the word] of Sin and Shamash, the gods, the lords of the dyke, my armies scrambled over the wide Tigris as (across an) irrigation ditch.

Warmly welcomed by the Assyrian people, and by most of the opposing army which defected to him, Esarhaddon proclaimed: "I entered into Nineveh, my royal city, joyfully, and took my seat upon the throne of my father in safety."

According to Luckenbill, Esarhaddon's brothers had actually, in the course of this particular revolt, slain their father Sennacherib [110]:

A firm [determination] "fell upon" my brothers. They forsook the gods and turned to their deeds of violence, plotting evil. Evil word(s) and deed(s), ... they perpetrated against me .... They revolted (?). To gain the [kingship] they slew [Sennacherib, their father.] ....

The Bible and pseudepigrapha seem to support this sequence of events, referring to Sennacherib's death and then accession of his son, Esarhaddon. Thus for instance 2 Kings, having briefly narrated Sennacherib's murder, adds: "His son Esarhaddon succeeded him" (4.Regn. 19:37) ; Septuagint.

But according to Georges Roux [120]: "The patricide is not mentioned ...".

Could this therefore be perhaps yet another case where the modern restorers of the Assyrian records have filled in the blanks with bracketted data according to their preconceived notions?

But, then again, what about the testimony of the scriptural data cited above? Well, the Hebrew root ben here is not too much of a problem, as it can mean both 'son' and 'grandson' [130]. As for the name, Esarhaddon, the Book of Tobit, which had been an ally for me in my theory that Sennacherib was the successor of Shalmaneser, now seems to desert me by distinctly naming Esarhaddon as the successor after Sennacherib's death (Tobit 1:21). Still, that is only in translation. The name translated as "Esarhaddon" is given in the Greek as Sacherdonos; a name that comes very close to the Saosduchin said in the Douay version of Judith to have "succeeded Asarhaddon in the kingdom of the Assyrians" [14].

That can only mean Ashurbanipal. Thus the original version of Tobit may well have read "... his [Sennacherib's] (grand)son Ashurbanipal succeeded him".

With Esarhaddon generally recognised as a younger son of Sennacherib, the eldest being Ashur-nadin-shumi whom Sennacherib made Viceroy of Babylon during his Year 12 (Fourth Campaign), the chronology I am trying to develop here would be extremely tight indeed. But Esarhaddon in fact calls himself "the oldest son of [Sennacherib ..." [150] - another apparent rebuff to convention. This primary piece of evidence not only assists my reconstruction, but now makes highly attractive also an identification of Esarhaddon (i.e. Ashur-akhi-iddina) with Ashur-nadin-shumi [160].

Ashur-nadin-shumi's six years of reign over Babylon would thus correspond with Esarhaddon's reign over that city. And I suggest it was during this early period that Esarhaddon rebuilt, probably magnified, the city of Babylon.

But while his father was still alive [170].

Once again, as with the data concerning the Sargonid succession, historians have taken an extreme licence when restoring the Assyrian records, adding what was never there - in this case the murder of Sennacherib - and thus wreaking havoc with Assyrian history.

If Sennacherib, ensconced at Khorsabad, had virtually abdicated in favour of his son, whom as heir he re-named Ashur-etil-ilani-mukin-aplu [180], this would go a long way towards explaining historians' puzzlement over the fact that there are no official annals for about the last decade of Sennacherib's 24-year reign. The annals are in fact available, but they need to be looked for under the name of Esarhaddon, whose 11-12 year reign must now be encompassed entirely within the reign of Sennacherib - who, as we shall see, only just outlived his son.

Unfortunately, Esarhaddon's annals are - as we noted in Part One - carelessly arranged, making the editor's job difficult.

Judith herself, in her definition of the precise relationship between the Great King of Assyria and his Viceroy, shows that, whilst the latter now had full charge of military affairs, it was nonetheless the ageing king who still cracked the whip (11:7):

'By the life of Nebuchednezzar, king of the whole earth, and by the power of him who has sent you to direct every living being! Not only do human beings serve him because of you, but also the animals of the field and the cattle and the birds of the air will live, because of your power, under Nebuchednezzar and all his house.'

