Skip to main content

Full text of "Bible Dictionary.William Smith, Editor. Hackett, Abbot, Fuller, etc. American, Eng. editions.9 vols.1868.1896"

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/ 


AH SSliia Y 

Harvard Depositorv 
Brittle Book 



i;f .' 


NoNOeeppopcNequc (N Oolo 


Theological Seminary 

THE Girr OF 

Alice • Lovveli. • Ropes 
'93 3 

Theological Library 




Digitized \yj 


"" n-^ 


/A^^t^ /f^^. 

Digitized \yj 


Digitized by 








Rev. J. M. FULLER, M.A. 

^ttonli (Pttttton. 

IN THREE VOLUMES.— Vol. I., Part I. 



S%e right of Trantlation i» rtftrrtd. 

Digitized by 



Theological liBRAR^ 




Digitized by 




G. J. B. Rev. Ghables James Ball, M.A., 
Chaplain of Lincoln's Inn. 

E. B. B. Bev. Edwabd Bdssell Bernabd, M.A., 

Canon of Salisbury; formerly Fellow of Magdalen College, 

A. T. C. Rev. Abthue Thomas Chapman, M.A., 

Fellow, Assistant Tutor, and Hebrew Leotnrer of Emma- 
ouel College, Cambridge. 

C. B. C. Major Claude Bexinieb Gomdkb, B.E ; D.C.L., LL.D. 

H. D. Rev. Henet Deanb, B.D., 

Prebendary of Winchester. 

S. B. D. Rev. Samuel Rolles Driver, D.D., 

Begins Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, 
Oxford ; Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of Southwell ; 
formerly Fellow of New College, Oxford. 

G. K Professor Dr. GEOBa Ebers, 

W. E. Bev. William Elwin, M.A., 

Vicar of St Andrew's, Worthing. 

F. Bev. John Mee Fuller, M.A., 

Professor of Ecclesiastical History, King's College, London; 
Examining Chaplain to the Arohbiuiop of Canterbuiy ; 
Yicar of JSexley, B.D.; formerly Fellow of St. John's 
College, Cambridge. 

E. C. S. G- Bev. Edgab Chables Sumneb Gibson, M.A., 
Principal of Wells Theological College. 

G. H. Bev. Charles Hole, M.A., 

Lecturer on Ecclesiastical History, King's College, London. 

A. F. K- Bev. Alexandeb Francis Kjrkpatrick, D.D., 

Begins Professor of Hebrew, Cambridge; Canon of Ely; 
Fellow of Trinity College, '.Cambridge; Examining 
Chaplain to the Bishop of Bocheeter. 

J. B. It. The late Right Bev. Joseph Barber LiaHTFOor, D.D., 
Bishop of Durham. 

J. K. Ii. Bev. Joseph Bawson Lumby, D.D., 

Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Cambridge; Ex- 
amining Chaplain to the Archbishop of York. 

a 2 

Digitized by 




D. S. M. D. S. Margoliocth, M.A., 

Laudian Professor of Arabic in the University of Oxford. 

E. N. ]6dooabd Naville. 

J. W. N. Eev. John Wiluam Nutt, M.A., 

Beotor of Harpsdon; formerly Fellow of All Souls' 
(College, Oxford. 

T. G. P. Theophilus Goldiiige Pinches, M.R.A.S., 

Of the Department of Egyptian and Assyrian Antiquities, 
British Museum. 

A. P. Eev. Alfred Plummer, D.D., 

Master of University College, Durham. 

A. E. Eev. Archibald Robertson, M.A., 

Principal of Hatfield Hall, Durham. 

E., or Eev. Herbert Edward Eyle, B.D., 

H. E. E. Hulsean Professor of Divinity, Cambridge ; Examining 

Chaplain to the Bishop of Eipon. 

G. S. Eev. Geoeoe Salmon, D.D., 

Provost of Trinity College, Dublin. 

W. S— y. Eev. William Sanday, D.D., LL.D., 

Dean Ireland's Professor of Exegesis, Oxford. 

J. E. S. John Edwin Sandys, Litt. D., 

Fellow and Tutor of St. John's College, and Public Orator 
in the University of Cambridge. 

A. H. S. Eev. Archibald Henry Sayce, LL.D., 

Professor of Assyriology, Oxford ; Fellow of Queen's College, 

V. H. S. Eev. Vincent Henry Stanton, M.A., 

Ely Professor of Divinity, Cambridge ; Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge; Examining Chaplain to the 
Bishop of Ely. 

A. W. S. Eev. Arthur William Stueane, M.A., 

Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. 

S. S.-Sy. The late Dr. S. Schiller-Szinessy, 

of the University Library, Cambridge. 

C. T. Eev. Charles Taylor, D.D., 

Master of St. John's College, Cambridge. 

H. F. T. Eev. Henry Fanshawe Tozer, M.A., 

Fellow and Tutor of Exeter College, Oxford. 

H. B. T. Eev. Heney Baker Tristram, D.D., F.L.S., 
Canon of Durham. 

H. W. W. Yen. Henry Willlam Watkins, D.U., 

Archdeacon and Canon of Durham ; Examining Chaplain 
to the Bishop of Durham. 

B. F. W. Right Eev. Brooke Foss Westcott, D.D., 

Bishop of Durham. 

W. Major-General Sir Charles William Wilson, E.E., K.C.B., 

K.C.M.G., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S., Director-General of the 
Ordnance Survey. 

C. H.H.W. Eev. Charles Henry Hamilton Wright, D.D., Ph.D., 

Vicar of St. John's, Liverpool. 

Digitized by 



Thb Dictionary of the Bible was commenced on a more restricted 
scale than was afterwards found to be consistent with the completion 
of the undertaking in a scholarlike and satisfactory manner. Ac- 
cordingly, as the Work proceeded, it expanded into three volumes 
instead of two, as was originally intended, and an Appendix was added 
to supply the omissions and deficiencies of the earlier letters. The 
primary object of this new Edition was to insert these supplementary 
articles in their proper places in the first volume ; but as this could 
only be done by re-setting the type, the opportunity was taken to 
revise the whole volume, and to re-write many of the more important 
articles. So large have been the additions that the new first volume 
exceeds the old, with the addition of the Appendix, by more than 
550 pages ; and it has therefore been found necessary to issue 
it in two parts. The second and third volumes, having been 
composed on a more extended and comprehensive scale than 
the earlier portion of the Dictionary, do not call for similar 
revision; and there is therefore no present intention of bringing 
out a new edition of them. Fortunately a large proportion of 
those articles on which recent research and criticism have thrown 
the strongest light, and concerning which the opinions of the best 
Biblical scholars have undergone the most noted change since the 
Dictionary was published, are contained in the first volume. We 
need only mention such subjects as Jerusalem, Assyria, Babylonia, 
Egypt, and the Hittites ; the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles ; 
the Books of Genesis and Deuteronomy ; the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
and the Crospel of St. John. 

It remains only to explain briefly the alterations and improve- 
ments which have been made in the present edition. First, the 
articles on the Books of the Bible have been for the most part re- 
written, on a much more extensive scale than before. For example, 
the article on the " Acts of the Apostles," re-written by the late 
Bishop Lightfoot, occupies eighteen pages, compared with a page and 
a half in the former edition; that on the "Gospel of St John," 
re-written by Archdeacon Watkins, fills twenty-five pages, com- 
pared with three in the former edition ; that on the " Epistle to 

Digitized by 



the Galatians," re-\mtten by Dr. Salmon, Provost of Trinity College, 
Dublin, comprises fourteen pages, compared with a page and a half 
in the former edition ; the " Epistle to the Hebrews," re-written by 
Dr. Westcott, the present Bishop of Durham, fills fourteen pages, 
compared with five in the former edition ; the article on " Deuter- 
onomy," re-written by Professor Driver, occupies twenty-two pages, 
compared with five in the former edition ; the article on the 
" Apocrypha," re-written by Professor Eyle of Cambridge, fills thirty- 
seven pages, compared with four in the former edition ; to the article 
on the " Gospels " by the late Archbishop Thomson, a supplement 
by Professor Sanday, containing twenty-six pages, has been added. 
This list might easily be enlarged, but the instances named above will 
serve to show the pains and labour bestowed upon the new articles 
relating to the Books of the Bible. 

Secondly, the revision of other articles has been entrusted to 
writers recognized as specialists in their respective departments. 
Thus, for example, the articles on Assyria and Babylonia have been 
re- written by Mr. Pinches, of the department of Assyrian Antiquities 
in the British Museum ; those on Egypt by the eminent Egyptologist, 
M. Naville ; and those on Natural History by Canon Tristram. The 
geographical articles by Sir George Grove, which were justly con- 
sidered one of the most valuable portions of the original edition, have 
been revised, at his request, by Sir Charles Wilson and, in a few 
instances, by Major Conder. Sir Charles Wilson has also re-written 
the article on the topography of Jerusalem, and has added separate 
maps of the Tribes and of other countries, with fresh illustrations 
of the sites of places. 

It would be impossible within the limits of a Preface to specify 
more partictilarly the assistance obtained in other departments. As 
each writer is alone responsible for his own contributions, differences 
of opinion must naturally occur, and the Editors could not take the 
liberty of altering materially articles thus signed, nor would it have 
been desirable, if it had been possible to do so. In the present state 
of Biblical criticism, it is better that different schools should be 
represented in the Dictionary than that strict uniformity should be 
secured. In the case of articles which have been revised by other 
writers, the initials of the original authors have been appended with 
those of the revisers, but the latter are alone responsible for the 
articles in their present form. 

Few articles of any importance have been reprinted without 
material alteration. The chief exceptions are, for obvious reasons, 
those by the late Dean Stanley, and the present Bishop of Durham ; 
though some of the articles by the latter writer have, at his request, 
been revised by Professor Eyle of Cambridge. 

Digitized by 



The meanings of the names of persons and places have been 
mostly given in accordance with the best authorities, but often with 
a real sense of the precariousness of the explanation. In some 
cases words of the Authorized Version now obsolete have been 
explained, and the readings of the Eevised Version appended. 

The Editors wish to acknowledge cordially the generous help 
given them from various quarters. To Professor Driver and the 
Bev. C. J. Ball they owe a careful revision of the Hebrew and other 
Semitic words in a large number of the articles. They are also 
indebted to the courtesy of Dr. Swete for sending them the early 
sheets of his smaller edition of the Septuagint, from which the 
readings are given in the present Work ; and to the Palestine 
Exploration Fund for permission to use the surveys and drawings 
from which Sir Charles Wilson has constructed many of the maps 
and illustrations. 

LoHSON, Mardi, 1893. 

Digitized by 




H. A. The late Very Rev, Hesry Auford, D.D., 

Dean of Canterbury, 

H, B, Rev. Hknrt Bailey, D.D., 

Hon. Canon of Canterbury ; formerly Fellow of St. John's 
College, Cambridge. 

H. B. The late Rev. Horatids Bonar, D.D. 

[Tbe geognpUcal articlea, aigned H. B., are wiiUen bjr Dr. Booar : those on other sutijecta, 
signed H. B., are written by Mr. Bailey.] 

A. B. Right Rev. Alfred Barry, B.D„ 

Canon of Windsor ; late Bishop of Sydney and Metropolitan 
of Australia, 

W. L. B, Rev. William Latham Betan, M,A., 

Canon of St. David's : Examining Chaplain to the Bishop 
of St. David's ; Vicar of Hay, Brecknookahire. 

J. AV. B. The late Very Rev. Joseph William Blakesley, B.D., 
Dean of Lincoln. 

T. E. B. The late Rev. Thomas Edward Brown, M.A., 

Vice-Principal of King William's College, Isle of Man ; 
formerly Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. 

R. W. B. A'en. Robert Wiluam Browne, M.A., 

Archdeacon of Bath ; Canon of Wells ; Rector of Weston- 

E. H. B. The late Right Rev. Edward Harold Browne, D.D., 

Bishop of Winchester. 

W. T. B. The late Rev. Wiluam Thomas Bullock, M.A., 

Assistant Secretaiy of the Society for the Propagation of 
the Gk)spel in Foreign Parts. 

S. C. The late Rev. Samuel Claek, M.A., 

Vicar of Bredwardine with Brobury, Hertfordshire. 

F. C. C. The late Rev. F. C. Cook, M.A., 

Canon of Exeter. 

G. E. L. C, The late Right Rev, George Edward Lynch Cotton, D,D., 

Bishop of Calcutta and Metropolitan of India. 

J, LI. D. Rev. John Llewelyn Davieb, M.A., 

Vicar of Kirkby Lonsdale; formerly Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge. 

Digitized by 




G. E. D. Bev. G. E. Day, D.D., 

Lane Seminaiy, Cincinnati, Ohio. 

E. D. The late Emanukl Deotsch, M.B.A.S. 

W. D. Bev. WiLUAM Drake, M.A., 

Chaplain to the Queen ; Hon. Canon of Worcester ; formerly 
Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. 

£. P. K Bev. Edward Paroissien Eodrup, KAn 

Prebendary of Salisbury ; Vicar of Bremhill. 

C. J. E. Bight Eev. Charles James Ellicott, D.D., 
Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. 

F. W. F. Ven. Fredebick William Farrar, D.D., F.B.S., 

Archdeacon and Canon of Westminster ; formerly Fellow 
of Trinity College, Cambridge. 

J. F. The late James Ferousson, F.B.S., F.B.A.S. 

E. S. Pf. Bev. Edmund Salusbory Ffoulkbs, B.D., 

Vicar of St. Mary the Virgin, Oxford. 

W. F. Bight Bev. William Fitzgerald, D.D., 
Bishop of Eillaloe. 

F. 6. The late Eev. Frascis Garden, M.A., 

Snbdean of Her Majesty's Chapels Boyal. 

F. W. G. Bev. Frederick Wiluam Gotch, LL.D., 

President of the Baptist College, Bristol. 

G. Sir George Grove, D.C.L., 

Director of the Boyal College of Music. 

H. B. H. Bev. H. B. Hackett, D.D., 

Professor of Biblical Literature, Newton, Massachusetts. 

E. H— s. The late Bev. Ernest Hawkins, B.D., 

Prebendary of St. Paul's ; Secretary of the Society for the 
Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. 

H. B. Eev. Henry Hayman, D.D., 

Hon. Canon of Carlisle ; Eeotor of Aldingham. 

A C. H. Bight Bev. Lord Arthur Charles Hervey, D.D., 
Bishop of Bath and Wells. 

J. A. H. The late Ven. James Augustus Hessey, D.C.L., 
Archdeacon of Middlesex. 

J. D. H. Sir Joseph D, Hooker, K.C.B., F.E.S. 

J. J. H. The late Eev. James John Hornby, M.A., 

Fellow of Brasenoso Collej^e, Oxford ; Principal of Bishop 
Cosin's Hall ; Tutor in the University of Durham. 

W. H. Eev. Wiluam Houghton, M.A., F.L.S., 

Bector of Preston on the Weald Moors, Salop, 

J. S. H. The late Very Eev. John Saul Howson, D.D., 
Dean of Chester. 

£. H. Eev. Edoae Huxtable, M.A., 

Prebendary of Wells. 

Digitized by 




W. B, J. Eight Eev. William Basil Jones, D.D., 
Bishop of St David's. 

A. H. L. Eight Hon. Austen Henbt Latabd, G.C.B., D.C.L. 

S. L. Eev. Stanley Leathes, D.D., 

Professor of Hebrew, King's College, London ; Prebendary 
of St. Paul's ; Beotor of Much Haddam. 

J. B. L. The late Eight Eev. Joseph Babber Lightfoot, D.D., 
Bishop of Dnrham. 

D. W. M. Eev. D. W. Marks, 

Professor of Hebrew in University CJollege, London. 

F. M. Eev. Frederick Meyrick, 1I.A., 

Prebendary of Lincoln ; Eeotor of Blickling ; formerly 
Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. 

Oppert. Professor Oppert, of Paris. 

E. E. 0. Eev. Edwabd Bedman Orqer, M.A., 

Vicar of Hoogham. 

T. J. O. The late Ven. Thomas Johnson Ormerod, M.A., 

Archdeacon of Suffolk; formerly Fellow of Brasenose 
College, Oxford. 

J. J. S. P. Eight Kev. John Jambs Stewart Febowne, D.D., 
Bishop of Worcester. 

T. T. p. Ven. Thomas Thomason Perowne, B.D., 

Archdeacon of Norwich ; Examining Chaplain to the Bishop 
of Norwich ; Bector of Bedenhall. 

H. W. P. Eev. Henry Wright Phillott, M.A., 
Canon of Hereford. 

E. H. P. The late Very Eev. Edwabd Hayes Plomptbe, M.A., 
Dean of Wells. 

E. S. P. The late Edward Stanley Poole, M.E.A.S. 

B. S. P. Eeginald Stuart Poole, LL.D., 

Keeper of Coins, British Museum ; Professor of Arohseology 
in University College, London ; Corresponding Member 
of the Institute of France. 

J. L. P. The late Eev. J. L. Porter, M.A. 

C. P. Eev. Charles Pbitchabd, M.A., F.RS., 

Savilian Professor of Astronomy, Oxford ; Fellow of New 
College, Oxford; formerly Fellow of St. John's College, 

C. E. Eev. George Bawunson, M.A., 

Canon of Canterbury ; Beotor of All Hallows, London. 

H. j. B. The late Bev. Henby John Eose, B.D., 

Eector of Houghton Conquest, Bedfordshire; formerly 
Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge. 

W. S. The late Eev. Willlam Selwyn, D.D., 

Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Cambridge; Canon 
of Ely. 

Digitized by 




W. S. Sir WniiAM Smith, D.C.L., LL.D., 

Formerly Classical Examiner in the Uniyersity of London. 

A. P. S. The late Very Eev. Arthur Penbhyn Stanley, D.D., 
Dean of Westminster. 

C. E. S. Rev. Calvin E. Stowe, D.D., 

Professor of Sacred Literature, Andover, Massachusetts. 

J. P. T. Kev. J. P. Thompson, D.D., 
New York. 

W. T. The late Most Bev. William Thomson, D.D., 

Archbishop of York. 

J. F. T. The late Rev. Joseph FiiANas Thrupp, M.A., 

Vicar of Barrington ; formerly Fellow of Trinity College, 

The late S. P. Tkegklles, LL.D. 

Sev. Henky Baker Tristram, D.D., F.L.S., 
Canon of Durham. 

The late Hon. Edward T. B. Twisleton, M.A. 

Sev. Edmund Yenables, M.A., 
Canon of Lincoln Cathedral. 

Sight Eev. Brooke Foss Westcott, D.D., 
Bishop of Durham. 

C. W. The late Bight Bev. Christopher Wordsworth, D.D., 

Bishop of Lincoln. 

W. A. W. William Aldis Wright, M.A., , 

Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 




. B. 









Digitized by 



The present Work is designed to render the same service in the 
study of the Bible as the Dictionaries of Greek and Eoman Anti- 
quities, Biography, and Geography have done in the study of the 
classical writers of antiquity. Within the last few years Biblical 
studies have received a fresh impulse ; and the researches of modern 
scholars, as well as the discoveries of modem travellers, have thrown 
new and unexpected light upon the history and geography of the 
East. It has, therefore, been thought that a new Dictionary of the 
Bible, founded on a fresh examination of the original documents, and 
embodying the results of the most recent researches and discoveries, 
would prove a valuable addition to the literature of the country. It 
has been the aim of the Editor and Contributors to present the infor- 
mation in such a form as to meet the wants not only of theological 
students, but also of that larger class of persons who, without pursuing 
theology as a profession, are anxious to study the Bible with the aid 
of the latest investigations of the best scholars. Accordingly, while 
the requirements of the learned have always been kept in view, 
quotations from the ancient languages have been sparingly intro- 
duced, and generally in parentheses, so as not to interrupt the 
continuous perusal of the Work. It is confidently believed that 
the articles wUl be found both intelligible and interesting even to 
those who have no knowledge of the learned languages; and that 
such persons will experience no difficulty in reading the book 
through from beginning to end. 

The scope and object of the Work may be briefly defined. It is a 
Dictionary of the Bible and not of Theology. It is intended to eluci- 
date the antiquities, biography, geography, and natural history of the 
Old Testament, New Testament, and Apocrypha ; but not to explain 
systems of theology, or discuss points of controversial divinity. It 
has seemed, however, necessary in a " Dictionary of the Bible " to give 
a full account of the Book, both as a whole and in its separate parts. 
Accordingly, articles are inserted not only upon the general subject, 
such as « Bible," " Old Testament," " New Testament," "Apocrypha," 
and " Canon," and upon the ancient Versions, as " Septuagint " and 
" Vulgate ; " but also upon each of the separate books. These articles 
are naturally some of the most important in the Work, and occupy 

Digitized by 



considerable space, as will be seen by referring to " Gen&sis," " Isaiah," 
" Job," " Nehemiah," " Pentateuch," " Proverbs," and the Books of 
" Samuel." 

