for some period over Western Asia, the existence of which was vaguely hinted at by the Greeks, who attributed its glory to the fabulous Memnon.* Contemporary records are still wanting which might show whether Kudur-mabug inherited these distant possessions from one of his predecessors—­such as Kudur-nakhunta, for instance—­or whether he won them himself at the point of the sword; but a fragment of an old chronicle, inserted in the Hebrew Scriptures, speaks distinctly of another Elamite, who made war in person almost up to the Egyptian frontier.** This is the Kudur-lagamar (Chedorlaomer) who helped Eimsin against Hammurabi, but was unable to prevent his overthrow.

* We know that to Herodotus (v. 55) Susa was the city of Memnon, and that Strabo attributes its foundation to Tithonus, father of Memnon.  According to Oppert, the word Memnon is the equivalent of the Susian Umman-anin, “the house of the king:”  Weissbach declares that “anin” does not mean king, and contradicts Oppert’s view, though he does not venture to suggest a new explanation of the name.

** Gen. xiv.  Prom the outset Assyriologists have never doubted the historical accuracy of this chapter, and they have connected the facts which it contains with those which seem to be revealed by the Assyrian monuments.  The two Rawlinsons intercalate Kudur-lagamar between Kudur-nakhunta and Kudur-mabug, and Oppert places him about the same period.  Fr. Lenormant regards him as one of the successors of Kudur-mabug, possibly his immediate successor.  G. Smith does not hesitate to declare positively that the Kudur-mabug and Kudur-nakhunta of the inscriptions are one and the same with the Kudur-lagamar (Chedor-laomer) of the Bible.  Finally, Schrader, while he repudiates Smith’s view, agrees in the main fact with the other Assyriologists.  On the other hand, the majority of modern Biblical critics have absolutely refused to credit the story in Genesis.  Sayce thinks that the Bible story rests on an historic basis, and his view is strongly confirmed by Pinches’discovery of a Chaldaean document which mentions Kudur-lagamar and two of his allies.  The Hebrew historiographer reproduced an authentic fact from the chronicles of Babylon, and connected it with one of the events in the life of Abraham.  The very late date generally assigned to Gen. xiv. in no way diminishes the intrinsic probability of the facts narrated by the Chaldaean document which is preserved to us in the pages of the Hebrew book.

In the thirteenth year of his reign over the East, the cities of the Dead Sea—­Sodom, Gomorrah, Adamah, Zeboim, and Bela—­revolted against him:  he immediately convoked his great vassals, Amraphel of Chaldaea, Arioch of Ellasar,* Tida’lo the Guti, and marched with them to the confines of his dominions.  Tradition has invested many of the tribes then inhabiting Southern Syria with semi-mythical names and attributes.  They are represented as being giants—­Rephalm; men of prodigious