Esarhaddon's military prowess was legendary; not least in his own mind [190]:

Like a lion I raged, I put on (my) coat of mail, (my) helmet, emblem of victory, I put on my head. I grasped in my hand the mighty bow .... Like a fierce eagle, with wings outspread ..., in front of my troops, [I went], like a flood, I advanced. The unsparing javelin of Assur, fiercely, swiftly, was let loose ..., the gods Shar-ur and Shar-gaz going [at my side].

Judith will immediately play on this reputation during her first encounter with the Turtan: "... it is reported throughout the whole world that you alone are the best in the whole kingdom, the most informed and the most astounding in military strategy" (Judith 11:8).

Esarhaddon was also ever loyal to his father, Sennacherib, and was thus especially vengeful against insolent kings - presumably those who according to the Judith narrative had originally sent back the Assyrian messengers "empty-handed and in disgrace". Good examples of kings who stubbornly resisted Assyria during Esarhaddon's floruit were Abdi-Milkuti, King of Sidon, whom Esarhaddon captured and beheaded, Baal of Tyre and his colleague, Tirhakah of Ethiopia [200]:

"... I threw up earthworks against Ba'lu, king of Tyre, who had put his trust in his friend Tirhakah ..., king of Ethiopia, had thrown off my royal yoke and had sent me insolent (messages). Food and drink (water) (which would) keep them alive, I withheld ...."

Baal and Tirhakah are likely the two figures depicted at Esarhaddon's feet in the victory (Senjirli) stele the Assyrian set up in northern Syria. Esarhaddon holds a cup in his right hand and from the left hand extends the ropes ("reins") which pass through the lips of these two conquered figures [210]. But Esarhaddon's and his father's enemies - at least those who survived their vengeful regime - would have the last laugh. In a short space of time, Assyria would lose to violence its Turtan (Viceroy) - slain during the campaign that was intended to culminate in his second (possibly third) invasion of Egypt [220] - much of the powerful Assyrian army, and - not long afterwards - the Great King himself, assassinated.

History apparently knows of no such Turtan. But according to Georges Roux [120]: "The patricide is not mentioned ...".

The Downfall of "Holofernes"

My reconstruction of neo-Assyrian history has enabled thus far for a most plausible identification of "Holofernes" with Esarhaddon, as second only to the Assyrian king during a climactic period of history, who died during a western campaign. All well and good as far as it goes. But to be fully satisfying we need some evidence of the Viceroy's shameful demise. This is to be found, I believe, most surprisingly in the Assyrian records themselves, in the Eponym Chronicle [230]; giving the lie to any naļve view that the Assyrians did not record defeats. Tadmor gives the crucial text as if belonging to Sargon's Year 17 (705 BC), presuming this to have been the year that Sargon actually died [240]:

"The king [against Tabal ....] against Ešpai the Kulummaean. [......] The king was killed. The camp of the king of Assyria [was taken ......]. On the 12th of Abu, Sennacherib, son [of Sargon, took his seat on the throne]."

There is no information from any other source on the last war of Sargon [sic], nor any plausible identification of the Kulummaeans.

We now know that a succession of Sargon to Sennacherib, as proposed in the above quote, is impossible. The un-named "king" referred to in this quote should in fact be identified as Esarhaddon, that is the "Holofernes" of the Book of Judith who "was killed [with the result that] ... The camp of the king of Assyria [was taken ......]". Cf. Judith 13:8, and 15:6-7: "... the people of Bethulia fell upon the Assyrian camp and plundered it, acquiring great riches. And the Israelites, when they returned from the slaughter, took possession of what remained".

The aging Sennacherib by no means at this point - as is suggested by the above quote - "took his seat on the throne" (though perhaps he may personally now have taken over the duties of his dead son).

Rather, he had to undertake a far less pleasant task.