The Editor believes that the Work will be found, upon examina- 
tion, to be far more complete in the subjects which it professes to treat 
than any of its predecessors. No other Dictionary has yet attempted 
to give a complete list of the proper names occurring in the Old and 
New Testaments, to say nothing of those in the Apocrypha. The 
present Work is intended to contain every name, and, in the case of 
minor names, references to every passage in the Bible in which each 
occurs. It is true that many of the names are those of com- 
paratively obscure persons and places ; but this is no reason for their 
omission. On the contrary, it is precisely for such articles that a 
Dictionary is most needed. An account of the more important 
persons and places occupies a prominent position in historical and 
geographical works ; but of the less conspicuous names no inform- 
ation can be obtained in ordinary books of reference. Accordingly 
many names, which have been either entirely omitted or cursorily 
treated in other Dictionaries, have had considerable space devotetl 
to them ; the result being that much curious and sometimes impor- 
tant knowledge has been elicited ^respecting subjects, of which little 
or nothing was previously known. Instances may be seen by re- 
ferring to the articles "Ishmael, son of Nethaniah," "Jaxeb," 
" Jedidiah," " Jehosheba." 

In the alphabetical arrangement the orthography of the Authorized 
Version has been invariably followed. Indeed the Work might be 
described as a Dictionary of the Bible, aecording to the Authorized 
Version. But at the commencement of each article devoted to a 
proper name, the corresponding forms in the Hebrew, Greek, and 
Vulgate are given, together with the variations in the two great 
manuscripts of the Septuagint, which are often curious and well 
worthy of notice. All inaccuracies in the Authorized Version are 
likewise carefully noted. 

In the composition and distribution of the articles three points 
have been especially kept in view — the insertion of copious references 
to the ancient writers and to the best modern authorities, as mucli 
brevity as was consistent with the proper elucidation of the subjects, 
and facility of reference. To attain the latter object an explanation 
is given, even at the risk of some repetition, under every word to 
which a reader is likely to refer, since it is one of the great drawbacks 
in the use of a Dictionary to be referred constantly from one heading 
to another, and frequently not to find at last the information that 
is wanted. 

Many names in the Bible occur also in the classical writers, and 

Digitized by 



are therefore included in the Classical Dictionaries already published. 
But they have in all cases been written anew for this work, and from 
a Biblical point of view. No one would expect in a Dictionary of the 
Bible a complete history of Alexandria or a detailed life of Alexander 
the Great, simply because they are mentioned in a few passages of 
the Sacred Writers. Such subjects properly belong to Dictionaries 
of Classical Geography and Biography, and are only introduced here 
80 far as they throw light upon Jewish history, and the Jewish cha- 
racter and faith. The same remark applies to all similar articles, 
which, far from being a repetition of those contained in the preceding 
Dictionaries, are supplementary to them, affording the Biblical inform- 
ation which they did not profess to give. In like manner it would 
obviously be out of place to present such an accoimt of the plants 
and animals mentioned in the Scriptures, as would be appropriate in 
systematic treatises on Botany or Zoology. All that can be reason- 
ably required, or indeed is of any real service, is to identify the plants 
and animals with known species or varieties, to discuss the difficulties 
which occur in each subject, and to explain all allusions to it by the 
aid of modem Bcienc& 

In a Work written by varioxis persons, each responsible for his 
own contributions, differences of opinion must naturally occur. Such 
differences, however, are both fewer and of less importance than 
might have been expected from the nature of the subject ; and in 
some difficult questions — such, for instance, as that of the " Brethren 
of our Lord" — the Editor, instead of endeavouring to obtain uni- 
formity, has considered it an advantage to the reader to have the 
arguments stated from different points of view. 

An attempt has been made to ensure, as far as practicable, 
uniformity of reference to the most important books. In the case 
of two works of constant occurrence in the geographical articles, it 
may be convenient to mention that all references to Dr. Robinson's 
BiUical Besearehes and to Professor Stanley's Sinai and Pales- 
tine have been uniformly made to the second edition of the former 
work (London, 1856, 3 vols.), and to the fourth edition of the latter 
(London, 1857). 

The Editor cannot conclude this brief explanation without 
expressing his obligations to the Writers of the various articles. 
Their names are a sufficient guarantee for the value of their 
contributions ; but the warm interest they have taken in the book, 
and the unwearied pains they have bestowed upon their separate 
departments, demand from the Editor his grateful thanks. There 
is, however, one Writer to whom he owes a more special acknow- 
ledgment. Mr. G«orge Grove of Sydenham, besides contributing 
the articles to which bis initial is attached, has rendered the Editor 

Digitized by 



important assistance in writing the majority of the articles on the 
more obscure names in the First Volume, in the correction of the 
proofs, and in the revision of the whole book. The Editor has also 
to express his obligations to Mr. William Aldis Wright, Librarian of 
Trinity Collie, Cambridge, and to the Rev. Charles P. Phinn of 
Chichester, for their valuable assistance in the correction of the 
proofs, as well as to Mr. £. Stanley Poole for the revision of the 
Arabic words. Mr. Aldis Wright has likewise written in the Second 
and Third Yolomes the more obscure names to which no initials are 

In consequence of the great importance of many of the subjects 
contained in the latter half of the alphabet, — of which " Miracles," 
"Noah," "Palestine," "Pentateuch," "Prophecy," "Versions," and 
"Vulgate" may be mentioned as specimens, — it has been found 
necessary to extend the work to three volumes, instead of comprising 
it in two, as originally intended. The usefulness of many Encyclo- 
paedias and Dictionaries has been sacrificed by compressing into 
narrow limits the later letters ; and it is believed that the extension 
of the present work will add greatly to its value. It has also enabled 
the Editor to give, at the end of the Third Volume, an Appendix to 
Volume L, containing many important articles on Natural History 
as well as some subjects omitted in the First Volume, such as 
"Antichrist," « Baptism," and " Church." 

It is intended to publish shortly an Atlas of Biblical Geography, 
which, it is hoped, will form a valuable supplement to the 


LoKDOH, Ifovember, 1863. 

Digitized by 



A. V. = Authorized Version ; R. V. = Revised Version. 
LXX. = Greek Version of the Old Testament. 

A. = Codex Alexandrinus. 

B. = Codex Vatioanus. 
K. = Codex Sinaiticus. 

T.^ = 7th edition of Tischendorfs LXX. 
PR, or PEF. Mem. or Qy. Stat. = Palestine Exploration Fund, Memoir, or 

Quarterly IStatement. 

KAT.* = 2nd edition of Schrader's Die Keilinschri/ien u. das AUe Testament. 

OS.* = 2nd edition of Lagarde's Onomaslica Sacra. 

HE. = Real-Encyclopadie. 

KL. = Kirchen-Lexicon. 

D. B. = Dictionary of the Bible. 

MV."or MV."= 10th or 11th edition of Gesenius, Hehraisches u. Aramdisches 
Handworterbuch iiber das Alte Testament, edited by Muhlati 
and Volck. The 11th edition has H. D. Miiller's 
additions. The new edition now in course of publica- 
tion at the Clarendon Press has come too late for use 
except in the last article of the volume. 

BE J, = Revue des ifctudes Juives (Paris). 

PSBA. or TSBA. = Proceedings or Transactions of the Society of Biblical 
Archaeology (London). 

HWB. = Handworterbuch. 

ZDMO. =ZeitBchritt d. Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft (Leipzig). 

QPB.* = 2nd edition of the Variorum edition of the Authorized edition 
of the Bible published by the Queen's printers (Eyre & 

ZATW. = Zeitschrift fiir die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft (Giessen). 

ZA. = Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie (Berlin). 

ZKF. = Zeitschrift fiir Eeilinschriftliche Forschung. 

LOT. = Driver's Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament. 
This book was not available earlier than the letter E. 

N. S. = New Series. 

HI. = History of Israel. 

A number attached to a name or book, e.g. Delitzsch*, indicates the 
edition of the work referred to. 

Digitized by 





A and n. [Alf HA.] 

A'ALAB. [Addas.] 

AABON (I^nrwt; 'Ao()<tr ; ilaron [derivation 
nibiowD ; connected fancifully by Rabbinic ety- 
mology witii mn, his mother baring been preg- 
nant with bim at the time of Pharaoh'a edict 
(Ex. u 16); by Geaenias thought perhaps to 
Bean mountaineer, aa though connected with ID; 
by Sayce connected with the Assyrian aAaru, 
to send]). He was the son of Amrara (Ei. vi. 
30 [AuRAJf]), the son of Kohath and Jochebed 
{Kohtth's sister) ; he was three years older than 
Moses (Ex. Tii. 7), but younger than his sister 
liiriaro (Nam. xxri. 59). He was a Leritc, and 
a«the6rit-bom nrould naturally be the priest of 
the honsehold, even before any special appoint- 
nifnl by God. Of bis early history we know 
nothing, although, by the way in which he is first 
mentioned in Ex. ir. 14, as " Aaron the Lerite," 
it would seem as if he had been already to some 
eilent a leader in his tribe. All that is definitely 
recorded of him at this time is. that in the same 
pasiage he is described as one " who could spealc 
veil." Judging from the acts of his life, we 
slionM luppoce him to hare been, like many 
eloquent men, a man of impulsive and com- 
paratively unstable character, leaning almost 
wholly on his brother ; incapable of that endur- 
ance of lonelinen and temptation which is an 
element of real greatness ; but at the aame time 
earnest in his devotion to God and man, and 
therefore capable of sacrifice and of discipline 
by trial. 

His first office was to be the " Prophet," i.<r. 
(according to the proper meaning of the word) 
tke Interpreter and "Jlouth" (Ex. iv. 16) of 
hit brother, who waa " slow of speech ; " and 
iccoriiingly he was not only the organ of com- 
monication with the Israelites and with Pharaoh 
(Ex. iv. 30, Tii. 2), but also the actual instru- 
ment of working most of the miracles of the 
Ejodus (see Ex. vii. 19, &c.). Thus also on 
the way to Mount Sinai, during the battle with 
Amaiek, Aaron is mentioned with Hur, as staying 
iji the weary hands of Hoses, when they were 
lifted up for the victory of Israel (not in prayer, 
as is sometimes explained, bat) to bear the rod 



of God (see Ex. xvii. 9). Through all this period 
he is only mentioned as dependent upon his 
brother, and deriving all his authority from 
him. The contrast between them is even more 
strongly marked on the arrival at Sinai. Moses 
at once acts as the mediator (Gal. iii. 19) for the 
people, to come near to God for them, and to 
speak His words to them. Aaron only approaches, 
with Nadab and Abihu and the seventy elders 
of, Israel, by special command, near enough to 
see God's glory, but not so as to enter His im- 
mediate presence. Left then, on Moses' departure, 
to guide the people, he is tried for a moment on 
his own responsibility, and he fails not from any 
direct unbelief on his own part, but from a weak 
inability to withstand the demand of the people 
for visible " gods to go before them." Possibly 
it seemed to him prudent to make an image of 
Jehovah, in the well-known form of Egyptian 
idolatry (Apis or MnevisX rather than to risk 
the total alienation of the people to false gods ; 
and bis weakness was rewarded by seeing a 
" feast of the Lord " (Ex. xxxii. 5) degraded to 
the lowest form of heathenish sensuality, and 
knowing, from Moses' words and deeds, that the 
covenant with the Lord was utterly broken. 
There can hardly be a stronger contrast with 
this weakness, and the self-convicted shame of 
bis excuse, than the burning indignation of 
Moses, and his stem decisive measures of ven- 
geance; although beneath these there lay an 
ardent affection, which went almost to the verge 
of presumption in prayer for the people (Ex. 
xxxii. 19-34), and gained forgiveness for Aaron 
himself (Deut. ix. 20). 

It is not a little remarkable, that immediately 
after this great sin, and almost as though it had 
not occurred, God's fore-ordained purposes were 
carried out in Aaron's consecration to the new 
office of the high-priesthood. Probably the fall 
and the repentance from it may have made him 
one " who conld have compassion on the ignorant 
and them who are out of the way, as being him- 
self also compassed with infirmity." The order 
of God for the consecration is found in Ex. xxix., 
and the record of its execution in Lev. viii. ; and 
the delegated character of the Aaronic priest- 
hood is clearly seen by the fact that, in this 
its inauguration, the priestly office is borne 

Digitized by 




by Moses, as God's truer representative (see 
Heb. vii.). 

The form of consecration resembled other 
sacriticial ceremonies in containing, first, a sin- 
oli'cring, the form of cleansing from sin and 
reconciliation [Sin-ofFEKISo] ; a burnt-olTering, 
the symbol of entire devotion to God of the 
nature so purified [Buiurr-OFFERINO] ; and a 
meat-offering, the thankful acltnowledgment 
and sanctifying of Go<i's natural blessings 
[Meat-offerisq]. It had, however, besides 
these, the solemn assumption of the sacred robes 
(the garb of righteousness), the anointing (the 
symbol of God's grace), and the offering of the 
ram of consecration, the blood of which was 
sprinkled on Aaron and his sons, as upon the 
altar and vessels of the ministry, in order to 
sanctify them for the service of God. The former 
ceremonies represented the blessings and duties 
of the man ; the latter the special consecration 
of the priest.* 

The solemnity of the office, and its entire 
de|>endence fur sanctity on the ordinance of 
God, were vindicated by the death of Nadab and 
Abihu, for "offering strange tire" on the altar, 
and apparently (see Lev. x. 9, 10) for doing so 
ID drunken recklessness. The checking of his 
sorrow by Aaron, so as at least to refrain from 
all outward signs of it, would be a severe trial 
to an impulsive and weak character, and a proof 
of his being lifted above himself by the office 
which he held. 

From this time the history of Aaron is almost 
entirely that of the priesthood, and its chief 
feature is the great rebellion of Korah and the 
Levitcs against his sacerdotal dignity, united 
with that of Dathan and Abiram and the 
Keubenites against the temporal authority of 
Moses [KoRAli]. The true vindication of the 
reality of Aaron's priesthood was, not so much 
the death of Korah by the fire of the Lord, as 
the efficacy of his offering of incense to stay the 
plague, by which he was seen to be .iccepted as 
an Intercessor for the people. The blooming of 
his rod which followed was a miraculous sign, 
visible to all and capable of preservation, of 
God's choice of him and his house. 

The only occasion on which his individual cha- 
racter is seen, is one of presumption, prompted 
as before chiefly by another ; and, as before, 
speedily repented of. The murmuring of Aaron 
and Miriam against Moses, if partly directed 
against the marriage of Moses with an Ethiopian, 
clearly proceeded from their trust, the one in his 
own priesthood, the other in her prophetic inspira- 
tion, as equal commissions from God (Num. xii. 2). 
It seems to have vanished at once before the de- 
claration of Moses' exaltation above all prophecy 
and priesthood, except that of One Who was to 
come; and, if we may judge from the direction 
of the punishment, to have originated mainly 
with Miriam. On all other occasions Aaron is 
spoken of as acting with Moses in the guidance 
of the people. Leaning, as he seems to have 
done, wholly on him, it is not strange that he 
should have shared his sin at Meribah, and its 
punishment [Moses] (Num. ix. 10-12). As 

* U Is noticeable that the ceremonies of the restoration 
of the leper to his place, as one of Qod's people, bear a 
strong resemblance to those of consecration. See Ijcv. 
xlr. 10-32. 

that punishment seems to have purged out from 
Moses the tendency to self-confidence which 
tainted his character, so in Aaron it may have 
destroyed that idolatry of a stronger mind, into 
which a weaker one, once conquered, is apt to 
fall. Aaron's death seems to have followed very 
speedily. It took place on Mount Hor, after, the 
transference of his robes and office to Eleazar, 
who alone with Moses was present at his death, 
and performed his burial (Num. xx. 28). This 
mount is still called the " Mountain of Aaron." 

The wife of A.nron was Elisheba (Ex. vi. 23). 
.She bare him four sons. Nadab and Abihu 
predeceased him (see above). Two survived 
him, Eleazar and Ithrjnar. The high-priesthood 
descended to the foi mer and to his descendants 
until the time of Eli, who, although of the house 
of Ithamar, received the hi^h-priesthood (see 
.loseph. Ant. v. 11, viii. 1, § .i), and transmitted 
it to his children; with them it continued till 
the accession of Solomon, who took it from Abi- 
.ithar, and restored it to Zadok (of the house of 
Eleazar), so fulfilling the propberv of 1 Sam. 
ii. .30. ' [A. B.] 

The I>abbinic view of Aaron is highly eulo- 
gistic. It will be found snmmed up in Ham- 
burger, Seai-Encydopiidic /. Bibel u. Talmud,* 
s. n. Rabbinic teaching finds depicted in Mai. 
ii. 0, the work and character of one who died 
"by the kiss of God." [F.] 

AAKONITES, THE (jnrtK ; B. 4 [A. oQ 
'Aapdy; stirps Aaroti, Aatom'tiK). Descendants 
of Aaron, and therefore priests, who, to tlie 
number of 3700 fighting men, with Jehoiada the 
father of Benaiah at their head, joined David at 
Hebron (1 Ch. xii. 27). Later on In the history 
(1 Cli. -xxvii. 17) we find their chief was Zadok, 
who in the earlier narrative is distinguished as 
" a young man mighty of valour." "They must 
have been an imi>ortant family in the reign of 
David to be reckoned among the tribes of 
Israel. [AV. A. W.] 

AB (3K, father}, an element in the composi- 
tion of many proper names, sometimes a title of 
God, sometimes not (see Nestle, Die Tsraelit, 
Kijennamcn, p. 173, &c. Cp. Adia.) Abba is 
the Ohaldaic form, the syllable affixed giving 
the emphatic force of the definite article. The 
conception of God as Ab forms one of the prin- 
cipal doctrines common to Judaism and Chris- 
tianity. [Abba.] [K.] 

AB. [Months.] 

AB'ACUC, 2 Esd. i. 40. [Habakkuk.] 

ABAD'DON (I'naN, destnutum) in the 
Hagiographa of the 0. T. the {wetical name for 
the place of the dead (in Job xxri. and in 
Prov. XV. 11 it is parallel with Sheol; in 
Ps. Ixxxviii. 12 with the grave ; in Job xiviii. 
22 with death), and personified in Job ixviii. 22 
(cp. a similar personification of a place in the 
(lersonification of the " heavens " in Dan. iv. 23). 
In Rev. ix. 11 it is the name of "the angel of 
the abyss" (R. V.), and the Greek equivalent 
'AiroAAvaii' (Apollyon) is given in explanation 
of this " king of the locusts upon the earth " 
(Rev. ii. 3-11). The Rabbis gave the name 
Abaddon to the lowest chamber of hell (see 
Schiittgen, Hor. Hebr. in Rev. /. c), and the 

Digitized by 



Talnind personified " the angel of the abvM " 
luier tiie title Dumah (Baxtorf, Ltx. Chaid. et 
Mm. ; Hamburger, ££.' ». v.). [F.] 

ABADI'AS (B. 'A/JaJtoi ; Abdiaa [t-. 38]). 
OamuH, the son of Jehiel (1 £sd. viii. 30). 

[W.A.W.] [F.] 

