Mr. Frazer's whole argument, of course, clashes with the higher criticism of Wellhausen, who avers that the Jews could keep no feasts in the exile, and there learned 'the lesson of religious isolation.' On the other hand, the Jews, by Mr. Frazer's theory, did keep a feast, and a very abominable feast, and, far from learning the lesson of religious isolation, borrowed the most execrable heathen cruelties, accompanied by ritual debaucheries. So Wellhausen must greatly err in his opinions, which are much revered by the clergy of this island.[41] [1] _G. B_. iii. 159. [2] Ezra ii. 2; Nehemiah vii. 7. [3] Esther ii. 7. [4] _Encyclop. Bibl. s. v_. 'Esther.' [5] Jastrow, p. 686, note 2. [6] _Encyclop. Bibl. s. v_. 'Esther.' [7] _G. B_. iii. 158, 159. [8] Jastrow does not indicate that, in the ancient poem on Eabani, he _did_ 'return to the upper world.' But see L. W. King, _Bab. and Ass. Rel. and Myth_. p. 146. [9] _G. B_. iii. 178. [10] Jastrow, p. 513. [11] _G. B_. iii. 179. [12] _G. B_. iii. 180. [13] _G. B_. iii. 181-184. Laing's _Knox_, ii. 157-160. [14] Hyde, _Hist. Bel. Pers_.(1760), p. 250, says that some call this ride an innovation, but they are wrong, and the ride is very ancient, in his opinion. _G. B_. iii. 183. [15] Purim, _Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Religion_, p. 51. Von Paul de Lagarde, Gottingen, 1887. [16] _G. B_. iii. 183. [17] _G. B_. iii. 184. [18] _G. B_. ii. 186. [19] _G. B_. iii. 183. [20] Nehemiah vii. 7; Ezra ii. 2. [21] _G. B_. iii. 158, 159. [22] _G. B_. ii. 123, 254. [23] _G. B_. iii. 152. [24] _G. B_. iii. 159. [25] _G. B_. iii. 159. [26] _G. B_. iii. 134-137. [27] _G. B_. iii. 171; Movers, _Die Phœnizier_, i. 496. [28] _G. B_. iii. 171. [29] _G. B_. iii. 171. [30] _G. B_. ii. 123, 124. [31] _G. B_. iii. 152. [32] _G. B_. iii. 159. [33] _G. B_. iii. 180, 181. [34] _G. B_. iii. 159. [35] _G. B_. iii. 155. [36] _G. B_. iii. 185. [37] I assume that Jensen's theory of Zakmuk is accepted, for it gets in a resurrection, through Eabani. This is essential, as we hear nothing elsewhere of a Tammuz resurrection in March at Babylon. [38] _G. B_. ii. 24, 26. [39] _G. B_. ii. 253-254. [40] _G. B_. iii. 155-156. [41] Wellhausen, _History of Israel_, pp. 492-493. IX _WHY WAS THE MOCK-KING OF THE SACÆA WHIPPED AND HANGED?_ Though I have tried to argue against Mr. Frazer's theory of the cause of the 'sacrifice' of the mock Sacæan king, I am not prepared to offer a dogmatic counter-theory. The Sacæan case is unique, is isolated; we are acquainted with no other similar examples, and thus a rite which has an isolated existence may have had a singular cause. The cause may be hidden behind the scenes of history. Though I have not a firm hypothesis as to that cause, I shall end this chapter by throwing out a conjecture, for what it may be worth.