Tadmor tells what this task was, though wrongly supposing that it was Sargon's demise that was the matter that Sennacherib had to investigate [250]:

The death of a king on a battlefield, killed in action, is as yet unparalleled in the history of Mesopotamia. Sennacherib had to investigate closely into the hidden reasons of his father's [sic] death in order to find out what were the sins (hītāti) of Sargon [sic].

What was an added shame for Assyria - pointing to the sins of the slain King of Assyria - was that this Assyrian king (the Viceroy) was not buried in "his house". According to Tadmor [26]: "This may mean that either his corpse was cremated at the battlefield or that it was not recovered from the enemy". The Book of Judith is definitive on this. The Viceroy's head was actually carried away from his lifeless corpse by the triumphant Judith and her maid back to Bethulia, where - upon Judith's instructions - it was hung upon the parapet of the city wall (cf. Judith 13:9-10, 15, & 14:11); the purpose being to strike fear into the hearts of the Assyrian soldiers and cause them to flee.

The Esarhaddon Chronicle gives the exact day of Esarhaddon's death, "on the [tenth] day of the month Marchesvan", which is the eighth month [27].

We can now set the record straight once and for all. The all-conquering Assyrian army of 185,000 was not 'nibbled to death', or 'infected', by mice (Herodotus) [280], nor space-blasted (Velikovsky). Its rout and defeat were set in train by the pious woman Judith, as she herself testifies (16:5-6):

'But the Lord Almighty has foiled them by the hand of a woman. For their mighty one (Turtan) did not fall by the hands of the young men, nor did the sons of Titans strike them down, nor did tall giants set upon him; but Judith daughter of Merari with the beauty of her countenance undid him'.

Sennacherib's Fury and Death

According to Tobit - who identified as a metaphysical cause for the defeat and flight of the Assyrian army, not the Turtan's sins but Sennacherib's own sin, of blasphemy - Sennacherib in his fury took revenge upon the Israelite people in Assyria, including eventually Tobit himself (1:18-20). Tobit finally had to flee for his life, but "not forty days passed before two of Sennacherib's sons killed him".

Epilogue

Encyclopaedia Judaica's article, "Judith", shows that this drama to end all dramas has consistently, down through the centuries, been represented in art, literature and music. Our footnotes especially show that the Greeks absorbed the story of Judith and Holofernes into their own folklore. In the Lindian Chronicle it is narrated that when Darius, King of Persia, tried to conquer the Island of Hellas, the people gathered in the stronghold of Lindus to withstand the attack. The citizens of the besieged city asked their leaders to surrender because of the hardships and sufferings brought by the water shortage (cf. Judith 7:20-28). The Goddess Athena [read Judith] advised one of the leaders [read Uzziah] to continue to resist the attack; meanwhile she interceded with her father Jupiter [read the God of Israel] on their behalf (cf. Judith 8:9-9:14). Thereupon, the citizens asked for a truce of five days, after which, if no help arrived, they would surrender (cf. Judith 7:30-31). On the second day of the truce a heavy shower fell on the city so the people could have sufficient water. Datis [read Holofernes], the admiral of the Persian fleet [read Turtan of the Assyrian army], having witnessed the particular intervention of the Goddess to protect the city, lifted the siege.

The Many Names of Esarhaddon as proposed by Damien: Esarhaddon = Holofernes, Ashur-akhi-iddina, Sacherdonos and possibly also Ashur-nadin-shumi. Other authors also equate Assur-etel-ilani-mujinni with Esarhaddon. [Oppenheim, Leo, `Letters from Mesopotamia', (Chicago), ABL 308, p. 158]

[10] Here called "Ecbatana". Both Judith and Tobit, in their current form, present, incorrectly, the triple set: (i) "Ecbatana", (ii) "Rhages" (or variants of the latter) and (iii) "the Medes"/"Media". In my articles on Tobit, for instance, I have shown that "Ecbatana" should read, "Bathania" (i.e. Bashan), "Rhages", Damascus, and "Media", Midian. In Judith, these three probably represent, respectively, Babylon, Kish and the Chaldeans. Herodotus [The Histories, Bk. Three] distinguishes between 'the Median Ecbatana' and 'Ecbatana in Syria'; the latter most surely referring to Bathania/Bashan.
e1)

[20 For the pro's and con's of this perfervid debate, see John Bright's A History of Israel, 296f., Excursus I: "The Problem of Sennacherib's Campaigns in Palestine".

