"
THE
AV^^ar
JEAVISH
("Gi'Dfimpliy." xvi. 2. S •*t'. P- "fi-), received almost divine honors from the inliahitunts of liorsippa (,?o(XT(TTr/i™ should undoubteiilv be read, with Hendel Harris, instead of the imiiossible form ,3o<i-o/>vi'i)i). A work of Theophrastus ("DioL'enes Lacrtius." v. 5(1) prciliably another also bears lli<' name of Akielianis Finally, in a moreference to the IJalnlonian sa;re. saic at Treves ("Antike Dcnkmiller des Archilolopischen Inslituts." i. 47). at the side of llie muse Polyliymnia. there is the form of a man hi>lding a scroll ill his hand, whose name was deciphered by Studemund (• Archilologische Jahrbik'her," v. 2 et acq.) as ' Accicar. None of the above statements by Oroek writers concerninjr Ahikar aHonls an e.xiilanalinn of the circumstances referred lo in the Hook of Tobil, It was reserved for recent research lo discover that the Arabic, Armenian, Kumanian. Slavonic, and !Syriac literatures have preserved references to a certain Ahikar. which ari' not only of value for the coniprebensifin of the references in Tobil. l)ul are important in the considenition of the whole ranire of .Jewish apocryphal literature, and also of the whole fund of Jewish folk-lore and Iej;end. The credit of demonstrjitinj; the connection between the Al.nl>ar of the Book of Tobit and the hero of the Oriental Icj^ends grouped around the sjime name belongs to Georg Hoffmann ("AusziVsreausSyrischenActen PcrsischerMilrtyrer," pp. 183 et >»•</.). who was closely followed by Meissner and Lidzbarski with further investigations. Thanks to the publication and translation of the Oriental te.ts of Ahikar by C'onybeare, Hendel Harris, and Mrs. A. S. Lewis {"The Story of Ahikar," London, 1898), and t.. the critical introduction to the last-named book, the siibject may now be more fully discussed. The legend of xVl.iikar, as current in the above-mentioned languages, is somewhat as follows Ahikar was the wise and powerful chancellor of the As.syrian king Sennacherib, son of Esar-haddon (in Kings. .ix. S~ Esar haddou is the son. and not the father, of Sennacbe..'.): but compare, for a similar anachronism, Sanh. 94</ indeed the later Jewish legend did not always adhere strictly to Biblical accounts). He was si.vty years of age, had sixty wives (compare Cant. vi. 8; in the Aramaic ChanceUor folk-lore of the Talnuid the nund)er of Sensi.My is a favorite one and usually de nacherib. notes anv larire nundier: 15. K. OH/. twice; IJ.'B. iti./; Sanh. 7*;: Hui. 58M. and no child had been born to him. The gods, to whom he brought many otTerings. announced to him at last that he would never have a child and they therefore desired him to adopt his sister's son. the lad Xadan (meaning "gift." like Nathan, but also possibly with a contcnii)tuous secondary meaning, as
—
H
Hearing him tciulerly. Ahikar in Ezek. xvi. Xi). himself undertook the lad's instruction. Nadan seemed a ])romisiug youth indeed, physically and intellectually, and Ahikar might have rejoiced at such return for all his care; but morally the lad was thoroughly corrupt, and paid not the slightest heed to the wi.se counsels and maxims of his uncle. Not only was he offensively donn'neering in Ahikar's household so much so indeed that the latter had eventually to forbid him the housi but at court, too, where Ahikar had presented him as his future successor in oliice. he used his influence with a view to destroying his benefactor. By means of forged letters and subtle intrigues Nadan succeeded in having Ahikar accused of high treason and condemned to deatli. Only through the friendship of the executioner Nabusamak (compare the Hebrew name "Elisamak) did .iVhikar escape. Nabusamak coucealed him in a subterranean hiding-
—
—
EXCYCXOPEDU
288
place, and showed the body of a de<apitated slave as that of Al,dl>ar. Nadan's triumph, however, was of short duration. The king repeatedly deplored the loss of the wise counsel of his former chaucellor. Wailing his opportunity. Nabusamak came forward and declared himself able to produce the missing sage. This was done, much to the king's gratiticulion and the latter received his lost friend with great honor. liut Ahikar had then no time to punish his rascally nephew: for he had to build for the king of Egypt a castle between heaven and earth, besides giving him other illustrations of A.s.syrian wisilom. It ajipears that Pharaoh had demanded of Sennacherib an arcliilect coiniietent to cre<-| such a caslle, and had prondsed to ])ay a large sum annually for several yeai's if he could provide one; failing which, Sennacherib was to pay him tribute. Al.ukar not only performed his task in Egypt successfully, but at the same lime gave so many instances of his superior wisdom that Pharaoh declared he could not comiiete with him. and dismissed him with rich rewards for himself and handsome presi'nts for his Architect master. On his return home the king for delivered Nadan into Al.nkar's hands Pharaoh, for punishment. Ahikar loaded him with chains and threw liini into prison, where, in contrast with the scanty food doled out to him, he was richly regaled with .selections from his uncle's wise proverbs the same that he had so s))urued in his youth, and for the |ir,»'tical utilizatiim of which he had now no opportunity. He died miserably in prison: "for he who digs a pit for his brother shall fall into it; and he who sets up traps shall be caught in them" (Arabic text, end; compare Ps. vii.'^lG: Eccl. x. 8). The foregoing brief abstract of the legend is nearly the same in all the above-mentioned versions. But there is great diversity as regards the maxims and fables that form the beginning and the close of the legend, so that it is desirable to consider the development of the legend apart from that of the
—
maxims. It is evident, in the first place, that the Arabic version has come directly from the Syriac. and that Syriac expressions (compare, for it retains many instance, inn 71t2ri- "Thou slialt have patience," p. '2. end. which is a literal translation of the Syriac inn -iiH. p. y'J, line Vi: and p. 27. line 4 from' bottom, the Syriac wont J'D is transliterated into the Arabic anil left untranslated). The Armenian text also is derived from the Syriac: while the Slavonic version, from which the Rumanian is a tran.slation. has the medieval Greek version for its foundation. Much more intricate is the problem of Versions of the connection with the so calleil " Life Legend of .Esop." by Maxinnis Planudes (ed.
Compared. Ebcrhard, "Fabuhr Komanen.ses." 225
i,
which
relates of .-Esop events similar to those ascribed to Ahikar. Meissner, therefore, maintains that the Ahikar legend in ft
sig.).
present form is simply an elaboration of Planudes' "Life of ^-Esop," and claims to have detected traces of its Greek origin in the Semitic version. The nature of these supposed traces, however, is sufficiently indicated by one example. In the riddle of thej'cars. occurring in both the Ahikar legend and the " Life of /Esop," mention is made of two cords, one white and one black, representing day and night. Meissner claims that this proves the Indo-GeiTiianic origin of the story; for Semites would have said "one black and one white," because they commence the<lay with the evening. Unfortunately for this ingenious hypothesis, in the Old Testament the Semitic character its
—