ABAG'THA (Kn?3K ; Abgatha\ one of the 
»ren ennachs in the Persian court of Ahasnenis 
(£$tb. i. 10). In the LXX. the names of these 
eunuchs are difiereat. The word contains the 
same root which we find in the Persia D names 
Bigtha (Esth. i. 10). Bigthan (Esth. ii. 21), 
Bigihana (Esth. ri. 2), and Bagoat. The ety- 
mologv of all these names is quite uncertain 
(Kal,'aiid Oettli in Strack u. Ziickler's Kgf. 
Kami, in loco). Bohlen explains it by bagaddta, 
'' giren by fortune," from baga, fortune, the sun ; 
Kvael-Bertheau {Kg/. Exeg. Hdb. z. A. T., 
• Kster ' p. 389) = god's gift. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ABATJA (rU3K*; 'A0<wi; W. 'Ap$ayd 
[snpeiscr. B"?, 'Arafiiwi, B»?nig]; A. Nof/Soyrf ; 
.Ibam ; R. V. Abanah ; R. V. marg. Amanah), 
nne of the " rivers (Tli^riJ) of Damascus " (2 K. 
r. 13) Gesenios (J%«s. 116) supposes Abaoa 
to be a commutation for AHANA by an inter- 
change of the labials 3 and D : it may be a 
dialectic or a prorincial difference. See also 
Xeil's Bb. der KBnige, p. 368. Amana might 
mean " constant " (comp. \0^, as said of water 

is Is. uiiii 16 and Jer. ir. 18). The rivers of 
Damascus are its one great abiding charm, and 
every Damascene loves them passionately. Some 
distance above Damascus the Barada (Xpv- 
nf^ia of the Greeks) is split np into several 
streams, which flow through the city under 
tliSerent names, and which are supposed to be 
of rariont degrees of excellence. The stream 
Those water is most prized is the Nakr Abanias 
(cp. the Amanoh of Schwai'z, p. 54), and this is 
JonirtJess the Abana of the text (Dr. Wright, 
in Leimn Hoar, 1874, p. 284). In the Arabic 
Version of the passage — the date of which has 
l>een fixed by RSdiger as the 11th cent. — .\bana 

a rendered by Barda, lS^^, and one of the 

'(reams flowing through the city is now called 
Hakr Barada, Another of the seven principal 
't'vams is the iCoAr Taiara, a name which is 
nimd in the .\rabic Version of the Bible instead 
«f Pharpar. Benjamin of Tudela {E. T. 90) 
apparently identifies Pharpar with the same 
stream. It'aaman's interrogation in 2 K. v. 12 : 
' Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Dama-v 
ctu, betUr than all the wsUrs of Israel ? " is 
something more than pride of country ; for the 
waters of the Abana (A'oAr Abaniat) are clear 
^ sparkling, whilst those of the Jordan and 
Kishon are tepid and turbid. 

The Barada rises in the Antilibanns near Ze6- 
iity, at about 23 miles from the city, and 
1149 feet above it. In its course it passes the 
■ite of the ancient Abila, and receives the waters 
•f 'i« Fijek, one of the largest springs in Sjrria. 
Taii w.\s long believed to be the real source of 
the Barada, according to the popular usage of 
tiw country, which regards the most copious 

' Tbe Kerl. whh the Targom JoDathan and the Syrlac 
^tnioa, has Amanah. 


fountain, not the most distant head, as the 
origin of a river. We meet with other instances 
of the same mistake in the case of the Jordan 
and the Orontes [Ain]; it is to Dr. Robinson 
that we are indebted for its discovery in the 
present case (Rob. iii. 477). After flowing 
through Damascus the Barada runs across the 
plain, leaving the remarkable Assyrian or 
perhaps Hittite ruin Tell es-Salahiyeh on its left 
bank, till it loses itself in the lake or marsh 
Bahret el-KHtliyeh. Mr. Porter calculates that 
14 villages and 150,000 souls are dependent on 
this important river. For the course of the 
Barada see Porter, vol. i. ch. v. ; Joum. of S. 
lit., N. S. viii.; Rob. iii. 446-7. Lightfoot 
{Cent. Chor. iv.) and Gesenins {TTiea. 116) quote 
tlie name jI'D^p as applied in the Lexicon 
Arich to the Amana; it is also found in the 
Baba Bathra, 74 c ; Schwarr, p. 54. [G.] [W.] 

ABA'RIM (Slilton accents Ab'arim), the 
" mount," or " monntains of " (always with 
the definite article, Dn3I!n in, or 'm >y\, tJ> 
tpos rh 'APapift, &c., or iv r^ ripow t»u 
'loptivov, = the mountains of the further parts, 
or possibly, of the fords), a mountain or range 
of highlands on the east of the Jordan, in the 
land of Moab (Dent, xxxii. 49), facing Jericho, 
and forming the eastern wall of the Jordan 
valley at that part. Josephus {Ant. iv. 8, § 48) 
has tir\ TV SfKiry 'Afiofu: Euseb. (OS.* p. 237, 
4) 'A$apfi/i. Its most elevated spot was " the 
Mount Nebo, 'head' of 'the' Pisgah," from 
which Moses viewed the Promised ^nd before 
his death. There is nothing to prove that the 
Aberim were a range or tract of any length, 
but the mention of Ije-Abarim ("heaps of A.") 
in Num. xixiii. 44, on the south frontier of Moab, 
seems to indicate that the name was applied to 
the whole range of hills on the eastern side of 
the Dead Sea ; it roust, too, be remembered that 
a word derived from the same root as Abarim, 
viz. 'Qfl. is the term commonly applied to the 
whole of the country on the east of Jordan. 

These mountains are mentioned in Num. xxvii. 
12, xxxiii. 47, 48, and Deut. xxxii. 49; also- 
probably in Jer. xxii. 20, where the word is 
rendered in the A. V. "passages," in R. V. 
" .\barim." 

The mountains of Abarim have recently been 
surveyed, and it is now possible to identify with 
considerable accuracy the places mentioned in 
connexion with them. Moses probably took 
his view of the Promised Land from some point 
on the ridge of J«6e' Xeba, which runs out west 
from the Moabite plateau, sinking gradually, — 
at first a broad brown field of arable land, then 
a flat top crowned by a ruined cairn, then a 
narrower ridge ending in the summit called 
SiSghah, whence the slopes fall steeply on all 
sides. Tlie name JV«6a (Nebo) applies to the 
flat top with the cairn, which has an altitude 
of 2644 feet ; and TaTat es-Sufa, which may 
contain a reminiscence of the " field of Zophim " 
(Num. xxiii. 14), to the ascent leading up to the 
ridge from the north ; the word SiSghah,' too, 
is possibly the modem form of "Seath," the 
burial-place of Moses, which is substituted for 
Nebo in the Targum of Onkelos (Num. xxxii. 3). 

• MeiriU, however (,Siut qf Jordan, p. MS), does not 
believe in the existence of the name 3i4aKah, 

B 2 

Digitized by 



Aihdoth-pisgah is probably 'Ayun itiaa, " the 
springs of Moses" [AsilDOTH-PlSOAU], and the 
camp of the Israelites " in the mountains of 
Abarira, before Nebo" (Num. xixiii. 47); the 
top of Pisgah in Num. xzi. 20 may be placed 
close to J^l Neia on the plain between Hedeba 
and HesbboD. Capt. Conder (_Neth and Muab, 
pp. 142^) has Identified " the top of Peor " 
(Num. xxiii. 28) with a narrow spur which runs 
out to Hinyeh, north of the Zeria M'ain, and " the 
high places of Baal " (Num. xxii. 41) with the 
ridge of UaalMyeh (p. 141). A good account 
of this interesting district is given by Capt. Cou- 
der (ffeM nnd ifoab, pp. 128-145X who found 
some interesting groups of rude stone roonu* 
ments, which he supiwses to have been connected 
with the sacriBces of ISalaam and the idolatrous 
worship of Moab. See also Merrill, £ast of 
the Jordan, 240-252 ; Tristram, Land of Moab, 
.'!25-330; Paine, American Pal. Exp. Soc., .3rd 
Stat., January 1875. [0.] [W.] 

AB'BA (NSK, Stat. cmpJi. ; 'APfid : see Ab). 
The West-Aramaic equivalent of the Greek i 
rarlip (Mk. xiv. 36; Rom. viii. 15; Gal. iv. 6); 
perhaps a liturgical formula originating among 
the Jews of Palestine after they had become ac- 
quainted with the Greek language, and expressing 
emphasis by repetition of the same idea. If 
so, it illustrate* that fusion of Jew and Greek 
which prepared the way for the preaching of the 
Gospel to the heathen (Bp. Lightfoot on Oal. 
1. c). [P.] 

AB'DA (K''I3?, lerrant; or, as in Phoenician, 
tervant of Him :' see Kenan, Des Xoma thtaphorei 
apocopes, in ' Revue d. £tudes Juives,' v. p. 165. 
1. Father of Adouiram (1 K. iv. 6 ; B. 'iippl, 
A. 'A0a<i ; Abda). 2. Son of Shammua (Neh. xi, 
17; B. 'l«W; K.' 'Affids), called Obadiah in 
1 Ch. ii. 16 (B. 'APStia, A. 'O/SSfo ; (Mxba). 

[W. A. W.] [P.] 

AB-DEE'L (^^?'H3»; Abdeel), father of She- 
lemiah (Jcr. xxxvl. 2J ; LxX. omits). [W. A. W.] 

ABDI' C^Sl?, my tervant; or, terrxmt of 
Him, Renan [Abda]. Olshausen [^Lehrh. p. 613] 
prefers = n*^31^. 1. A Merarite of the time 
of David and ancestor of Kthan the singer (1 
Ch. vi. 44; B. 'Affitl, A. -(; Abdi). 2. The 
father of Kiah. A Merarite of the time of 
Hezekiah (2 Ch. xxix. 12). From a com- 
parison of 2 with 1, it would seem that the 
Levitical families repeated ancestral names, or 
that such names became the names of families 
and not of individualii. 3. One of the B«ne- 
Elam in the time of Ezra, who had married 
a " strange " (i.;. foreign) wife (Ezra x. 26 ; 
B«. 'A/jaeui, A. -io> [W. A. W.] [P.] 

ABDIAS. The prophet Obadiah (2 Fjd. 
i. 39). [W. A. W.] 

ABDI-EL (V«'"n3», aeroant of God; A. 
'a/3Ma, B. 'AjSSt^A ;' 'Ab<Uel), son of Guni (1 
Ch. v. 15). The name corresponds to the Arabic 
Abdallah. Milton {Paradise Lost, v. 805, 89G) 
applies it to " the Seraph faithful found among 
the faithless, faithful only he." [W. A. W.] [FJ 

AB'DON {^"^yO, tertUe ; B. 'A0S<iy, A. Aafi- 
Sii/i; Abdon). 1. The eleventh out of the 
twelve judges (Judg. xii. 1.3, 15). He judged 
Israel eight years, and bad forty sons and thirty 


sons' sons, who rode, in token of their rank, 
upon asses. He is not to be confounded with 
Bedan, in 1 Sam. xii. 11. 2. Son of Shashak 
(1 Ch. viii. 23; B. 'AfiaSif, A. 'AffSiir). 8. 
First-born son of Jeiel, father of Gibeon (1 Ch. 
viii. 30, B. 'A0a\ir ; iz. 36, BM. 3a$a»(it>, A. 
3a$S<iv), i.e. the head of the house of Gibeon. 
4. Son of Micah, a contem|)orary of Josiah 
(2 Ch. xxxiv. 20 ; A. 'APSiir, B. 'APSoSiti), called 
Achbor, son of Micaiab, in 2 K. xxii. 12. 

[W.A.W.] [1-.] 
AB'DOK (fn2V ; A. 'APSiy, B. Aa$0i>f in 
Josh. {. c, 'Afiapir in 1 Ch. I. c. ; Abdon"), i.e. 
sereile, a city in the tribe of Asher, given ti> 
the Gershonites (Josh. xxi. SO ; 1 Ch. vi. 74). 
No place of this name appears in the list of the 
towns of Asher (Josh. xix. 24-31) ; but instead 
we find (». 28) p3», " Hebron,"' which is I he- 
same word, with the change freqnent in Hebrew 
of T for ^. Indeed many MSS. have Abdon in 
Josh. xix. 28 (Ges. p. 980 ; Winer, a. v.) ; but, ou 
the other hand, all the ancient Versions retain 
the r (e.g. Vulg. Abran') except B., which has 
'Eh$(iy (A. 'Axpio; 17 MSS. have 'Efifxir). 
Identified by Gu^rin {Oalilde, ii. S5, 36) with 
'Abdeh, small ruins east of et-Zih (AchzibX on 
a low bill overlooking the plain of Acre (P. F. 
Mem. i, 170). There are also rnins called 
'Abdun, close to Dor. The name occurs in 
Arabia Petraea, and is written in the older 
itineraries 'EpOa. [G.] [W.] 

ABED-NEGO (^Jjnjl!, or [once in Dan. iii. 
29] K^33 '0; 'APStyceyii ; Abdenago), l.e. set-cant 
of Xego, a copyist's mistake for Nebo, the Baby- 
lonian name of the planet Mercury, worshipped 
as the scribe and interpreter of the gods (Gesen. 
ITtes. : Duncker-Abbott, Hist, of Antiq. i. 268 : 
Sayce, Hibbert Lectures, p. 115). A statue 
of the god, found at Nimrnd, is in the British 
Museum (see Hommel, Gesckichte liabyloniens- 
Assyriens, p. 629). Abed-nebo occurs (B.C. 683) 
in a " registry " tablet from the record oflBce of 
the Assyrian kings, as the name of a witnesi to :i 
deed of sale (see Speaker's Commentary on Daniel 
[1881], p. 243.) Compounds with Abed arc not 
infrequent in Babylonian names (see Schroder, 
KAT.', p. 430). Aliednego (or -nebo) was the 
Babylonian name given to Azariah (Dan. i. 7), 
one of the three friends of Daniel, miraculously 
saved from the burning fiery furnace (Dan. iii.). 
[Azariah, No. 10.] [F.] 

A'BEL (?3K = meadow, according to Go- 
senjus,* who derives it from a root signifying 
moisture like that of grass), the name of several 
places in Palestine : — 

1. A'BEl/-BETH-MA'ACnAH (HSVO 71*3 'N- 

see below and Maachah ; 2 Sam. xx. 15, A. 
'A0iA iv B-neimxi, B. *A/3iA tV Bai9^x<( ; 
Abela et Bethmaacha: 1 K. xv. 20, A. 'AfllX 
ovKov [sic] Waaxi, B. 'AttKiiiB; Abel domum- 
Maacha: 2 K. xv. 29, B. ri/y 'AP^K icol r)|» 
9aiuutxii, A. r. KoiSiA k. t. Bc/i/taaxif; Abel 
domiaa-Maacha ; R. V. Abel-Mh-MaacaK), a town 

• The Ai» Is here rendered bjr H. The H in the n'vll- 
Known Hebron represents Ch. Usually Ain Is not 
expressed in the Antboriied Version. 

' The Cbsldec Targum frequently renders .\bel by 
Mithor, a level rpot or plain generally. Cp Ltgarde, 
Cebertitktab.d.imAram.,Arab.,u. Bibr. UN. BiMuttff 
<*. .Vami'na , pp 46, 76. 

Digitized by 



ot somt unport&nce (wi\ts koI laftfiwokn, " a 
L'itr Ui3 1 motlier in Israel," 2 Sam. ix. 1 9), in the 
ettmiie N. of Palestine ; twice named with other 
|iUea in the order from north to south ; once Ijon, 
iMii, Abel, and all Cinneroth; and again Ijon, 
Abel, Janoah, Kedesb, Hazor ; and as such falling 
.ID early prey to the invading kings of Syria (IK. 
ir. 20) and Assyria (2 K. xr. 29). In the parallel 
parage, 2 Ch. xvi. 4, the name is changed 
to .KbA Maim, Dn3 'K = "Abel on the waters." 
Hfre Sheba was overtaken and besieged by 
Joab (2 Sam. xx. 14, 15); and the city was 
sared by the exercise on the part of one ot 
its inhabitants of that sagacity for which it 
was prorerbial (v. 18). In w. 14 and 18 it is 
simply Abel, and in t. 14 is apparently distin- 
fished from Beth-maacha : the full name may 
iwuibly hare been Abel near Beth-maacha. It 
V3S possibly a colony of, and derived its name 
from, the small Aramean kingdom of Maacha. 
•losephns {Ant. vii. 12, § 5) gives the form 'AfitK- 
Xilr), and apparently places it near the northern 
boundary of Israel. It is probably the modern 
M, or Milet-Kiam/i, a small Christian village on 
the left bank of the A'altr Bareigit, which Bows 
from the 3ferj 'Ayin. The village is situated 
on so isolated oval hill that rises above a plain 
of rich basaltic soil which produces fine wheat, 
•hence the name el-Kamh ; there are traces of 
oM foundations and a spring (P. F. Mem. i. 85, 
107). It possibly derives its name Abel Haim 
from the stream that rashes past the western 
slope of the mound, or from the neighbouring 
Jfrr/ 'Ayin, which is rich in springs. Stanley 
{S. and P. p. 390, note) places it to the south 
in the marshy region of Lake Huleh ; Ensebius 
sad Jerome between Paneas and Damascus. 

a, A'BEl^HA'ai (D^ ^3K; A. 'AJJeA/iafv, 
B. -^; Abebnaim). 2 Cb. xvi. 4. [ABEL, 1.] 

a A'bel-miz'buu (Ui(zraim), W.'Vp U 
according to the etymology of the text, the 
moaniing of Egypt, viytot Atyirrov, Planctta 
Aegypti (this meaning, however, requires a 

diSerent pointing, ?3^ for ?3K): the name 
liven W the Canaanites to the floor of Atad, at 
which Joseph, his brothers, and the Egyptians 
made their mourning for Jacob (Gen. 1. 11). It 
was '^S, " beyond " Jordan, an expression used 

fw either east or west of the river, according to 
the position of the speaker. Jerome identifies 
it with B«th-Hogla (now 'Ain Uajla), near the 
river, on its vest bank. No authority is given 
for this identification, which necessitates the 
"=irriage of Jacob's body by a long circuitous 
roate through Moab and round the north end of 
the Dead St-a to Hebron. A more natural 
position would be some station on the direct 
larsvan road from Egypt to Hebron, possibly 
near the territory of the Canaanite king Arad. 

4. .A'BEl^nrr'Tni (with the article 'R 
a^yn, " the meadow of the acacias " [the Sam. 
Cod. omits the article]; B. BcAo-a, A. BcA- 
•••ttI^ F. -*lr; Abelaatim); in the "plains" 
(ra'^V=the deserts) of Moab by Jordan- Jericho, 
or in that portion of the Jordan valley which 
WIS opposite Jericho and belonged to Hoab. 
Mere — their last resting-place before crossing 
tke Jordan — Israel " pitched from Beth-jesimoth 


unto Abel-shittim " (Num. izxiii. 49). The place 
is most frequently mentioned by its shorter 
name of Shittim. [Shittix.] In the days of 
Josephua it was still known as Abila, — the town 
embosomed in palms* (0irou vvy "wiKts itrrXv 
'A/3iA4, ^aifunJ^vTOf 8* tarX rh xiifiov. Ant. 
iv. 8, § Vy, 60 stadia from the river (v. 1, § 1). 
It was taken by Placidus, with Julias Besimoth 
and other villages near the Dead Sea (B. J. iv. 
7, § 6). Jerome, in his commentary on the third 
chapter of Joel, places it six Roman miles from 
Livias. The Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds 
give twelve miles as the distance between Abel- 
shittim and Beth-joshimoth. Now probably 
Kefrein, on a rocky slope east of Jordan, near 
the northern margin of the fertile plain called 
Seiteban. There is abundant water at Kefrein 
and some shapeless ruins, including those of a 
citadel on a small isolated rock. Near the 
western edge of the plain there arc still many 
acacia trees, " shittim " (Tristram, Laiid of 
Israel, 523-525). , _ 

8. A'bel-ukiio'laii (Mec/iolah, rpinp 'tt. 
"meadow of the dance."' In Judg. vii. 22 
[Vulg. V. 23], B. 'APttiitovXd, A. BatrcA/teawXd ; 
in 1 K. iv. 12, B. 'E/SeA^uwAd, A. 'AjSeA- 
^laouXd ; in 1 K. xix. 16, B. 'E^aX/ioovXcC, A. 
'A0t\puui\; Abel-Meuia, Abelmehula), named 
with Bethshean (Scythopolis) and Jokneam (1 K. 
iv. 12), and therefore in the N. part of the Jordan 
valley (Euseb. iy ry AiMfi,03.' p. 243, 36). To 
"the border (the 'lip' or 'brink*) of Abel- 
meholah," and to Beth-shittali (the " house of the 
acacia "), both places being evidently down in the 
Jordan valley, the routed Bedouin host fled from 
Gideon (Judg. vii. 22). Here Elisha was found at 
his plough by Elijah returning up the valley from 
Horeb (1 K. xix. 16-19). In Jerome's time the 
name had dwindled to 'AjBcA/t^o. Probably at 
'Ain el-ffelteeh, " sweet spring," at the southern 
end of the Bethshean plain, where the western 
hills approach the Jordan, and close to an ancient 
road. There are ruins near the spring, and 
the position agrees with that indicated by 
Eusebius and Jerome (cp. P. F. Mem. ii. 231). 