[30] This number is not incredible. The Assyrian king Shalmaneser III deployed the same sized army against the Syrians at Karkar (Qarqar). See G. Roux's Ancient Iraq, 348.

[40] Most plausibly identified by C. Conder with the town of Mithilia or Meselieh, facing Dothan from a distance of 3 miles ("supposing the substitution of M for B, of which there are occasional instances in Syrian nomenclature"), Survey of Western Palestine, 156-157. For evidence of a (Jewish) Simeonite settlement on the border of the valley of Dothan, see Encyclopaedia Judaica, "Judith".

[50] Op. cit., 345. See also Leo Oppenheim, `Letters from Mesopotamia', ABL 870, p. 159.

[60] Thus Diodorus Siculus xvii, 6, 1, as referred to in EJ. He also refers to a "Bagoas" as another general of the Persian army. Aspects of the story regarding the Turtan in Judith do seem to have certain likenesses, too, to Xerxes' commander, Mardonius; and/or even Hannibal's ultimately headless brother, Hasdrubal.

[70] I like Emmet Sweeney's compelling parallels between Sennacherib and the Persian king, Xerxes, "Emmet Sweeney's Historical Revision", SIS Chronology & Catastrophism Review 1998:2, 56. To the comparisons that Sweeney has made there can probably now be added that between Xerxes' [Artaxerxes III's?] huge force that went against the west and Sennacherib's, as described in Judith. Archaeological research makes it extremely doubtful that Xerxes ever managed to bridge the Hellespont, as the history books tell us, in order to invade Greece with a massive force.
There are also in Greek mythology the stunning likenesses between Helen and Judith. Cf. Judith 10:6-9 and Helen at the gates of Troy, praised by Priam and the elders for her beauty.

[80] The name EsARhadDON is a reasonable likeness to MARDONius mentioned above in [60].

[82] A 3.8 cm long fragmentary ivory scarab (ND7624) carved as a winged uraeus with a sun disc bears the inscribed name of Pharaoh Tirhaqa (690-664 BC). This scarab was found immediately below the surface against the west wall of Fort Shalmaneser together with a later cache of pottery clearly out of position of its original location. It is curious that this, the only ivory object bearing an Egyptian royal name, is likely to be later than the remainder of the ivories. Perhaps it was cherished as a valuable trophy by Taharqa's contemporary, Esarhaddon.[Mallowan, Nimrud and its Remains, Vol. II, London, 1966, p. 599.] A sample of archaeological artifacts pertaining to Esarhaddon includes clay tablet BM#91027, featuring an Assyrian plow and seed drill, part of the middle register of a memorial stone of the king. See G.G. Cameron, `The Babylonian Scientist and His Hebrew Colleague' in BA, Vol. VII May, 1944, p. 21-29, 32-40.

[90] D. Luckenbill's Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, II, #500.

[100] Ibid., #'s 504, 505, 506.

[110] Ibid., #'s 501, 502.

[120] Op. cit., 325.

[130] C. Seow, Grammar for Biblical Hebrew, 44.

[140] Douay, `The Holy Bible Douay Version' (London Catholic Truth Soc), Fifth Impression January 1963. Note 1:5.
Who became king after Sennacherib? In two places the Bible says it was , Asr--hdn. Apparently the ancients had a degree of uncertainty on the spelling of this name as the two spacers in the Hebrew Bible indicate. Could the name have been Sacherdonos? Should we trust the Septuagint or the Hebrew version on the rendition of this name? Is the Hebrew or the Septuagint the older source? While whichever name one chooses is not consequential for biblical veracity but only for apogryphical, it would be well to discuss this point some more.

[150] Luckenbill, #591.

[160] He may also be the same as Sargon's Turtan, Ashur-Isqa-Danin.