6. A'bei/-cera'iiui (Q^I? 'K ; B. *E3<X- 

Xopja*'/') -A- 'A^A ifirtXavAy ; Abel gum eat 
vineis con»ita\ in the A, V. rendered " the plain 
(marg. ' Abel ') of the vineyards ; " R. V. Abel- 
cheramim; R. V. ninrg. Me meadow of vine- 
yards: a place eastward of Jordan, beyond 
Aroer ; named as the point to which Jephthah's 
pursuit of the Bene-.\mmon extended (Judg. 
xi. 33). A Kififi iiiTfho^pos 'A$t\ is men- 
tioned by Eusebius as t> (Jerome, 7) miles 
beyond Philadelphia (Kabbah); and another, 
olyo<f>6pos KoXoviiivri, more to the N. 12 miles £. 
from Gadara, below the Hieromax. The site 
of the former hns not yet been identified ; (he 
latter, the modem Abil, is still found in the 
same position (Ritter, Syiia, p. 1058). There is 
another Kcfr Abil on the Roman road from Pella 
to Genua, between the former place and Wady 
Yibis. The passage (Judg. xi. 33) possibly 
means that Jephthah drove the Ammonites out of 
Gilead (comp. vv. 13, 22), in which case Aroer 

• It was amoopt these palms, aooording to Jo- 
sephus, that Deuteronomy was delivered by Moses. 
See tbe passage above cited. 

<■ If Mectaolah always Implies a rellgloni dance, Abel- 
Hecbolah was probably a sanctuary. 

Digitized by 





on the ArnoQ and Abel-ceramim (Abit) on the 
Hieromax would be the limits of the district 
freed. The position of Abel-ceramim depends 
upon that of Miouith, which is still unknown ; 
it is placed by Jerome (05.' p. 171,4) four miles 
from Ueshbon on the road to Philadelphia. Oli- 
phant {Land o/ GUead, p. 420) identifies it with 
MinehfU station on the Haj rood north of KaTat 
Zerka. There is also a Minkh south of Mount 
Nebo. There were at least three places with the 
name of Aroer on the further side of the Jordan. 

7. rhnvxh"^. " The great ' Abel ' (»iar;,. 
' stone ; ' Abel MagHWii) in the field of Joshua 
the Bethshemite " (1 Sam. vi. 18). By com- 
parisou with re. 14 and 13, it would seem that 

for 73K should be read {SK = stone. So the 
LXX., Targum, R. V., and most modern scholars. 
The translators of A. V., by the insertion of 
" stone of," seem to have taken a middle course. 
The view that Abel was the name subsequently 
given to the spot in reference to the "mourn- 
ing " (l73Sn^) there (v. 19) has now no sup- 
iwrters. In the Jewish traditions it was an altar 
erected by Abraham. M. C Ganneau (/•. F. 
Qy. Stat, 1877, pp. 154-6X reading Eben for 
Abel, connects the spot with Eben-ezer (1 Sam. 
iv. 1), where the Israelites encamped before the 
disastrous battle in which the ark was lost. 
This place he identifies with Vclr 'Abdn, two 
miles east of 'Ain S/icms, " Bethshemesh," and 
viose to the Roman road to Jerusalem. Eusebius 
and Jerome (0S.» pp. 132, 20; 243, 15) place 
Abenezer ('AfifrtCip) near Bethsames on the road 
from £lia to Ascalon, a position which answers 
well to that of Deir 'Abdn. [G.] [W.] 

A'BEL (^35; 'A/3«A; 4bcl ; i.e. breath, 
vapour, transitoriness), a name expressive gene- 
rally (<i) of the transitoriness of man considered 
by himself apart from God and God's promises ; 
or (t) of the mother's recognition of the brevity 
and fr.nilty of human life after the fall ; in 
the latter case the child would have been so 
named at his birth. Others consider Abel to 
have been so chilled from the shortness of his 
life (cp. Ps. xxxii. 6; Job vii. 16). He was the 
second son of Adam, and was murdered by his 
brother Cain (Gen. iv. 1-16). Jehovah showed 
respect for Abel's oflering, but not for that of 
Cain; because, according to Hebrews xi. 4, Abel 
" by faith oflercd a more excellent sacrifice than 
Cain." The expression " sin " (taken in the sense 
of a sin-offering) " li<;th at the door " (Gen. iv. 7), 
seems to imply that the need of sacrifices of 
blood to obtain forgiveness was already revealed. 
Others, questioning as anachronistic the inter- 
pretation " sin-ofl'ering," take the sentence to 
refer to the danger to which Cain was exposing 
himself by his wrath. Sin, like a crouching 
beast, was preparing to spring upon him 
(see int. al. Delltzsch [1887], Harold Browne 
[Speaker's Commentary'], Payne Smith [EUicott's 
Commentan/], on Gen. iv. 7). On account of 
Abel's faith, St. Augustine makes Abel the type 
of the new regenerate man ; Cain that of the 
natural man (<fo Civ. Dei, xv. 1). St. Chrysos- 
tom observes that Abel offered the best of his 
flock — Cain that which was most readily pro- 
cured (Ilatii. in Gen. xviii. 5 : cp. the Midrash 

Kabbah, Par. ixii. in Hamburger, HE. s. n. 
Hebel, or in Wiinsche's Sammlung Alter Midra- 
achim, 4" Lieferung, pp. 98, &c.). Jesus Christ 
spoke of htm as the first " martyr " (Matt, xxiii. 
35) ; so did the early Church subsequently. Kor 
Christian traditions, see Iren. v. 67 ; Chrysost. 
Horn, in Gen. xlx. ; Cedren. Jiist. 8 ; Wetzer u. 
Welte's KL.* s. n. : for those of the Rabbins and 
Mahommedans, see Kisenmenger, Entdeckt. JuJ. 
i. 462, 832 ; Hamburger, op. cit. ; Uottinger, 
Hist. Or. 24 ; Ersch and Gruber, Encyklop. s. v. ; 
and the A'ur-an, ch. t. The place of his murder 
and his grave are pointed out near Damascus 
(Pococke, b. ii. 168); and the neighbouring 
peasants tell a curious tradition respecting his 
burial (Stanley, S. and P. p. 413). 

In modern times the interpretation of Abel 
hits been traced to the Assyrian Aa6aJ=sou, a 
word not infrequent in proper names (f.g. Asur- 
nusir-habal ; Nabu-habul-usur), and imported 
from the Sumerian-Accadian (Schrader, KA T.', 
p. 44) ; but such an interpretation, if suitable to 
the first-born son of the first man, does not 
seem appropriate to the younger brother (cp. 
Uelitzsch). The fondness for the pastoral life, 
in which — as distinguished from the agricul- 
tural life — the Israelites delighted in the earlier 
days of their existence, has been traced with 
some probability to their .ittachment to the 
memory and calling of Abel. To Christians, 
.\bel the shepherd became a type of Christ, '■ the 
just One," the "good Shepherd," "brought 
like a lamb to the slaughter," and offering the 
" blood of sprinkling that sjieaketh better than 
tiMt of Abel " (Heb. xii. 24, R. V.). For the sect 
of the Abelonii (or Abelito:) see s. e. in Dictionary 
of Christian Biography. [R. W. B.] [F.] 

A'BEZ (f^^, in pause fJK ; B. 'Pt04s, A. 
'At/It ; Abes ; R. V. Ebet), a town in the posses- 
sion of Issachar, named between Kishion and 
Remeth, in Josh. xix. 20, only. Gescnius {Thes.) 
mentions as a possible derivation of the name, 
that the Chaldee for tin is t(V3M. Some 
derive it and the name Ibzan from an unused 
root (= to shine, hence to be high) applied to 
high places and positions. Others connect it 
with an Arabic root, to be white. Possibly, 
however, if the boundary of Issachar may be 
carried so far to the south, the word is a c<:>r- 
ruption of }*3J5, Thebez, now Tibds, a town, 
9 miles S.E. of Engannim, which otherwise ha.s 
escaped mention in the list in Joshua. Condor 
(,1/dblt. to Bible, 401) identifies it with A'A. 
et-Beidha, on the plain of Esdraelon, between 
Tell Keimun (Jokneam) and Beit La/an (Beth- 
lehem), but this place must have been included 
within the border of Zebulun. [G.] [W.] 

ABI' (^3K, /<riA<r= progenitor ; "AjSou ; Abi), 
wife of Ahaz, and mother of king Hezekiah 
(2 K. xviii. 2). The name is written Abijaii 
(No. 6, nj3K) in 2 Ch. xxii. 1. Her father'- 
name was Zechariah. He was perhaps the 
Zechariah mentioned by Isaiah (viii. 2). 

[R. W. B.] [F.] 

ABFA, ABI'AH, or ABI'JAH (nj3K= 
ln*3K, my father [or a father] is Jah ; 'Affia ; 
Abia). Many proper names are compounded of 
'3S (father, or my father). The sense in 
which this is to be understood is uncertain; 

Digitized by 




perhaps in some ca<es it may be a title of 
God (cp. Ewalil, Lekrb. p. 615 ; Mestic, Israelii. 
Eujoaamm, p. 182 iq. ; Fr. Delitzsch, Protegg. 
z. Ha.-Aram. Worterb. p. 200 tq.). 1. Son of 
Becher, the son of BenjiimiD (1 Ch. vii. 8, 
B. 'A^ioiiS, A. 'Afitov). 2. Wife of Hezron 
(I Ch. ii. 24). 8. Second <oD of Samuel, whom 
together vith hus eldest son Joel he made judges 
in Beertheba (1 Sam. viii. 2 ; 1 Ch. vi. 28). The 
corruptness of their administration wa* the 
reason alleged bj the Israelites for their de- 
manding a king. 4. Mother of king Uezekiah 
[Abj]. S. Or Abijam, the son of Rehobuam 
(1 Ch. iiL 10, B. 'ABfla; Matt. i. 7). 6. De- 
scendant of Eleazar, and chief of the eighth of 
the tneoty-foar courses of priesls (Luke i. 5). 
Cp. Abuah (No. 4). For other persona of thia 
name, see Abuah. [B. W. B.] [F.] 

ABI-AL'BON. [Abiel.] 

ABI-A'SAPH, otherwiae written EBI- 
ASAPH («ip«»5K, Ex. Ti. 24, B. 'ABuurip, 
F. •A$dra<t> ;' and ff^M in 1 Ch. vi. 8 [LXX. 
and Volg. c. 23], B. ''Affmiiip, A. 'Afiiaaii^ ; 
in 1 Ch. Ti. 22 [LXX. and Vulg. t. 37], 
B. 'Afiioffip, A. 'A0uuri^; in 1 'Ch. ix. 19, 
B. 'A^ioirsp; AbUuaph: according to Simonii 
{bat improbably), " cujus patrem abstulit DeJis," 
with reference to the death of Korah, as related 
in Nam. xri. ; but according to MV." my father 
Sath ijathered ; compare ({DK, Asaph, 1 Ch. vi. 
39). He was the head of one of the families 
«f the Korbites (a house of the Kohathites), 
hat his precise genealogy is somewhat uncer- 
tain. In Ex. ri. 24, he appears at first sight 
to be represented as one of the sons of Korah, 
and as the brotbar of Assir and Elkanah. But 
in 1 Ch. Ti. he appears as the son of El- 
kanah, the son of Assir, the son of Korah. 
The natural inference from this would be that 
in Ex.tL 24 the expression " the sons of Korah " 
merely means the families into which the house 
of the Korhites was subdivided. But if so, the 
Terse in Exodus must be a later insertion than 
the time of Moses, as in Moses' lifetime the 
^eat-grandson of Korah could not have been 
the head of a family. And it is remarkable 
that the verse is quite out of its place, and 
appears improperly to separate ver. 25 and 
ver. 23, which both relate to the house of Aaron. 
If, however, this inference is not correct, then 
the Ebiasaph of 1 Ch. vi. is a different person 
from the Abiasaph of Ex. vi., viz. his great- 
nephew. But this does not seem probable. It 
appears from 1 Ch. ix. 19, that that branch of 
the descendants of Abiasnph of which Shallum 
was chief were porters, " keepers of the gates of 
the tabernacle ; " and from ver. 31 that Matti- 
thiah, " the first-bom of Shallum the Korahite, 
had the set office over the things that were 
made in the pans," apparently in the time of 
Darid. From Xeh. xii. 25 we learn that 
Abiasapb's family was not extinct in the days of 
Kthemiah ; for the family of MeshuUam (which 
is the same as Shallum), with Talmon and 
Akkob, (till filled the office of porters, " keeping 
the ward at the threshold of the gate." Other 
remarkable descendants of Abiasaph, according 
to the text of 1 Ch. vi 33-37, were Samuel the 
prophet and Elkanah bis father (1 Sam. i. 1), 
and Heman the singer ; but Ebinsaph seems to 

be improperly inserted in t>. 37.* The posses- 
sions of those Kohathites who were nut descended 
from Aaron, consisting of ten cities, lay in the 
tribe of Ephraim, the half-tribe of Uauasseh, and 
the tribe of Dan (Josh. xxi. 20-26 ; 1 Ch. vi. 61). 
The family of Elkanah the Kohatbite resided in 
Mount Ephraim (1 Sam. i. 1). [A. C. H.] 

ABI-ATHABO^',39 > 'Afiuaip; Abiathar; 
but the version of Santes Pagninus has Ebiathar, 
according to the Hebrew points. In Mark ii. 26, 
it is 'A0ii8ttp. According to Gescnius = father of 
excellence, or abundance ; according to Olshausen 
\_Lehrb. p. 620] = my father excels. The exact 
meaning is uncertain). Abiathar was that one of 
all the sons of Ahimelech the high-priest who 
escaped the slaughter inflicted upon his father's 
house by Saul, at the instigation of Doeg the Edo- 
mite (see title to Ps. lii, and the Psalm itself), in 
revenge for his having inquired of the Lord for 
David, and given him the shewbread to eat and 
the sword of Goliath the Philistine, as is related 
in 1 Sam. xxii. We are there told that when 
Doeg slew in Nob on that day fourscore and five 
persons that did wear a linen ephod, " one of the 
sonsof Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abia- 
thar, escaped and fled after David;" and it is 
added in 1 Sam. xxiii. 6, that when he did so " he 
came down with an ephod in his hand," and was 
thus enabled to inquire of the Lord for David (1 
Sam. xxiii. 9, xxx. 7 ; 2 Sam. ii. I, v. 19, &c). 
The fact of David having been the unwilling causa 
of the death of all Abiathar's kindred, coupled 
with his gratitude to his father Ahimelech for 
his kindness to him, made him a firm and sted- 
fast friend to Abiathar all his life. Abiathar on 
his part was firmly attached to David. He 
adhered to him in his wanderings while pursued 
by Saul ; he was with him while he reigned in 
Hebron (2 Sam. ii. 1-3), the city of the house 
of Aaron (Josh. xxi. 10-13) ; he carried the ark 
before him when David brought it up to Jeru- 
salem (1 Ch. XV. 11 ; 1 K. ii. 26); he continued 
faithful to him in Absalom's rebellion (2 Sam. 
XV. 24, 29, 35, 36, xvii. 15-17, xlx. 11); and 
" was aflSicted in all wherein David was 
afflicted." He was also one of David's chief 
counsellors (1 Ch. xxvii. 34). When, however, 
Adonijah set himself up for David's successor on 
the throne in opposition to Solomon, Abiathar, 
either persuaded by Joab, or in rivalry to Zadok, 
or under some influence which cannot now be 
discovered, sided with him, and was one of his 
chief partisans, while Zadok was on Solomon's 
side. For this Abiathar was banished to his 
native village, Anathoth, in the tribe of Ben- 
jamin (Josh. xxi. 18), and narrowly escaped 
with his life, which was spared by Solomon only 
on the score of his long and faithful service 
to David his father. He was no longer per- 
mitted to perform the functions, or enjoy the 
prerogatives, of the high-priesthood. For we 
arc distinctly told that "Solomon thrust out 
Abiathar from being priest to the Lord ; " and 
that " Zadok the priest did the king put in the 
room of Abiathar" (I K. ii. 27, 35). So that 
we must understand the assertion in 1 K. iv. 4, 
that in Solomon's reign " Zadok and Abiathar 
were the priests," as simply stating the his- 
torical fact that they were the priests at the 

• See rAe Otnealogia of our Lord and Smiour Jenu 
OirUt, by Lord Arthur Uervey, p. 210, and p. 21i, note- 

Digitized by 





begioning of Solomon's reign. Ver. 2, which 
tells us that " Atariah the son of Zadok " was 
"the priest," — a declaration conKrmed by 
1 Ch. vi. 10, — refers to the eleventh year of his 
reign when the Temple was finished. It is pro- 
bable that Abiathar did not long survive David. 
He is not mentioned again, and he must have 
been far advanced in years at Solomon's accession 
to the throne. 

There am one nr two other difficulties con- 
nected with Abiathar, to which a brief reference 
must be made before we conclude this article. (1.) 
In 2 Sam. viii. 17*, and in the dnplicate passage 
1 Ch. xviii. 16 (K* 'A3i<a0«», and in 1 Ch. xxir. 
3, 6, 31, we have Ahimekch substituted for 
Abiathai; and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar 
instead of Abiathar the son of AhimeleJh. Whereas 
in 2 Sam. ix. 25, and in every other passage in 
the 0. T., we are uniformly told that it was 
Abiathar who was priest with Zadok in David's 
reign, and that he was the son of Ahimelech, 
and that Ahimelech was the son of Ahitub. 
The difficulty is increased by finding Abiathar 
spoken of as the high-priest in whose time David 
ate the shewbread (see Mark ii. 26, and Alford 
in loc.). However, the evidence in favour of 
David's friend being Abiathar the son of Ahime- 
lech preponderates so strongly, and the impossi- 
bility of any rational reconciliation is so clear, 
that one can only suppose, with Procopius of 
Gaza, an error here (cp. WcUhausen, d. Text d. 
ISB. Sun. p. 177). The mention o( Abiathar by 
our Lord, in Mark ii. 26, might perhaps be 
accounted for, if Abiathar was the person 
who persuaded his father to allow David to 
have the bread, and if, ns is probable, the 
loaves were Abiathar's (Lev. xxiv. 9), and 
given by him with his own hand to David. 
The expression i ipxtfpfis is the equivalent of 
ttl^^t "the priest," applied to Ahimelech 
thronghont 1 Sam. xxi. and xxii., and equally 
applicable to Abiathar if he was the chief 
officiating priest under his father. 

(2.) Another difficulty concerning Abiathar is 
to determine his position relatively to Zadok, 
and to account for the double high-priesthood, 
and for the advancement of the line of Ithamar 
over that of Eleazar. A theory has been in- 
vented that Abi-ithar was David's, and Zadok 
Saul's high-priest, but it seems to rest on no 
solid ground. The facts of the cose are these : — 
Ahimelech, the sou of Ahitub, the son of 
I'hiuehns, the son of Eli, was high-priest in the 
reign of Saul. On his death his son Abiathar 
became high-priest. The first mention of 2!adok 
is in 1 Ch. xii. 28, where he is described as " a 
young man mighty of valour," and is said to 
have joined David while he reigned in Hebron, 
in company with Jehoiada, " the leader of the 
Aarunites." From this time we read, both in 
the books of Samuel and Chronicles, of " Zadok 
and Abiathar the priests," Zadok being always 

» Klostemunn ^Kurzg^. Kommmtar lu A. u. S. T., 
old. Strtck u. Zuckler, 1881) supposes In loco that such 
words as "inUN '30^ (cp- 1 Sam. Ul. 1, 11. 18) have 

fmllen out of the text after D'JHD- Hackett (D. B., 
Amer. cd.) mentions tbe opinion that Ahimelech and 
Ablslhar were hereditary names In the fomllv, and hence 
that the father and son could have borne these names 
reiipectivelj-, and this view I* accepted by most 
modems. [F.] 

named first. And yet we are told that Solomen 
on his accession put Zadok in the room of 
Abiathar. Perhaps the true state of the case 
was, that Abiathar was the first and Zadok the 
second priest ; but that from the superior 
strength of the house of Eleazar (of which Zadok 
was head), which enabled it to furnish sixteen oat 
of the twenty-four courses (1 Ch. xxiv.), Zadok 
acquired considerable influence with David ; and 
that this, added to his being the heir of the elder 
line, and perhaps also to some of the passages 
being written alter tbe line of Zadok was esta- 
blished in the high-priesthood, led to the pre- 
cedence given him over Abiathar. We have 
already suggested the possibility of jealousy of 
Zadok being one of the motives which inclinetl 
Abiathar to join Adonijah's faction. It is most 
remarkable how, first, Saul's cruel slaughter of 
the priests at Nob, and then the political error 
of the wise Abiathar, led to the fulfilment of 
God's denunciation against the house of Eli, as 
the writer of 1 K. ii. 27 leads us to observe 
when he says that " Solomon thrust out Abiathar 
from being priest unto the Lord, that he might 
fulfil the word of the Lord which He spake con- 
cerning tl^ house of Eli in Shiloh." See alsa 
Joseph. Ant. viii. 1, §§ 3, 4. [A. C. H.] 


ABI-OAH and ABI-OA (IH'^N, apparently 
= my father knoiceth ; B. 'AfitiSi, A. -i- [in 1 Ch. 
/. c.]; AD. 'A$ipi [in Gen. /. c] ; Abida), a son 
of Midian and grandson of Abraham by Keturah 
(Gen. XXV. 4 ; 1 Ch. i. 33). [E. S. P.] 

ABI-DAN (JT5X, my father ie judge ; A. 
'AjSiSiy, B. -«-; Abidan), chief of the tribo 
of Benjamin at the time of the Exodus (Num. i. 
11, ii. 22, vii. 60, 65, i. 24). [W. A. W.] [K.] 

ABI-EL (^et'JK, my father [or, a fat/ier} 
is Ood [or EQ ; A. 'Afit^X, B. -..- ; Abicl). 
1. The father of Kish, and consequently grand- 
father of Saol (1 Sam. ix. 1), as well as o^ 
Abner, Saul s commander-in-chief (1 Sam. xiv. 
51, B. 'Afiti^p). In the genealogy in I Ch. viii. 
33, ix. 39, Ner is made the father of Kish, and 
the name of Abiel is omitted, but the correct 
genealogy according to Samuel is :— 

Klsb Ner 

I I 

Saul Abner 

a. 'AjSi^A. One of David's thirty "mightr 
men " (1 Ch. xi. 32). The view that Abi-Alboo 
(2 Sam. xxiii. 31) is an alternative for Abiel is 
very improbable (Driver). The reading Abiel in 
2 Sam. is supported by B. (at end of ch. xxiii., ed. 

Swete, p. 666), FoJ o3 1 J| A i;»j = p^l/OX Wi' 
and the Luc. Recension raAo-aSi^t. Holmes atii 
Parsons give twelve MSS. with 'AJJi^A, and 
eleven with 'Apii\. Klostermann's suggestion 
here (note in loco in Strack u. ZSckler's JCgf. 
Komm.) is to some not unreasonable. p3 in 

\\27V ('Albon) may be a corruption of n*a, and 
he would read ^ni*)^ n% ^*3K (instead 
of 'T»ri |i3^»-»3K), Abiel of Betharaba (ep. 
Josh. XV. 6, 61), called Arabah in Josh, xvrii. 
18. [R. W. B.] [F.] 

Digitized by 



ABI-E'ZEK CW »3K, father of help; in 
Josh. /. c. A. *Axi<'C<p> B. 'U(*i ; in Num. /. c. 
[L\X. t. 34], "Axi^C'p; A»i«*(T). 1. Eldest 
><ii of Gilead, and descendant of Machir and 
Manasseh, and apparently at one time the leading 
familr of the tribe (Josh. xrii. 2 ; Num. xxvi. 
.'!0, where the name is giren in the contracted 
farm of TllPVi, Jezer), In the genealogies of 
Chronicles, Abieier is, in the present state of 
the teit, said to have sprang from the sister of 
(iilesd (1 Cb. Tii. 18). Originally, therefore, 
the fitmilj was with the rest of the house of 
Gilead on the east of Jordan ; but when first 
met with in the history, some part at least of 
it had crossed the Jordan and established itself 
at Ophrah, now probably Ferata, a village five 
miles W.S.W. of Sbechem, and not far from the 
borders of Ephraim, the old name of which was 
Ophrah (Sua. Chron.). See V. /'. Mem. ii. 162. 
Hen, when the fortunes of his family were at 
the lowest — " my ' thousand ' is ' the poor one ' 
in Manasseh " (Judg. vi. 15) — was born the great 
jadge Gideon, destined to raise bis own house 
to almost royal dignity (Stanley, p. 229), and to 
achicre for his country one of the most signal 
deliTerances recorded in their whole history. 
[Gioeok; Opbrah.] 

i. One of Darid s " mighty men " (2 Sam. 
uiiL 27, B. 'Kfittiiff, AB^ 'A^k'C'P ; 1 Cb. zi. 
.■«, iiTii. 12, B. •A$U{(p). [G.] [W.] 

ABI-EZ'BrrE (nwn »5K: B. warper r«S 
'SaSftl in Jodg. ri. 11° [A. «. 'AjSi<0>Oi 24 [A. 
r. T. !<(/>(]; B. 'A^ifffSfxl in Judg. Tiii. 32, 
A. »p? 'A$it(p*i : pater familiae Etri [tL 1 1], 
iamUia Etri [ri. 24, riii. 32]). The designation 
is giren to Joash the father of Gideon, and is 
descriptive of a descendant of Abiezer, or Jeezer, 
the SOB of Gilead (Judg. vi. 11, 24; riii. 32), 
aid thence also called Jeezerite (Nom. zxvi. 
30; tee Abiezeb, No. 1). In Judg. vi. 24, 
Tiii. 32, the A. V. and R. V. both use the plural 
"Abiexiites" for the collective Hebrew singular. 
The Peshito and Targum both regard th e fi rst part 
of the word " Abi " as an appellative, " father of," 
as also the LXX. and Vulgate. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ABIGAIL (^:i»3K, or S3»?N [Kethib, 
'iMl MV." =fat'her'o/joy, Olshausen [X«Ar6. 
f. 616] = my father ii joy ; 'AjSryaio, B. -«i- ; 
Migait). 1. The beautiful wifeofNabal, a wealthy 
owner of goatsnnd sheep inCarmel. When David's 
messengers were slighted by Nal>al, Abigail took 
the blame upon herself, supplied David and his 
followers with provisions, and succeeded in ap- 
peasing his anger. Ten days after this Nabal 
<ti«d, and David sent for Abigail and made her 
lis wife (1 Sam. xxv. 14 uq.). By her he 
lad a son, called Chileab in 2 Sam. iii. 3, but 
Uaaiel (6. Atyu't^A ; Daniel) in 1 Cb. iii. 1. 
He may well have borne both names (Keil). 

2. A sister of David, married to Jether the 
Ithauutite, and mother, by him, of Amasa (1 
Ch. ii. 17). In 2 Sam. xvii. 25 she {Abig(U) is 
^iKribed as the daughter of Nahosh, sister to 
Zeniiah, Joab's mother, and as marrying Ithra 
(iBotiier form of Jether) an Itraelite. A. has 
here IvitatiAtirris ( B. 'Iirp- ), a reading ac- 
npted by Tbenius, Keil, and Wellhansen. There 
nraU, it is tbonght, be no reason for re- 
<^ing a marriage with nn Israelite; but the 
wcBJnstance of David's sister marrying a 



heathen Ishmaelite deserved mention (Thenius, 
Exeg. Handb. Sam. /. c). Lucian has the reading 

6 'Uipav\lTris (= '^Knt»n), but there is no 

place called hfU'W. [R. W. B.] [F.] 

ABIHA'IL (^!n'3M, Ges. = father o/ might. 
1. A. "A/SixofA, B. -«i-, F. 'Afiixala; Abihaiel. 
Father of Zuriel, chief of the Levitical family of 
Merari, a contemporary of Moses (Num. iii. 35). 

2. Wife of Abishur (1 Ch. ii. 29). 

8. A. 'APixala, B. -«- ; Abihail. Son of 
Huri, of the tribe of Gad (1 Ch. v. 14). 

4. Wife of Reboboam (2 Ch. zi. 18 ; AbihatC). 
She is called the daughter, i.«. a descendant of 
Cliab, the elder brother of David. 

5. 'KiuiiaS6fi ; Abihail. Father of Esther and 
uncle of ilordecai (Esth. ii. 15, iz. 29). 

The names of Nos. 2 and 4 are written in some 

MSS. ^'ri'JK (B. 'A/Jwxoio, A 'Aptyaia in 1 Ch. 
ii. 29; B. Bafoy, B.*""^ 'Afieday, A. 'A/JioiiA. 
in 2 Ch. xi. 18X which may be conjectured t» 

be a mistake fur or variation of yn ^^M. 

[R.W. b!] [F.] 
ABIHU (Wn«3K, my Fatteris IIe';'A$toiti 
AUti), the second son (Num. iii. 2) of Aaron by 
Elisheba (Ex. vi. 23), who, with hia father and his. 
elder brother Nadab and seventy elders of Israel, 
accompanied Moses to the summit of Sinai (Ex. 
xxiv. 1). Being together with Nadab guilty of 
offering strange fire (Lev. x. 1) to the Lord, !>. 
not the holy fire which burnt continually upoa 
the altar of bumt-oflering (Lev. vi. 9, 12), they 
were both consumed by fire from heaven, and 
Aaron and his suriiving sons were forbidden to 
mourn for them. The name also occurs iu Exod. 
xxiv. 9, xxviii. 1 ; Num. iii. 4, zzvi. 60, 61 -y 
1 Ch. vi. 3, xxiv. 1, 2. [B. W. B.] [F.] 

ABIHUD (n-inUM, father of majesty, or 
my father it majesty j'APioit] Abiud), son of 
Bela and grandson of Benjamin (1 Ch. viii. 3). 
[W. A. W.] [F.] 

ABI'JAH or ABI'JAM. 1. in»3K. n»3K. 
my father (or, a father) is Jah. D'^K according 
to Ges. = father of the tea, \.e. a maritime man ; 
according to Nestle (Die lar. Eigenn. p. 173 n.) 
= Dl^aS, father of the people ; 'Afilas, Joseph. ; 
Abiam, Abii, the son and successor of Rehoboam 
on the throne of Judab (1 K. ziv. 31 ; 8 Cb. 
xii. 16). He is called Abijah in Chronicles. 
(nj3N; 'AOd; Abia), Abijam in Kings {'Afiioi; 
Abiam) ; the latter name being probably an error 
in the MSS., since the LXX.-lorm, 'APioi, seems 
taken from Abijahu, which occors 2 Ch. xiii. 20, 
21 CAjSui; Abia). Indeed Gesenius says that 
some MSS. read Abijah in 1 K. xiv. 31. The 
supposition, therefore, of Light foot (Harm. 0. T., 
p. 209, Pitman's edition), that the writer in 
Kings, who takes a much worse view of Abijah'* 
character than we find in Chronicles, altered 
the last syllable to avoid introducing the holy 
Jah into the name of a bad man, is unneces- 
sary. But it is not fanciful or absurd, for 
changes of the kind were not unusual : for 

* Cf. tt^n*^. HtT\' ^*> appears to have been used 

• V: 

to denote God. Cp. OItb«usen, TAkrb., p. 615; Renao. 
Dtt .Y<mu thAphora, In BBJ. v. IM. [F.] 

Digitized by 




example, after the Samaritan schism the Jews 
altered the name of Shechem into Sychar 
(drunken), as we have it in John iv. 5 ; aud 
Hosea (iv. 15) changes Beth-el, house of God, 
into Beth-aven, house of naught (see Stanley, 
3. ^ P. p. 222). 

From the First Book of Kings we learn that 
Abijah endeavoured to recover the kingdom of 
the Ten Tribes, aud made war on Jeroboam. No 
details are given, but we are also informed that 
he walked in all the sins of Rehoboam (idolatry 
and its attendant immoralities, 1 K. xir. 23, 24), 
and that his heart " was not perfect before God, 
as the heart of David his father." In the Second 
Book of Chronicles his war against Jeroboam is 
more minutely described, and he makes a speech 
to the men of Israel, reproaching them for break- 
ing their allegiance to the house of David, for 
worshipping the golden calves, and substituting 
unauthorized priests for the sons of Aaron and 
the Invites. He was successful in battle against 
Jeroboam, and took the cities of Bethel, Jeshauah, 
and Ephrain, with their dependent villages. It 
is also said (2 Ch. liii. 3, 17) that his army 
consi;>ted of 400,000 men, and Jeroboam's of 
800,000, of whom 500,000 fell in the action : 
numbers which, if in themselves almost in- 
credibly high and possibly incorrect, are yet iu 
keeping with the systematic use of high figures 
on the part of the Chronicler (see 1 Ch. zxi. 5 ; 
cp. 2 Sam. xxiv. 9 : Rawlinson in the Speaker's 
Commentary on Ch. /. c). Nothing is said by the 
writer in Chronicles of the sins of Abijah, but we 
are told that after his victory he " waxed mightv, 
and married fourteen wives," whence we may 
well infer that he was elated with prosperity, 
and, like his grandfather Solomon, fell during 
the last two years of his life into wickedness, as 
described in Kings. Both records inform us that 
he reigned but three years; and the Talmud 
accounts his early death a punishment for his 
non-fulfilment of the duties to which his own 
speech had summoned the children of Israel 
(2 Chron. xiii. 4-12). His mother was called 
Maachah. In some places (I K. iv. 2 ; 2 Ch. xi. 
20) she is said to be the daughter of Absalom 
or Abisi)alom (the same name) ; in one (2 Ch. 
xiii. 2 ; Heb. reads -liTS'l?, but the LXX. and 
Syr. read DOBD, which is certainly right, and 
is accepted by Bertheau and Keil) of Uriel of 
Gibeah. It is, however, so common for the word 
n3, daughter, to be used in the sense of grand- 
daughter or descendant, that we need not hesitate 
to assume that Uriel married Tamar, Absalom's 
daughter, and that thus Maachah was daughter 
of Uriel and granddaughter of Absalom. Abijah 
therefore was descended from David, both on his 
father's and mother's side. According to the old 
chronology, the date of Abijah's accession was 
variously placed between B.C 933 (Seyffarth) 
and B.a 968 (Ewald) ; but, since the discovery 
of the Assyrian Eponymous Canon, between n.c. 
912 (Brandes) and ac. 921 (Riehm). See RBsch's 
useful table in Herzog, SE.* xvii. p. 477, s. n. 
Zeitrechnung. The 18th year of Jeroboam co- 
incides with the Ist and 2nd of Abijah. 

2. The second son of Samuel, called Abiah in 
A. v., Abijah in R. V. [See Abia, No. 3.] 

8. 'AiSi^ ; Abia. The son of Jeroboam I. king 
of Israel, in whom alone, of all the house of 
Jeroboam, was found " some good thing toward 


the Lord God of Israel," and who was therefore 
the only one of his family who was suffered to go 
down to the grave in peace. He died in bis 
childhood, just after Jeroboam's wife had been 
sent in disguise to seek help for him in hu 
sickness from the prophet .\hijah, who gave her 
the above answer. (1 K. xiv.) 

4. 'Kfiid ; AIna. A descendant of Eleazar, who 
gave his name to the eighth of the twenty-four 
courses into which the priests were divided by 
David (1 Ch. iiiv. 10 ; 2 Ch. viii. 14). Only 
four of the courses returned from the Captivity, 
and that of Abijah was not one (Ezra ii. 36-;A9; 
Neh. vii. 39-42, xii. 1). But the four were 
divided into the original number of twenty-four, 
with the original names ; and hence it happened 
that to the course of Abijah or Abia belonged 
Zacharias the father of John the Baptist (Luke 

6. 'kfiii ; Ahia. A contemporary of Kcbe- 
miah (Neh. i. 7). 

6. The daughter of Zechariah (2 Ch. xxix. 1. 
B. 'A.$$i, A. 'Afifiaeie, Abia), also called Abi 
(B. 'ABoi, Abi, in 2 K. zviii. 2), wife of Ahaz, and 
mother of HezekUh. [Abl] [G.E.LC.] [F.] 

ABI'JAM. [Abijah, No. 1.] 

A'BILA. [Abilene.] 

ABILE'NE CA/3iA.i)Wi, Luke iii. 1), a te- 
trarchy of which Abila was the capital. This 
Abila must not be confounded with Abila in 
Peraea, and other Syrian cities of the same 
name, but was situated on the eastern slope of 
Antilibanus, in a district fertilised by the river 
Barada. It is distinctly associated with Lebanon 
by Josephus (Ant. xviii. 6, § 10, xix. 5, § 1, 
II. 7, § 1 ; B.J. ii. 11, § 5). Its name probably 
arose from the green luxuriance of its situation, 
" Abel " perhaps denoting " a grassy meadow " 
[see s. r.]. The name, thus derived, is quite 
sntBcient to account for the traditions of the 
death of Abel, which are aasociated with the 
spot, and which are localised by the tomb called 
Neby Habit, on a height above the ruins of the 
city. The position of the city is very clearly 
designated by the Itineraries as 18 miles from 
Damascus, and 38 (or 32) miles from Heliopolis 
or Baalbec (/«n. Ant. and Tdb. Pent.). 

It is impossible to fix the limits of the Abilene 
which is mentioned by St. Luke as the totrarchv 
of Lysanias. [Lysasias.] Like other districts 
of the East, it doubtless underwent many changes 
both of masters and of extent, before it was 
finally absorbed in the province of Syria. Jose- 
phus associates this neighbourhood with the 
name of Lysanias both before and after the time 
referred to by the Evangelist For the later 
notices see the passages just cited. We there 
find " Abila of Lysanias," and " the tetrarchy of 
Lysanias," distinctly mentioned in the reigns of 
Claudius and Caligula. We find also the phrase 
'A/Ji'Ao Avtroflov in Ptolemy (v. 15, § 22). The 
natural conclusion appears to be that this was 
the Lysanias of St. Luke. It is true that a. 
chieftain bearing the same name is mentioned 
by Josephus in the time of Antony and Cleopatra, 
as ruling in the same neighbourhood (Ant. xiv. 
3, § 3, XV. 4, § 1 ; B. /. i. 13, § 1 ; also Dio 
Cass. xlix. 32): and from the close connexion 
of this man's father with Lebanon and Damascus 
(Ant. xiii. 16, § 3, xiv. 7, § .4; B. J. i. 9, § 2) 
it is probable that Abilene was part of his terri- 

Digitized by 





torj, and that the Lysanias of St. Luke was the 
s«o or gruuiwn of the former. K.vea if we 
sistttae (as many writers too readily assume) 
ihat the tetrarch mentioned in the time of 
CUodins and Caligula is to be identified, not 
with the Lysanias of St. Luke, bat with the 
earlier Ly»nias (never called tetrarch and 
Dtirer positively connected with Abila) in the 
limes of Antony and Cleopatra, there is no 
difficulty in believing that a prince bearing this 
name ruled over a tetrarchy having Abila for 
iU capital, in the 13th year of Tiberius (see 
WicKler, C/tronologiache Synopae der vier Evcm- 
piitn, pp. 174-183). 

Tlie site of the c)>ief citv of Abilene has been 
omlottbtcdly identified wLere the Itineraries 
plice it ; and its remains have been described of 
Ute years by many travellers. It stood in a 
remarkable gorge called the Suk Wady Barada, 
vhere the river breaks down through the moun- 
tain towards the plain of Damascus. Among 
the remains the inscriptions are most to our 
purpose. One containing the words Amrcuilou 
letfifxm is cited by Pococke, but has not been 
seen by any subsequent traveller. Two Latin 
inscriptions on the face of a rock above a frag- 
ment of Roman road (first noticed in the 
Qftarterly Seview for 1822, Ho. 52) were first 
published by Letronne {JannuU del Savants, 
1837), and afterwards by Orelli (/nscr. £at. 
4997, 4998). One relates to some repairs of the 
road at the expense of the Abiteni: the other 
associates the 16th Legion with the place. See 
Hogg, Tram, of t/te Hoy. Oeog. Soc. for 1851 ; 
Porter, Joitm. of Sac. Lit. for July 1853, and esp. 
iiis Damacut, i. 261-273 ; Robinson, iMttr Bib. 
So. 478-484 ; Diet. G. and S. Geogr., art. " Abi- 
lene ; " and Schamacher, " Abila of the Deca- 
polis"(P£f., July 1889). [J. S. H.] [W.] 

ABI-MA'EL (^{<0»?K ; A. 'Afii^K E. 
'Afiiiukt^ ; Abimail), named as a descendant of 
Joktaa (Gen. x. 28 ; 1 Ch. i. 22), and thus as 
the progenitor of an Arab tribe. Bochart 
(Phateg, ii. 24) conjectures that his name is 
preserved in that of MdXi [Mo^i£\i], a place in 
Arabia Aromatifera, mentioned by Theophraetus 
(Hist. Plant, ix. 4), and thinks (with scant 
probability) that the Malitae are the same as 
Ptolemy's KainTiu (vi. 7, § 23), and that they 
were a people of the Minaeans (for whom see 
Arabia). D. H. Miiller (in MV.'" >. n.) com- 
pares tlie name with the South-Arabian proper 
name nnfiimaK, Abmi 'Athtar = a father is 
Atitar (the Hebrew Ashtoreth, but in S. Arabia 
a male divinity. See Baethgen, BeitrSge z. 
■5nm(. Seiigionsgesch., p. 117 «{.). [E. S. P.] [F.] 