[170] Such a streamlining of chronology should also assist those agonising over a revised reconstruction of the Third Intermediate Period of Egyptian history, enabling now for a synchronisation of Sennacherib's encounter with Tirhakah of Ethiopia with those of Esarhaddon, followed closely by those of Ashurbanipal.

[180] I.e., "Ashur, the lord of the gods, has established an heir".

[190] Luckenbill, #561.

[200] The execution included Abdi-milkuti of Sidon, Sanduarri of Kundi, Zedekia (Sidka) of Askelon and Hiskia of Juda. [Luckenbill, Vol. II, # 528; Tiele, C.P., `Babylonisch-Assyrische Geschichte', 2.Teil, S. 289; Luckenbill, # 556. Emphasis added.

[210] Ibid., # 573.

[220] Given variously as 'Harran', or 'on his way to Egypt'. The place name Harran (Charan) has probably been confused with Canaan (where Holofernes was reputedly slain), as in fact it has been confused in Judith 9:5 (Douay version). The death of Cambyses at Syrian Ecbatana is somewhat reminiscent of that of Holofernes, unintentionally by his own sword, after having previously asked a question about the location.

[230] Given as C^b6 in Tadmor's The Campaigns of Sargon II of Assur", JCS, XII (1958).

[240] Ibid., 97. Emphasis added. As an aside to the western campaign of Esarhaddon, one of his servants had sent him a letter (we don't know if he received/read the letter) in which `Nabu..' interprets a partial lunar eclipse. He wrote: "To the king my lord, from your servant Nabu-ahhe-eriba: Good health to your Majesty! Since this is a day of darkness, I did not send the customary blessings. The eclipse of the moon moved from the eastern quadrant and settled over the entire western quadrant of the moon. The planets Jupiter and Venus were visible during the eclipse until it cleared. This is propitious for Your Majesty, and (portends) evil for the Westland. Tomorrow I will send Your Majesty an (astrological) tablet dealing with eclipses of the moon."
But besides this letter of good fortune, the king also received word of an omen of bad fortune from his servant Balasi. "... As to Your Majesty's writing me about the wording of the omen prediction as follows: `What is the meaning of "The king will come to naught together with his powerful officials"?' Experts must be put to work (on this problem). Predictions in omens depend on the month of the year; thus, one is like the other; they take their meaning from the contexts. (In this case) the prediction of the omen means (actually), `He will come to naught.'"
Of these Isaiah wrote: "Thus saith the Lord ... I am the Lord who made all things ... who frustrates the tokens of the liars, and makes diviners mad; who turns wise men backward, and makes their knowledge foolish." While the stars predicted fortune, omens seemed to predict doom - a common tactic of the practitioners of the occult even if these two sources were not aware of each others opinions.
How foolish the `interpreters', priests of the gods, etc. in those times could make their clients appear may perhaps be seen by the following letter which reminds us of the `Emperors Cloths ' kind of a story. "To the king, my lord (Esarhaddon), from your servant Marduk-šākin-šumi: Much good health to your Majesty! ... In reply to Your Majesty's writing to me concerning the white ceremonial robes: `How many days should I keep on wearing them?' the king should wear them on the 20th and the 21st; two days are more than enough. On the 22nd he can dress normally (again). And your Majesty should, as he usually does, act exactly as directed. ..." [Oppenheim, `Letters from Mesopotamia', ABL 407, p. 151; ABL 355, p. 162; Isaiah 44:24; ABL 379, p. 165]

[250] Ibid. Emphasis added.

[260] Ibid., n.311. Emphasis added.

[270] As quoted in C. Jonsson's "The Foundations of the Assyro-Babylonian Chronology", Chronology and Catastrophism Review, Vol.IX (UK, 1987), 16.

[280] Herodotus may have picked up the idea of mice from the Book of Judith, according to which the Assyrian soldiers likened the emboldened Israelites to "mice, coming out of their holes" (Douay version 14:12); a typical Assyrian simile. The Greek version of Judith has "slaves" instead of "mice".