ABI-MET.ECH C|^'3K ; if compounded of 
the Phoenician deity Milk [or Moloch = king ; 
Ke Baethgen, op. cit., p. 37 n.] = my father is 
[the god] Mitk; 'APiftdXtx; Abimelech), the 
Uffle of several Philistine kings. It is supposed 
by many to hare been a common title of their 
kiigs, like that of Pharaoh among the Egyptians, 
sad that of Caesar and Augustus among the 
Bomans. The name Father of the King, or 
father King, corresponds to Padishah (Father 
King), the title of the Persian kings, and Atilih 
(Father, pr. patemitv), the title of the Khans of 
Bucharia (Gesen. Thes.). 
"L A Philistine, king of Gerar (Gen. xx., xxi.). 

who, exercising the right claimed by Eastern 
princes of collecting all the beautiful women i>t' 
their dominions into their harem (Gen. xii. 15 ; 
Esth. ii. 3), sent for and took Sarah. The 
account given of Abraham's conduct on this 
occasion is similar to that of his behaviour 
towards Pharaoh [Abkaiiam]. A few years 
later, Abimelech and Phicol, *' the chief captain 
of his host," made au alliance of peace and 
friendship with Abraham ; and the covenant was 
established by a present to the king of seven 
ewe lambs, made at " the well of the oath " 
[Bkebsueba], which Abimelech's servants had 
" violently taken away," but which was then 

2. Another king of Gerar in the time of Isaac, 
of whom a similar narrative is recorded in rela- 
tion to Rebeknh (Gen. x.xvi. 1 se</.). Once more 
there was n dispute about wells ; and once more 
were these disputes allayed by peaceful alliances 
between the king and the patriarch. 

3. B. 'AfifiitiXtx- Son of the judge Gideon by 
his Shechemite concubine (Judg. viii. 31). Here 
the derivation of the name is not Phoenician. 
The latter part of the name is not to be con- 
nected with a heathen deity, but is another 
name for Jehovah, = (The) King (Jehovah) is 
(my) father, or father of him who bears the 
name (see Baethgen, p. 146 S7.). After his 
father's death he " hired vain and light fellows," 
and murdered all his brethren, seventy in 
number, with the exception of Jotham thu 
youngest, who concealed himself ; and he then 
]>ersuaded the Shechemites, through the influence 
of his mother's brethren, to elect him king. It is 
evident from this narrative that Shechem then 
became an independent state, and threw off the 
yoke of the conquering Israelites (Ewald, Gescli. 
ii. 444). When Jotham heard that Abimelech 
was made king, he addressed to the Shechemites 
his fable of the trees choosing a king (Judg. ix. 
1 seq. : cf. Joseph. Ant. r. 7, § 2), which may be 
compared with the well-known fable of Menenius 
Agrippa (Liv. ii. 32). After he had reigned three 
years, the citizens of Shechem rebelled under 
Gaal, son of Ebed. He was absent at the time, but 
he returned and quelled the insurrection. Gaal 
was expelled by Zebul, the governor friendly to 
Abimelech, and the city was taken by stratagem, 
utterly destroyed, and the ground strewn with 
salt. Thqse who had escap^ for safety to " the 
hold of the house of El-Berith " were destroyed 
by the setting of the hold on fire. Shortly after 
he stormed and took Thebex, but was struck on 
the head by a woman with the fragment of a 
mill-stone (comp. 2 Sam. xi. 21); and lest it 
should be said to his disgrace that he had died by 
the hand of a woman (cp. Soph. 2VacA. 1064 ; 
Sen. Here. Oet. 1176), he bade his armour-bearer 
slay him. Thus the murder of his brethren was 
avenged, and the curse of Jotham fulfilled. 

4. Son of Abiathar, the high-priest in the 
time of David (1 Ch. iviii. 16); but this is 
evidently an error for the person called Abi- 
melech OI^^'nK; •Ax<M^'>^«Xi B. 'AxsWAex; 
Achimeltch) in 2 Sam. viii. 17 [Ahimelech]. The 
reading Ahimelech is also adopted in 1 Ch. xviii. 
16 by the LXX., Vulg., Syr., Targ., Arab., and by 
twelve Heb. MSS. (De Rossi, Var. Lect. iv. 182). 

5. Ps. xxiiv., title. [Auimixech, 2.] 

[R. W. B.] [F. 


Digitized by 




ABI-NADAB (3nraK, Ges. = no6fe father, 
MV.'« = my fatlter \l n^; A. "A/m-oSajS, B. 
'A/Kciy-; Abinadab). 1. A native of Kirjatb- 
jearim, in whose house " on a hill " the ark re- 
mained 20 yean (1 Sam. vii. 1, 2 ; 2 Sam. ri. 

3, 4 ; 1 Ch. xiii. 7, K. 'A/uy-). 2. Second son of 
Jesse, who followed Saul to bis war against the 
Philistines (1 Sam. xvi. 8. ivii. 13; 1 Ch. ii. 
13). 8. A son of Saul, who was slain with his 
brothers at the fatal battle on Mount Gilboa 
(1 Sam. xxxi. 2, B. 'latvoSif/S ; 1 Ch. viii. 33, 
ix. 39, I. 2, »A. •AfumtiP, B."^ 'Afup-). 

4. Father of one of the twelve chief officers 
of Solomon (1 K. ir. 11, A. 'ABtyafiP. B. 
omit.). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

ABI-NEB ("I3»3K. Ges. = father of a lamp, 
MV." = my father ii a lamp ; B. 'A$tytrlip, A. 
'Afffy^ip ; Abner), Marginal form of the name 
Abner (1 Sam. xir. 50). Cp. Lagarde, Ueberticht 
vb. d. i. Aram., Arab., «. Jiebr. Bildvmfi d. 
Nomina, p. 75 n. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ABI-NO'AM (Drj'5X. Ges. = father of 
pleasantness, Olshausen and MV." = my father is 
pleasantness ; B. 'Ai3<iW</t, A. 'AiSiv- ; Abinoem), 
father of Barak (Judg. iv. 6, 12, A. 'lafiwitu ; 
T. 1, 12). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

ABI-BAM (QTaX.Ge.-;. = father of loftiness, 
NV."=my father is lofty ; B. 'A0ftp<iv [A once 
'Afiapii)], F. 'Ai9i- ; Abiron). 1. A Reubenite, 
son of ETiab, who with Datban and On, men ot 
the same tribe, and Korah a Levitc, organized a 
conspiracy against Moses and Aaron (Num. xvi.). 
[For details, see Ko&AH.] 

2. B. 'AfftipAr ; Abiram. Eldest son of Hiel, 
the Bethelite, who died when his father laid 
the foundations of Jericho (1 K. xri. 34), and 
thus accomplished the first part of the curse of 
Joshua (Josh. -ri. 26). [E. W. B.] [F.] 

ABI-BON CAfittpiii' ; Abiron). Abirxm 
(Ecclus. xlv. 18; Vulg. v. 22). [W. A. W.] 

ABI-SEl {Abisei). Abishua, the son of 
Phinehas (3 Esd. i. 2). [W. A. W.] 

ABI-8HAG (3B^3N. Ga. = father [i«. 
author] of error, and so used of man or woman. 
Olshausen, Lehrb. d. Hebr. Sprache, p. 620, notes 
that the real meaning is very obscure. B. 
'APftad, A. 'A0urdy ; Abisag), a beantiful 
Shunammite, taken into David's harem to 
comfort him in his extreme old age (1 K. i. 
1-4). After David's death Adonijah induced 
Bathsheba, the queen-mother, to ask Solomon 
to give him Abisbag in marriage ; but this 
imprudent petition cost Adonijah his life (1 K. 
ii. 13 sej.). [Adonuah.] [R. W. B.] [F.] 

ABI-SHAI 0E"5« ; in 2 Sam. x. 10, ♦B'SK. 
Ges. = father of a gift, M V." my father is a gift : 
Abisai). The eldest son of Zeruiah, David's 
lister, and the brother of Joab and Asahel (1 Ch. 
ii. 16, B. 'A$(icd [and usually], A. 'Afitaad). 
A man of daring and devoted loyalty, he, more 
than his brothers, bad won the conBdence of 
David. He went with him to the sleeping camp 
of Saul (1 Sara. xxvi. 6, &c., A 'A$'cat [nnd 
usually]), and would have smitten the king 
with bis spear, had not David's loyal respect 
for " the Lord's anointed " prevented him. 
Tbey took the king's spear and the cruse of 


: water which was at Saul's head ; and David, 
presently denouncing the incompetency of the 
guard kept over their master by Abner and his 
soldiers, pointed to the king's preservation as an 
illustration of his own good will towards hi* 
person. A like indignation against the enemies 
of his uncle animated .\bisbni when he eagerly 
craved permission to slay Shimei, who cursed 
David while fleeing before Absalom (2 Sam. 
xvi. 9-14). In the successful battle which 
quelled the rebellion of Absalom (2 Sam. iviii. 2, 
A. 'A0uratt), Abishai was in command of one 
of the three divisions of the royal army, and 
in the absence of Amasa he headed the troops 
commanded to pursue the rebel Sheba (2 Sam. 
XX. 6, A. 'A/3i<r«l). Abishai could forgive no 
wrong and brook no rival. Hence his name 
is inseparably connected with two deeds of blood 
wrought by, or in conjunction with, his brother 
Joab : the second was the slaughter of Amasa, 
whom David bad appointed captain of bis host 
in the place of Joab after the murdei of Absalom 
(2 Sam. xix. 13, xx. 10, A. 'A/3i<ra<0; the first 
was the treacherous murder of Abner, who. 
when fleeing after the fight of "the pool of 
Gibeon," had slain Asahel (2 Sam. ii. 19, &e., 
iii. 30, B. 'Afittrad, A. 'Aval). His bravery and 
generalship were undisputed. In the war of 
retaliation against the Ammonites and Syrians, 
in consequence of Hannn's outrageous treatment 
of David's messengers, Joab assigned to Abishai 
the command against the former, and together 
they utterly discomfited the hosts united 
against them (2 Sam. x. 1, &c., B. 'A$(urd, A. 
'Afiural; 1 Ch. xix. 1, &c, B. r. 11, A. e. 15, 
'Afittrad). Abishai took also his share in the 
memorable victories won over the Edomites in 
" the valley of salt " by David and Joab (2 Sam. 
viii. 13 ; 1 Ch. xviii. 12, B. 'Afitaad, A. 'Afiurd ; 
Ps. Ix., title). As acts of personal prowess, 
it is recorded of him that in a war with the 
Philistines he rescued his master David from 
his peril at the hands of Ishbi-benob the giant 
and slew bim (2 Sam. xxi. 17, B. 'Afitaad, A. 
*AjBi<ra«0 i and in a single-handed contest with 
three hundred men, his valour secured him the 

title of Rosh ha-sheloshah (MC'^n \ffvh, al. 
D'^^n "\\ » chief among the three " (al. " of 
the thirty "), or, as some prefer, " chief or 
captain of the warrior (or Shalish) class" (2 
xxiii. 18 ; 1 Ch. xL 20, A. 'Afitirrd'), the second 
grade in the famous catalogue of David's mighty 
men. There is much probability in the con- 
jecture that these personal acts are to be referred 
to the period of David's wandering among the 
Philistines. There is no record of the end of 
Abishai's life. [K.] 

ABI-SHA'LOM (pSb&'2« ; 'A$t<r<ra\A^ ; 
Abessalom, " father of peace "), father of Maachah, 
who was the wife of Rehoboam, and mother oi' 
Abijah (1 K. xv. 2, 10). He is called Absalom 

(DiW3«) in 2 Ch. xi. 20, 21. This person 
must be David's son (see B. [A. floiriXet], 2 Sam. 
xiv, 27). The daughter of Absalom was doubt- 
less called Maachah after her grandmother 
(2 Sam. iii. 3). [W. A. W.] 

ABI-SHU'A (Wt^^K, Ges. = father of leel- 
fare, Olshausen and MV.'*=mi/ father is xctl fare; 

Digitized by 



AUsiie). 1. Son of Bcia, of the tribe of Ben- 
jimia (1 Cb. riii. 4, B. 'A$fi<rdiias, A. 'KfUnovi, 
T.' 'A^avovi). 2. Snn of Pbinehas, the son of 
Eleusr, ant! father of Bukki, in the genealogy of 
the hijh-priesta (1 Cb. vi. 4, 5, 50, B. 'Afittroi, 
A. -t-; Exra vii. 5, T.' 'Afiarmf). According 
to Josephns {Ant. riii. 1, § 3) he executed the 
office of high-priest after hia father Phinehas, 
and was succeeded by Eli ; hia descendaats, till 
Zadok, falling into the rank of private persons 
(ait>T(^is>T(t). His name is cormpted in 
JoKphns into 'liaifKot. Nothing is known of 
liim. [A. C. H.] 

ABI-SHUB (-HE^3«. The meaning is nn- 
certain ; Ge». ^father of a tcall, MV." = my father 
II a mil; B. 'Afitiaoip, A. -v ; Abtsur"), son of 
Shammai (1 CI. ii. 28> [W. A. W.j [F.] 

ABI-SUM (B. 'Afiturevi, A. -•-; Abisue). 
kutsBVA, the son of Phinehas (1 £sd. riii. 2 
[LXX. and Vulg. Tii. 5]), called also Abisei ; one 
of the ancestors of Ezra. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ABI-TAL (^'3K, Gts.=/ather of dew, 01s- 
han»n and MV.'* = 3fy father is the dew ; B. 
'AfirriMt, A. -i ; Abitai), one of David's wires 
(2 Sam. iii. 4; 1 Ch. iii. 3, B. iafitiriK). 

[W.A. W.] [F.] 

ABI-TCB (34e»3»?, Oes. = father of goodness. 
a?.»= Jfy father is goodness ; BA. •Afiirifi, T.' 
'A^rr^A; Abitdb), son of Shaharaim by Hushim 
(lCh.TiiLll). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ABITD CAiSwvS; AbiuS). Descendant of 
Zorobabel, in the genealogy of Jesus Christ 
(Matt. i. 13). Lord A. Herrey identifies him 
with HooAiAH (1 Ch. iii. 24) and Juda (Luke 
ill 26), and supposes him to hare been the grand- 
ion of Zcmbbabel through his only daughter 
mfntioned, Shelomith (1 Ch. iii. 19). NSsgen, 
■nth less probability, considers him to hare been 
the hnsband of Shelomith. [W. A. W.] [F.] 


AB'NEB (IJaill, once n?.'aK, where see the 
etymologies ; B. ' Afiem^p, A. 'Afitv^p or 'Afiaarlif ; 
ilmir). 1. Son of Ner.who was the brother of 
Kish (1 Ch. ix. 36), the father of Saul. Abner, 
therefore, was Saul's first cousin, and was made 
hy him commander-in-chief of his .army (1 Sam. 
»i». 50). He was the person who conducted 
Dirid into Saul's presence after the death of 
Goliath (iTii. 57) ; and afterwards accompanied 
fail master when he sought David's life at 
Uaehilah (ixri. 3-14). From this time we 
hear do more of him till after the death of 
SiiU, when he rose into importance as the 
naimtiy nf his family. It would seem that, 
inmediately after the disastrous battle of Mount 
Oilboa, Darid was proclaimed king of .Tudah in 
Hebron, the old capital of that tribe, but that 
the rKt of the country was altogether in the 
haada of the Philistines, and that fire years 
pMsed before any natire prince rentured to 
oppose his claims to their supremacy. Dnring 
that time the Israelites were gradually recorering 
their territory, and at length Abner proclaimed 
the weak aiid unfortunate Ishbosheth, Saul's 
<w, as king of Israel in Mahanaim, beyond 
Jonlan— at first no doubt as a place of security 
Haiast the Philistines, though all serious appre- 



hension of danger from them must hare soon 
passed away — and Ishbosheth was generally re- 
cognised except by Judah. This riew of the 
order of events is necessary to reconcile 2 Sam. 
ii. 10, where Ishbosheth is said to have reigned 
over Israel for two years, with v. 1 1, in which 
we read that Darid was king of Judah for 
seven;* and it is confirmed by tw. 5, 6, 7, in 
which David's message of thanks to the men of 
Jabesh-gilead for bnrying Saul and his sons 
implies that no prince of Saul's house had as ret 
claimed the throne, but that David hoped that 
his title would be soon acknowledged by all 
Israel ; while the exhortation " to be valiant " 
probably refers to the struggle with the 
Philistines, who placed the only apparent im- 
pediment in the way of his recognition. War 
soon broke out between the two rival kings, and 
a " very sore battle " was fought at Gibeon 
between the men of Israel under Abner, and the 
men of Judah under Joab, son of Zeraiah, 
David's sister (1 Ch. ii. 16). When the army 
of Ishbosheth was defeated, Joab's youngest 
brother Asahel, who is said to have been " as 
light of foot as a wild roe," pursued Abner, and 
in spite of w.iming refused to leave him, so that 
Abner in self-defence was forced to kill him. 
After this the war continued, success inclining 
more and more to the side of David, till at last 
the imprudence of Ishbosheth deprived him of 
the counsels and generalship of the hero, who 
was in truth the only support of his tottering 
throne. Abner had married Rizpah, Saul's 
concubine, and this, according to the views of 
Oriental courts, might be interpreted to imply n 
design upon the throne. Thus we read of a cer- 
tain Annals, who, while left viceroy of Egypt in 
the absence of the king hia brother, " used 
violence to the queen and concubines, and put on 
the diadem, and set up to oppose hia brother " 
(Manetho, quoted by Joseph, c. Apion. i. 15. 
Cp. also 2 Sam. xri. 21, zx. 3, 1 K. ii. 13-25, and 
the case of the Pseudo-Smerdis, Herod, iii. 68). 
[Absalom; Adonijah.] Rightly or wrongly, 
Ishbosheth so understood it, though Abner 
might seem to hare given anfiicient proof of his 
loyalty, and be ventured to reproach him with 
it. Abner, incensed at his ingratitude, after an 
indignant reply, opened negotiations with David, 
who received him most favourably at Hebron, 
and promised him the chief command of the 
armies of the united kingdom. Abner then 
undertook to procure his recognition throughout 
Israel ; but after leaving his court for the 
purpose was enticed back by Joab, and trea- 
cherously murdered by him and his brother 
.\bishai at the gate of the city, partly no doubt, 
as Joab showed afterwards in the case of Amasa, 
from fear lest so distinguished a convert to their 
cause should gain too high a place in David's 
favour (Joseph. Ant. vii. 1, § 5), but ostensibly 
in retaliation for the death of Asahel. For this 
there was indeed some pretext, inasmuch as it 
was thought dishonourable even in battle to kill 
a mere stripling like Asahel, and Joab and 
-Ibishai were in this case the retengers of Uood 

• In the opinion of many, the nnrnbers have been 
tampered with. lahbosheth was more probably 24 or 14 
years old than 40, and his reign lasted possibly six 
years. See Sptaker't Cbniii. and Klostermann iKgf. 
Komm. z. A. u. y. T., edd. Slrack n. Zuckler) In loco. 

Digitized by 




(Kum. XMV. 10), but it is also plain that Abner 
only killed the yonth to save hi* own lifer. This 
murder caused the greatest sorrow and indig- 
nation (cp. 1 Kings ii. 5) to David ; and as the 
assassins were too powerful to be punished, he 
contented himself with showing every public 
token of respect to Abner's memory, by follow- 
ing the bier and pouring forth a simple dirge 
over the slain, which is thus translated by 
theR. V.:— 

Should Abner die as a fool dletb 1 
Tby hands wero not bound, nor thy feet put Into 

Aa a nun falleth before the children of Iniquity, so 

didst thou lUl. 

),f. "Thou didst not fall as a prisoner taken 
in battle, with hands and feet fettered, but by 
>ccret assassination, such as one wicked man 
meets at the hands of other wicked men " ('2 Sam. 
iii. 33, 34). What specially excited the indig- 
nation of David was the mode in which Abner 
had met his death. See also Lowth, Lectures on 
Hebrew Poetry, xxil [G. E. L. C] [K.] 

2. Father of Jaa-siel, chief of the Benjamites 
in David's reign (1 Ch. ixvii. 21); probably 
the same as Abner No. 1. [W. A. W.] 

ABOMINATION (iiajjin). The considera- 
tion of this term may be conBned to two passages 
(see Speaker's Commentary and Delitzsch, Oenetis 
[1887], notes in loco), (a) Gen. xliii. 32, "The 
li^gyptians might not eat bread with the Hebrews, 
for that is an abomination unto the Egyptians." 
The Egyptians would not eat with foreigners. 
National pride and superstition had combined in 
establishing such usage (Herod, ii. 41 ; Died. 
Sic. i. 67). They treated the Hebrew, the 
Greek, and all outside themselves as foreigners. 
A primary reason for this exclusiveness may 
have consisted in the fact that the sacrifice of 
the cow, so common among Hebrew, Greek, and 
other nations, was forbidden among the Egyp- 
tians, the cow being their sacred animal ; but, 
generally speaking, the land of the " foreigners " 
and its inhabitants belonged to Set (Typbon), 
"the almighty destroyer and blighter." The 
.lews themselves, at a later period of their ex- 
istence, adopted the same habits of exclusiveness 
(cp. John iv. 9 ; Acts x. 2S, xi. 3). (6) Gen. 
xlvi. 34: "Every shepherd is an abomina- 
tion nnto the Egyptians." Joseph describes his 
brothers to Pharaoh as "shepherds, keepers 
of cattle " ; and bids them describe themselves 
as " keepers of cattle from our youth even until 
now, both we and our btbers." Such description 
will, he intimates, secure their ilwelling in the 
land of Goshen rather than in the neart of 
Egypt, becanae — he adds — "every shepherd," 
&c. If the advent of Joseph to Egypt be placed 
(with Ebers and Lepsius) at the end of the Hyksos 
period [Egtpt], the memory of the shepherd (i.e. 
nomad) dynasty and its oppressiveness would be 
still acute. " Foreigner " shepherds would all 
be termed by an indiscriminating hatred, 
" abomination." Otherwise the shepherd was 
not, as was the swineherd (Herod, ii. 47), 
especially abominable to the Egyptians, a people 
who were great breeders and rearers of cattle of 
all sorts (cp. Gen. xlvii. 6). They would only 
have stamped with an offensive epithet men of 
foreign nationality and religion (cp. Anahim; 


Dillmann, Genesis,' in loco ; Dnncker-Abbott, 
Hist, of Antiquity, i. p. 199). [F.] 

0Sf\vyfUi rfis dfiritiuattts. Matt. xxiv. 15), men- 
tioned by our Saviour as a sign of the approach- 
ing destruction of Jerusalem, and with reference 
to Dan. ix. 27, xi. 31, xii. 11. The Hebrew 
words in these passages are respectively, (a) 

Djjj?? D'vw e;3| ht3, (6) Dt;^ pp^n. 

and (c) DtSe' pi%': the LXX. translate the 
first word uniformly /SScXiry/uz, and the second 
ipriiiintni (ix. 27) and iprtiiitrtas (xi. 31, xii. 
11): BA. however have li^ayianirar in xi. 31, 
and AB." iwh i^arlanov in ix. 27. The mean- 
ing of the first of these words is clear : )Mj3C' 
often expresses religions abominations, and in 
the singular (1 K. xi. 5, 7) — and especially in the 
plural — number, iMs (2 K. xxiii. 24). Soidas 
defines fiSiXvyiia m used by the Jews to express 
iroi' elSwXoy koI irSv iieTinruiui laf$ftniov. It is 
important to oliserve that the expression is not 
used of idolatry in the abstract, but of idolatry 
adopted by the Jews themselves (2 K. xxi. 2-7, 
xxiii. 13). Hence we mast look for the fulfil- 
ment of the prophecy in some act of apostasy on 
their part; and so the Jews themselves appear 
to have understood it, according to the traditional 
feeling referred to by Josephu8(fi. J. iv. 6, § 3), 
that the Temple would be destroyed iiai x"P*f 
olK€7di ^pofuifuvt rh r4iityot. With regard to 
the words DpCV and DpC*, the former is trans- 
lated in ix. 27 by the A. V. "he shall make it 
desolate," and by the R. V. "shall come one 
that maketh desolate; " in xi. 31 and xii. 11 by 
both A V. and R. V., " that maketh desolate.'' 
The Saviour probnbly referred to the latter of 
these passages. What was the object referred 
tp is a matter of doubt (see a summary of 
opinions in the Speaker's Commentary, Daniel,* 
pp. 364-5); it should be observed, however, 
that in the passages in Daniel the setting up of 
the abomination was to l>e consequent upon the 
cessation of the sacrifice. The Jews considered 
the prophecy to be fulfilled in the profanation 
of the Temple under Antiochns Epiphanes, when 
the Israelites themselves erected an idolatrous 
altar (iSw/iiSs, Joseph. Ant. xii. 5, § 4) upon the 
sacred Altar, and offered sacrifice thereon : this 
altar is described as $S4\vyfia t^i i/niii^crfccs 
(1 Mace. i. 54, yi. 7). The prophecy, however, 
referred ultimately (as Josephns himself per- 
ceived. Ant. X. 11, § 7) to the destruction of 
Jerusalem by the Romans, and consequently the 
ptiXvyina must describe some occurrence con- 
nected with that event. But it is not easy to 
find one which meets all the requirements of the 
case: the introduction of the Roman standards 
into the Temple would not be a fUSiKvyiia, 
properly speaking, nnless it could be shown 
that the Jews themselves participated in the 
worship undoubtedly paid to them by the 
Roman soldiers (Joseph. Bell. Jud. vi. 6, § 1 ; 
Tertullian, Apoi. xvi.) ; moreover, this event, as 
well as several others which have been proposed, 
such OS the erection of the statue of Hadrian 
(Nicephoms Callist. iii. 24), fails in regard to 
the time of their occurrence, being subsequent 
to the destruction of the city. It appears very 
probable that the profanities of the Zealots con- 

Digitized by 



ititatcd the abomination, trhich was the sign of 
imixadiog rnia (Joseph. B. J. iv. 3, § 7. Cp. 
jlaniel in Speakei's Commentary, Mutt. zxlr. 
15, note, and Niiiigen on the same passage in 
Strack B. ZSckler's Kgf. Komm. z. d. jV. T.). 
If to, St Lake's paraphrase, explanatory fur the 
Gtotiles (ixi. 20), " when ye shall see Jerusalem 
c«ii{asse<i irith armies," dwells only upon the 
latter part of the sign, the detoUition, the near- 
nea of which would be intimated by the Roman 
armies encircling Jemsalem. [W. L B.] [F.] 

AB-BAHAM (On^SK. The significance of 
tiiis name to the Hebrew is given in Gen. xvii. 5, 
nil pOir^^ ^- ^- "*''* father of a multitude 
cf nations," but its etymology is still a matter 
of conjectOTS.* Dillmann and Delitzsch in loco 
take Dill as an older and dialectic form of D1, 
tiie final syllable Dil reflecting the 6rst syllable 
of pan [see M v.", ». n.] ; 'Afipmin; Abraiiam: 
criginally ABBAM, D'laK, the father is lofty 
<r loftg father, 'Afipdii ; Abram ; which name is 
amiiar in meaning to Abiraro [1 K. XTi. 34], the 
AburaaH of the Assyrian inscriptions [Schrader, 
KAT.' L L]), the son of Terah, and brother of 
Xahor and Haran ; and the progenitor, not only 
of the Hebrew nation, but of several cognate 
tribes. His history is recorded to us with much 
'letail in Scriptare, as the very type of a true 
patriarchal life ; a life, that is, in which all 
authority is paternal, derived ultimately from 
<iod the Father of all, and religion, imperfect as 
ret in revelation and ritual, is based entirely 
00 that same Fatherly relation of God to man. 
Tne natonl tendency of such a religion is to the 
Tonhip of tutelary gods of the family or of the 
tribe, traces of soch a tendency on the part of 
the patriarchs being found in the Scriptural 
History itself; and the declaration of God to 
Hoses (in Ex. vi 3) plainly teaches that the full 
Kose of the Unity and Eternity of Jehovah was 
not vet nnfolded to them. But yet the revela- 
tion' of the Lord as the " Almighty God " (Gen. 
ini. 1, ixviiL 3, xsxv. 11) and " the Judge of 
-Jl the earth " (Gen. xviii. 25), the knowledge 
'<f Hit intercourse with kings of other tribes 
(0«n. II. 3-7), and His judgment on Sodom and 
Gomorrah (to say nothing of the promise which 
titended to "all nations ") must have raised the 
patriarchal religion far above this narrow idea 
"f God, and given it the germs, at least, of 
:']tnre eialtation. The character of Abraham is 
that which is formed by such a religion and by 
the influence of a nomad pastoral life ; free, 
■imple, and manly ; full of hospitality and 
iamilj affection; truthful towards all such as 
w«e bound to him by ties, though not untainted 
vith £astem craft towards those considered as 
>I>«i ; ready for war, but not a professed warrior 
or one who lived by plunder ; free and childlike 
in religion, and gradually educated by God to a 
offltinnally deepening seiLse of its all-absorbing 
claims. His character stands remarkably con- 
trajted with those of Isaac and Jacob. 

The scriptural history of Abraham is mainly 
linited, as usual, to the evolution of the Great 
Ctrenaat in his life ; it is the history of the 
nan himself rather than of the external events 
of his life ; and, except in a few instances 



* C|>. also Lagirde, POertiAt S%. <i. (. Aram., Arab., 
t. Btbr. Mdimt d. .Voau'iKI, p. »3, *c. 

(Gen. xii. 10-20, xiv., xx., ixi. 22-34), it does 
not refer to his relation with the rest of the 
world. To them he may only Have appeared a 
chief of the hardier Chaldaean race, disdaining 
the settled life of the more luxurious Canaanites, 
and fit to be hired by plunder as n protector 
against the invaders of the North (see Gen. xiv. 
21-23). Nor is it unlikely, though we have no 
historical evidence of it, that his passage into 
Canaan may have been a sign or a cause of a 
greater migration from Haran, and that he may 
have been looked upon (e.g. by Abimelech, Gen. 
xxi. 22-32) as one who, from his position as 
well as his high character, would be able to 
guide such a migration for evil or for good. 

The traditions which Josephus adds to the 
scriptural narrative, are merely such as, after 
his manner and in accordance with the aim of 
his writings, exalt the knowledge and wisdom 
of Abraham, making him the teacher of mono- 
theism to the Chaldaeans, and of astronomy and 
mathematics to the Egyptians. He quotes, 
however, Nicolaus of Damascus,' as ascribing to 
him the conquest and government of Damascus 
on his way to Canaan, and stating that the 
tradition of his habitation was still preserved 
there (Joseph. Ant, i. c. 7, § 2 ; see Gen. xv. a). 

The Arab traditions are partly ante-Moham- 
medan, relating mainly to the Kaabah (or sacred 
house) of Mecca, which Abraham and his son 
" Ismail " are said to have rebuilt for the fourth 
time over the sacred black stone. Bnt, in great 
measure, they are taken from the Koran (see 
Sale's Koran, index s. n. ; Hughes, Diet, of 
Islam, s. n.), which has itself borrowed from the 
0. T. and from the Rabbinical traditions. Of 
the latter the most remarkable is the story of 
his having destroyed the idols (see Jud. v. 6-8) 
which Terah not only worshipped (as declared in 
Josh. xxiv. 2) but also manufactured, and of his 
having been cast by Nimrod into a fiery furnace 
(cp. Vulg. of Neh. [2 EsdJ ix. 7), which turned 
into a pleasant meadow. 'The legend is generally 
traced to the word Vr CWX), Abraham's birth- 
place, which has also the sense of " light " or 
" fire." The name of Abraham appears to be 
commonly remembered in tradition through 
a very large portion of Asia, and the title " el- 
Khalil," " the Friend " (of God) (see 2 Ch. ix. 
7 ; Is. xli. 8 ; Jas. ii. 23), is that by which be is 
usually spoken of by the Arabs. 

The scriptural history of Abraham, derived 
mainly from three sources (KShler and Delitzsch, 
Qerusia [1887], p. 241 S3.=J, E, Q), is divided 
into various periods by the various and pro- 
gressive revelations of God which he received : — 

I. Gen. xii.-xiv. With his father Terah, his 
wife Sarai, and nephew Lot, Abram left Ur (i.e. 
El-Mugheir, on the W. side of the Euphrates). 
Thence he migrated to Haran (Charran), in the 
N. part of Mesopotamia, on the high road from 
Babylonia and Assyria to Syria and Palestine. 
Both cities were famous for the cult of the 
Moon-god. This step was in obedience to a call 
of God (cp. Acts vii. 2-4). Haran, apparently 
the eldest brother — since Nahor married his 
daughter, and Abram's position as first of the 
three brothers is that of merit and fame rather 
than of priority of birth — was already ; 

NIcolaas was a contemporary and bvourlte of Herod 
the Great and Augustus. His Universal History Is said 
to have contained 144 books. 

Digitized by 




and Nshor remained behind (Gen. x'l. 31). In 
Haran Terah died : and Abrnm, now the head 
«f the family, receired a second call, and with it 
the promise.* The promise was twofold, con- 
taining both a temporal and spiritual blessing, 
the one of which was the typo and earnest of 
the other. The temporal pi'omisc was, that he 
should become a great and prosperous " nation " ; 
the spiritaal was, that iu him "should all 
families of the earth be blessed " (Gen. sii. 2). 

Abram appears to hare entered Canaan, as 
Jacob afterwards did, along the valley of the 
Jubbok ; for he crossed at once into the rich 
|ilain of Moreh, near Sichem, and under Ebal 
and Gerizim. There, in one of the most fertile 
apots of the land, he received the first distinct 
promise of his future inheritance (Gen. xii. 7), 
and built his first altar t« God. " The 
Canaanite " (it is noticed) " was then in the 
land," and probably would view the strangers 
of the warlike north with no friendly eyes. 
Accordingly Abram made his second resting- 
place in the strong mountain country, the key 
of the rarioos passes, between Bethel and Ai. 
There he would dwell securely, till famine 
drove him into the richer and more cultivated 
land of Egypt. It is still a matter of dispute in 
what dynasty this took place. Cook (^Spaiier's 
Commentary, i, p. 446) and Kawlinson place 
Abram's entry into Egypt in the earlier part 
of the 12th dynasty ; Ebers and Sayce place it 
in the later or Hyksos period. 

That his history is no ideal, mythical, or 
heroic legend,* is very clearly shown, not merely 
by the record of his deceit as to Sarni, practised 
in Egypt and repeated afterwards, but much 
more by the clear description of its utter 
failure, and the humiliating position iu which it 
placed him in comparison with Pharaoh, and 
still more with Abimelcch. That he should 
have felt afVaid of such a ciWlized and imposing 
power as Egypt even at that time evidently 
woi, is consistent enough with the Arab nature 
as it is now: that he should have sought to 
guard himself by deceit, especially of that kind, 
which is trae in word and false in effect, is 
unfortunately not at all incompatible with a 
generally religious character; but that such a 
story should have been framed in an ideal 
description of a saint or hero is inconceivable. 

The period of his stay in Egypt is not re- 
corded, but it is from this time that his wealth 
and power appear to hare begun (Gen. xiii. 2). 
On his return, the very fact of this growing 
wealth and importance caused the separation of 
Lot and his portion of the tribe from Abram. 

• It is expressly stated in the Acts (vli. 4) that 
Abram quitted Haran after liis father's death. This Is 
supposed to be loconslstcnt nith ihc statements that 
Terah was TO yean «ld at the birth of Abram (Oen. 
xl. a«); that be died at the age of 20S (Oen. xl. 33 ; in 
Samar. text, I4S) ; and that Abram nu 75 jrears old when 
he left Haran : from which It would seem to follow that 
Abnm migrated fh>m Haran in his lather's llfetlnnc. 
Varluus explanations have been given of ihia difficulty ; 
«ne being that the statement In Oen. xl. 26, that Terah 
was 70 years old when he begat his three children, 
lapplles only to the eldest, Haran, and that the births of 
ills two yonnger children belonged to a subsequent 
period [CiiaoxoLooT]. Many adopt the Samar. nomber. 

<■ See some of these views fkom Ooldzlbcr to Stade 
•tated in DeUtisch, OatetU, pp. 217, 248 (1887); Dill- 
aaan, Otnt$it,' p. 327, &c. 


Lot's departure to the rich country of Sodom 
implied a wish to quit the nomadic life, and 
settle at once ; Abram, on the contrary, was 
content still to " dwell in tenta " and wait for 
the promised time (Ueb. xi. 9). Probably till 
now he had looked on Lot as his heir, and his 
separation from him was a providential pre- 
paration for the future. From this time he 
took up his third resting-place at Mamre, or 
Hebron, the future capital of Judah, situated in 
the direct line of communication with Egypt, 
and opening down to the wilderness and pastorv 
land of Bcersheba. This very position, so di9°ereDt 
from the mountain-fastness of Ai, marks the 
change in the numbers and powers of his tribe. 

The hiatory uf his attack on Chedorlaomer 
(see s. n. ; on the genuineness of the history, cp. 
Delitzsch, pp. 262-3) which follows, gives us a 
specimen of the view which would betaken of him 
by the external world. By the way in which it 
speaks of him as "Abram the Hebrew " (Gen. xiv. 
13),* it would seem to be an older document, a 
fragment of Oanaanitish history (as Ewald calls 
it), preserved and sanctioned by Moses. The in- 
vasion was clearly another northern immigratioD 
or foray, for the chie& or kings were of Shinar 
(? South Babylonia), Ellasar (Larsa), Elam 
(Persia), &c That it was not the first, k 
evident from the vassalage of the kings of the 
cities of the plain; and it extended (see Gen. 
xiv. 5-7) far to the sonth over a wide tract of 
country. Abram appears here as the head of a 
small confederacy of chiefs, powerful enough to 
venture on a long pursuit to the head of th<- 
valley of the Jordan, to attack with success a 
large force, and not only to rescue Lot, but to 
roll back for a time the stream of northern in- 
vasion. His high position is seen in the 
gratitude of the people, and the dignity witli 
which he refuses the character of a hireling. 
That it did not elate him above measure, is 
evident from his reverence to Melchizedek, in 
whom he recognised one whose call was, 
and consecrated rank superior, to his own [Mel- 

II. Oen. XV., xvi. The second period of 
Abram's life is marked by the fresh ravelation 
which, without further unfolding the spiritual 
promise, completes the temporal one, already in 
course of fulfilment. It first announced to him 
that a child of his own should inherit th<' 
promise, and that his seed ahoold be as the 
"stars of heaven." This promise, unlike the 
other, appeared at his age contrary to natiu'e. 
and therefore it is on this occasion that his faith 
is specially noted, ss accepted and " counted for 
righteousness." Accordingly, he now passed 
into a new position, for not only is a fuller 
revelation given as to the captivity of his seed 
in Egypt, the time of their deliverance, and 
their conquest of the land, " when the iniquity 
of the Amorites was full," but after his soleniii 
burnt-offering the visible appearance of God in 
fire is vouchsafed to him as a sign, and he enters 
into covenant with the Lord (Gen. xv. 18). This 

• 'O trcpimt, LXX. ; one who had come fhnn the 
other side of the Euphrates. If this sense of the word 
be taken, it strengthens the supposition noticed. In 
any case the name is that applied to the Israelites by 
foreigners, or used by them of themselves only in 
speaking of foreigners : see Hkbbew. 

Digitized by 



mnnant, like the earlier one with Koah (Gen. 

ii. 9-17), ii one of free promise from God, faith 

oolj is tiut promise being required from man. 

The immediate consequence was the taking of 
Hagar, Sarai'a maid, to be a concubine of Abram 
(as a means for the fulfilment of the promise of 
aeed), and the conception of lahmael. 

in. Gen. iTii.-xxi. For fourteen years no 
more is recorded of Abnun, who seems during 
all that period to have dwelt at Mamre. After 
that time, in Abram's 99th year, the last step 
in the rerelation of the promise ia made, by the 
declaration that it should be given to a son of 
Sarai, and at the same time the temporal and 
spiritual elements are distinguished ; ishmael 
cas share only the one, Isaac is to enjoy the 
other. The oorenant, which before was only 
for temporal inheritance (Gen. xt, 18), is now 
made " ererlasting," and sealed by circumcision. 
This new state is marked by the change of 
Abram's name to "Abraham," and Sarai's to 
''Sarah,"'and it was one of far greater acquaint- 
ance and intercourse with God. For, imme- 
diately after, we read (xviii. 1) of the Lord's 
appearance to Abraham in human form, attended 
by two Angels, the ministers of His wrath 
against Sodom, of His announcement of the coming 
jadgmeit to Abraham, and His acceptance 
«f his intercession for the condemned cities,* 
The whole record stands alone in Scripture for 
the simple and familiar intercourse of God with 
him, contrasting strongly with the vaguer and 
more awful descriptions of previous appearances 
(lee e^. xr. 12), and of those of later times 
(Gen. xxTiU, 17, xxxii, 30; Ex. iiL 6, &c.). 
And, corresponding with this, there is a perfect 
ibsenoe of all fear on Abraham's part, and a 
cordial and reverent joy, which, more than any* 
thine else, recalls the time past when " the voice 
of the Lord God was heard, walking in the 
garden in the cool of the day." 

Strangely unworthy of this exalted position 
as the " friend " and intercessor with God, is the 
repetition of the falsehood as to Sarah in the 
laad of the Philistines (Gen. xx.). It was the 
first time Abraham had come in contact with that 
tiibe or collection of tribes which stretched along 



' The original name **1{^ is uncertain in derivation 

sad meaotsg. See tiie Lexicons of Oesentus, of MV.**, 
•ad DUlmann on 0«n. xvU. 15. Oeaenlus tenders It 
" noUUtj," from tbe same root as " Sarah ; " Ewald and 
I^titBch by "quarrelsome" (from the root HIK*' 'n 
■Daeof "to fight *> Tbe name Sarah, n'Vff, Is cer- 


I TnditkHi stiU points out the supposed site of this 
■Ppearanee of the Lord to Abraham. About a mile 
f^ao Hebron is a beaatlf ol and masfllve oak, which still 
tesn Alirabam's name. Tbe residence of the patriarch 
ns called -the oaks of Maa>re" (R. V.), erroneously 
Oaashted In A. V. " the plain " of Mamre (Gen. xUi. 
», xtUL I) ; bnt H Is doubtfhl whether this Is tbe 
(Set spot, since the tradition In the time of Josephus 

(B. J. W. •, } 7) was attached to a terebinth O^fpti 

MIQD is rendered " terebinths of H." In R. V. maig.). 

^istree no longer remains ; but there is no donbt that 
H stood within the ancient enclosure, which Is still 
oOtd "Abraham's Hooae." A fair was held beneath 
it hk the time of Gonstantlne ; and It remained to the 
limeotTbeodoslas, (Boblnsan.ii, 81, ed. 18S6; Stanley, 

BtBtE Mcr.— VOL, I. 

the coast almost to the borders of Egypt ; a race 
apparently of lords ruling over a conquered 
population, and another example of that series 
of immigrations which appear to have taken 
place at this time. It seems, from Abraham's 
excuse for his deceit on this occasion, as if there 
had been the idea in his mind, that all arms 
might be used against unbelievers, who, it is 
assumed, have no " fear of God," or sense of 
right. If so, the rebuke of Abimelech, by its 
dignity and its clear recognition of a God of 
justice, must have put him to manifest shame, 
and taught him that others also were servants 
of the Lord, 

This period again, like that of the sojourn in 
Egypt, was one of growth in power and wealth, 
as the respect of Abimelech and his alarm for 
the future, so natural in the chief of a race of 
conquering invaders, very clearly shows, Abra- 
ham's settlement at Beersheba, on the borders 
of the desert, near the Anialekite plunderers, 
shows both that he needed room and was able 
to protect himself and his ilocks. 

The birth of Isaac crowned his happiness, and 
fulfilled the first great promise of God : and tbe 
expulsion of Ishmael, painful as it was to him, 
and vindictive as it seems to have been on 
Sarah's part, was yet a step in the education 
which was to teach him to give up all for the 
one great object. The symbolical meaning of 
the act (drawn out in Gal, iv. 21-31) could not 
have been wholly nnfelt by the patriarch him- 
self, so &r as it involved the sense of tbe 
spiritnal nature of the promise, and carried out 
the fore-ordained will of God, 

IV, Geii,xxii,-xxT, 11, Again for a long period 
(twenty-five years, Joseph. Ant. i. 13, § 2) the 
history is silent : then comes the final trial and 
perfection of the faith of Abrnham in the command 
to ofi°er up tbe child of his affections and of God's 
promise. The trial lay, first in the preciousness 
of the sacrifice, and the perplexity in which the 
command involved the fulfilment of the promise ; 
secondly, in the strangeness of the command to 
violate the human life, of which the sacredness 
had been enforced by God's special command 
(Gen. ix, 5, 6), as well as by the feelings of a 
father. To these trials he rose superior by faith, 
that " God was able to raise Isaac even from the 
dead " (Heb, xi, 19), probably through the same 
faith to which our Lord refers, that God had 
promised to be the "God of Isaac" (Gen. xvii. 
19), and that Ha was not "a God of the dead, 
but of the living."" 

It is remarkable that, in the blessing given 
now to Abraham, the original spiritual promise 
is repeated for the first time since his earliest 

" The scene of the sacrifice Is, according to our present 
text, and to Joaepbus, the hmd of " Morlab," or n*1^D> 

T • 

the meaning of which is unknown ; In Gen. xxlL there 
seems to be a play upon It : comp. the name " Jehovah- 
Jireh," xxU. U. Tbe Samaritan Pentateuch has 
"Uoreh," il^lO; the LXX. renders the word here 

by rfv v^Xiif, tbe phrase used for what la undoubtedly 
"Moreh" In xll, «, whereas In 2 Ch. Ill, 1 "Morlah" 
is rendered by B. 'A^opcw, A. -t-: they therefore pro- 
bably read " Moreh " also. The distance — three days' 
Jouniey from Beersheba — suits Moreh better (see 
Stanley's S. * P. \>. 261) ; but other considerations 
seem In tavonr of Morlah, the place where the Temple 
was afterwards built. [Mobiah.] 


Digitized by 




call, and in the same words then used. But the 
promise that " in his seed all nations should be 
blessed" would also be now understood very 
differently, and felt to be far above the temporal 
promise, in which, perhaps, at first it seemed to 
be absorbed. It can hardly be wrong to refer 
pre-eminently to this epoch the declaration that 
Abraham " saw the day of Christ and was glad " 
(John viii. 56). 

The history of Abraham is now all but over, 
though his life was prolonged for nearly fifty 
years. The only other incidents are the death 
and burial of Sarah, the marriage of Isaac with 
Rebekah, and th»t of Abraham with Keturah. 

The death of Sarah took place at Kirjath- 
arba, i.e. Hebron, so that Abraham must have 
returned from Beersheba to his old and more 
peaceful home. In the history of her burial, 
the most notable points are the respect paid to 
the power and character of Abraham, as a mighty 
prince, and the exceeding modesty and courtesy 
of his demeanour. It is sufficiently striking that 
the only inheritance of his family in the land of 
promise should be n tomb. The sepulchral cave 
«f Machpelah is now said to be concealed under 
the Mosque of Hebbon (see Stanley, 8. ^ P. 
p. 101). 

The marriage of Isaac, so far as Abraham is 
concerned, marks his utter refusal to ally his son 
with the polluted and condemned blood of the 

The marriage with Keturah is the strangest 
and most unexpected event recorded in his life, 
Abraham having long ago been spoken of as an 
old man ; bnt his youth having been restored 
before the birth of Isaac may have remained to 
him ; and Isaac's marriage, having taken hie son 
comparatively away, may have induced him to 
seek a wife to be the support of his old age. 
Keturah held a lower rank than Sarah, and her 
children were sent away, lest they should dis- 
pute the inheritance of Isaac, Abraham having 
learnt to do voluntarily in their case what had 
been forced upon him in the case of Ishmael. 

Abraham died at the age of 175 years, and his 
sons, the heir Isaac, and the outcast Ishmael, 
united to lay him in the cave of Machpelah by 
the side of Siarah. 

His descend.-mts were (1) the Israelites ; (2) a 
branch of the Arab tribes through Ishmael; 
(3) the " children of the East," of whom the Mi- 
dianites were the chief; (4) perhaps (as cognate 
tribes) the nations of Ammon and Moab (see 
these names) ; and through their various 
branches his name is known all over Asia. 

To English readers Stanley's Lecturts on the 
Jewish (Sturch, Lectures i. and ii. (1883) ; Mil- 
man's History of the Jews, i. ch. 1 ; H. G. Tomkins' 
Abraham and his Times ; W. J. Deane's Abraham, 
his Life and Tiines, will give much interesting 
information. See also Vigouroui, La Bible et 
les B^couvertes Mvdemes,* i. pp. 379-497. The 
Jewish legends concerning Abraham will be 
found in Beer, Ltien Abrahams n. Auffassung d. 
jiidixAen Sage, 1859 ; and summarized in Ham- 
burger, SE. /fir Bibel u. Talmud,* a. n. Cp. 
Gaster, The Apocalypse of Abraham, from the 
Roumanian (Trans, of Soc. of Bibl. Arch. ix. 
p. 195 sq.y [A. B.] [F.] 

ABBAHAM'S BOSOM. Cp. Luke xvi. 23. 
During the Roman occupation of Jndaea at least 


the practice of reclining on couches at meali 
was customary among the Jews. As each guest 
leaned upon his left arm, his neighbour next 
below him would naturally be described as lying 
in his bosom ; and such a position with respect 
to the master of the house was one of especial 
honour, and only occupied by his nearest friends 
(John i. 18, ziii. 23). To lie in Abraham's 
bosom, then, was a metaphor in use among the 
Jews (cp. 4 Mace. xiii. 16 and Grimm's note in 
Fritzsche's Kgf. Handbuch nv d. Apokryphen d. 
A. T. iv**. Lief. p. 347) to denote a condition 
after death of perfect happiness and rest, and a 
position of friendship and nearness to the great 
founder of their race, when they should lie down 
on his right hand at the banquet of Paradise, 
"with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the 
kingdom of heaven " (Matt. viii. 11). "That the 
expression was in use among the Jews is shown 
by Lightfoot {Hor. Hebr. in Luc. ivi. 22), who 
quotes a passage from the Talmud {Kiddushia, 
fol. 72), which, according to his interpretation, 
represents Levi as saying in reference to the 
death of Rabbi Judah, "to-day he dwelleth in 
Abraham's bosom." The future blessedness of 
the just was represented under the figure of a 
banquet, " the Innquet of the garden of Eden or 
Paradise." See Schoettgen, Sor. Sebr. in Malt. 
viii. 11; Hamburger, £E. f. B. «. J", s. n. 
" Abraham's Schooss." [W. A. W.] [F.] 


ABBECH. Gen. xli. 43 (A. V. and R. V.): 
"They cried before him (Joseph), Bow the knee 
(^IIM)." Of the many conjectt^ explanations 
of this word, that which considers it Egyptian 
is the most usual and natural. The LXX. and 
Vulg. give no direct translation of it; the 
Targum and Midrash make it a composite word 
= " tender father " (11. 3K) or " fatherof the 
king" (^T = rex! cp. Gen. xlv. 8). Fried. 
Delitzsch, adopting the last-named signification, 
identifies it with the Babyloninn-Awyrian abar- 
akkit, the title of the principal minister (cp. 
H^. Language viewed in the Iiight of Assyrim 
Research, 1883, pp. 25-7).* An Assyrian word 
in the mouth of the Egyptian was not, however, 
BO likely as an Egyptian. Canon Cook's explana- 
tion " Rejoice thou " (Speaker's Commentary, i. 
note to Gen. xli. 43, and p. 482), if the most 
perfect as regards sound and grammatical form, 
hardly gives the real sense of the word Ab. 
Moreover, the transcription db-rek does not 
accurately represent the Egyptian pronunciation 
of the original word, which would have been 
abu-re-k. If, however, ^13K may be admitted 
as standing for d6u-rv-4, the word may be taken 
to signify "thy commandment is the object of 
our desire," i.e. " w^ are at thy service " (sec 
Renouf, PSBA. xi. p. 5, &c.). [F.] 

ABBO'NAH (ny"13r= passage, from t^V, to 
cross over), one of the halting-places of the 
Israelites in the desert, immediately preceding 
Ezion-geber ; and therefore, looking to the root. 

• The intercourse between Egypt and Babylonia w«s 
so great that this IdentificutioD cannot be called imp>«- 
slble ; and the word maj thus have been one which, with 
many other words of Semitic origin, found admisBloD 
into the ancient Egyptian speech. 

Digitized by 



the name may possibly retain the trace of a 
ford icrou the head of the tlanitic Gulf. In 
the A. V. it is given as £bronah (R. V. Abronah ; 
At. 'E^v^ ; B. ^fBpayi ; Bebronuh ; Num. 
iiiiii. M, 35). [Xbronau.] If the wilderness of 
the waaderings was in Arabia proper, Abronah 
was possibly at Hail, l>etween which place and 
'ikiah the mountains approach the sea so 
clottly that only one camel can pass at a 
time. [G.] [W.] 

ABKO'NAS C'Afipvvi; K. Xt$p<iv; Mambre), 
a torrent {x'iita^jms] apparently near Cilicia 
(Jndith ii. 24, compared with 25) ; if so, it may 
jfossibly be the Nahr Abraim, or Ibrahim, the 
aocient Adonis, which rises in the Lebanon at 
Afia, and falls into the sea at Jebeil (Byblos). 
It has, howerer, been conjectured (Movers, 
Bomur ZeiU. xiii. 38) that the word is a 
cormption of TTUn ^3J^ = beyond the river 
(Euphrates), which has jnst before been men- 
tioned ; a corruption not more inconceivable than 
many which actually exist in the LXX. The 
A. V. has Abbonai (Judith ii. 24. See Sjjeaker's 
CammaUary, note in loco). [G.] [W.] 

AB'SALOM (Di^'aM, father of peace; 
' AB*a<raA<iit ; Abiatom), third son of David by 
Maacah, daughter of Talmai king of Geshur, a 
.Syrian district adjoining the M.E. frontier of the 
Holy Land near the Lake of Merom. He is 
scarcely mentioned till after David had com- 
mitted the great crime which by its conse- 
quences embittered his old age ; and then appe»rs 
as the instrument by whom was fulfilled God's 
threat against the sinful king, that " evil should 
be raised up against him out of his own house, 
and that his neighbour should lie with his wires 
ia the sight of the sun" (2 Sam. xii. 11). In 
the latter part of David's reign, polygamy bore 
its ordinary fruits. Not only is his sin in 
the case of Bathsheba traceable to it, since it 
naturally suggests the unlimited indulgence of 
the passions, but it also brought about the pun- 
ishment of that sin, by raising up jealousies and 
ooflicting claims between the sons of different 
mothen, each apparently living with a separate 
boose and establishment (2 Sam. xiii. 8, xiv. 
34 ; cf. 1 K. vii. 8, &c.). Absalom had a sister 
Tsmar, who was violated by her half-brother 
Amnon, David's eldest son by Ahinoam, the 
Jcneelitess. The king, though indignant at so 
great a crime, would not punish Aronon because 
fee was his iirst bom (cp. the LXX. of 2 Sam. 
siii. 21. The words are wanting in the Hebrew). 
The natural avenger of such an outrage would 
be Tamar's full brother Absalom, just as the 
s<ns of Jacob took bloody vengeance for their 
•ister Dinah (Gen. ixiiv.). He brooded over 
the wrong for two years, and then invited 
^ the princes to n sheep-shearing feast at his 
estate in Baal-iiazor, possibly an old Canaani- 
tish tanctuary, on the borders of Ephraim and 
Beijamin. Here he ordered bis servants to 
narder Amnon, and then fled for safety to his 
>atber-iB-Uw's conrt at Geshnr, where he re- 
aained for three years. David was overwhelmed 
^ this accumulatioo of family sorrows, thus 
ciimpleted by separation from bis favourite son, 
wham he thought it impossible to pardon or 
recalL But he was brought back by an artifice 
of Juab, who sent a woman of Tekoah (after- 



wards known as the birthplace of the Prophet 
Amos) to entreat the king's interference in a 
supposititious case similar to Absalom's. Having 
persuaded David to prevent the avenger of blood 
from pursuing a young man who, she said, had 
slain his brother, she adroitly applied his assent 
to the recall of Absalom, and urged him, as 
he had thus yielded the general principle, to 
" fetch home bis banished. David did so, but 
would not see Absalom for two more years, 
though he allowed him to live in Jerusalem. 
At last, the impetuous young man — wearied 
with delay, perceiving that his triumph was 
only half complete and that his exclusion from 
court interfered with the ambitious schemes 
which he was forming, and fancying that sutfi- 
cient exertions were not made in his favour — 
sent his servants to bum a field of com near 
his own, belonging to Joab, thus doing as 
Snmson had done (Judg, xv. 4, 5). Thereupon 
Joab, probably dreading some further outrage 
from his violence, brought him to his father, 
from whom he received the kiss of recon- 
ciliation. Absalom now began at once to pre- 
pare for rebellion, urged to it partly by his 
own restless wickedness, partly perhaps by the 
fear lest Bathsheba's child should supplant him 
in the succession, to which he would feel himself 
entitled as of royal birth on his mother's side 
as well as his father's, and as being now David's 
eldest surviving son, since we may infer that 
the second son Chileab was dead, from no men- 
tion being made of him after 2 Sam. iii. 3. It is 
bard to account for Absalom's temporary success, 
and the imminent danger which befel so power- 
ful a government as his father's. The sin with 
Bathsheba had probably weakened David's moral 
and religious hold upon the people : and as he 
grew older he may have become less attentive 
to individual complaints and to that personal 
administration of justice which was one of an 
Eastern king's chief duties. For Absalom tried 
to supplant his father by courting popularity, 
standing in the "gate" (or place of justice), 
conversing with every suitor, lamenting the 
difficulty which he would find in getting a 
hearing, "putting forth his hand and kissing 
any man who came nigh to do him obeisance " 
(2 Sam. XV. 5). He also maintained a splendid 
retinue (2 Sam. xv. 1), and was admired for 
his personal beauty and the luxuriant growth 
of his hair, on grounds similar to those which 
had made Saul acceptable (1 Sam. x. 23). It 
is also probable that the great tribe of Judah 
had taken some offence at David's government, 
perhaps from finding themselves completely 
merged in one united Israel; and that they 
hoped secretly for pre-eminence under the less 
wise and liberal rule of his son. Thus Absalom 
selected Hebron, the old capital of Judah (then 
supplanted by Jerusalem), as the scene of 
the outbreak ; Amasa, his chief captain, and 
Ahitophel of Giloh, his principal counsellor, 
were both of Judah, and after the rebellion was 
crashed we see signs of ill-feeling between Judah 
and the other tribes (2 Sam. xix. 41). But 
whatever the causes may have been, Absalom 
raised the standard of revolt at Hebron after 
fort;/ years, as we read in 2 Sam. xv. 7, but 
which it seems better to consider a false 
reading (cp. Hervey, Speaker't Com., in loco: 
Kleinert in Riehm's HWB. s. n. "Absalom") 

C 3 

Digitized by 




for /our (the number actually giren by 
Josephus, Lucian's Recension, and accepted by 
nearly all modem critics — Ewald, Keil, Kirk- 
patrick, VYellhansen), than to interpret of the 
fortieth year of Dayid's reign. The revolt was 
at first completely successful : David fled from 
bis cajiital over the Jordan to Hahanaim in 
Gilead, where Jacob had seen the " two Hosts " 
of the Angelic vision, and where Abner had 
rallied the Israelites round Saul's dynasty in 
the person of the unfortunate Ishbosheth. Ab- 
salom occupied Jerusalem, and by the advice 
of Ahitophel, who saw that for such an un- 
natural rebellion war to the knife was the best 
security, took possession of David's harem, in 
which bad been \e{t ten concubines. This was 
considered to imply a formal assumption of all 
his father's royal rights (cp. the conduct of 
Adonijah, 1 K. ii. 13 S., and of Smerdis the 
Magian, Herod, iii. 68), and was also a fulfil- 
ment of Nathan's prophecy (2 Sam. xii. 11). 
But David had left friends who watched over 
his interests. The vigorous counsels of Ahito- 
phel were afterwards rejected through the 
crafty advice of Hushai, who insinuated himself 
into Absalom's confidence to work his ruin ; and 
Ahitophel himself, seeing his ambitious hopes 
frustrated, and another preferred by the man 
for whose sake he had turned traitor, went 
home to Giloh and committed suicide. At fast 
Absalom, after being solemnly anointed king at 
Jerusalem (xii. 10), .inJ lingering there far 
longer than was expedient, crossed the Jordan to 
attack his father, who by this time had rallied 
round him a considerable force ; whereas, had 
Ahitophel's advice been followed, he would pro- 
bably have been crushed at once. A decisive 
battle was fought in Gilead, in the wood of 
Epbraim (Lucian's Recension is unsupported 
in its reading, " of Hahanaim : " EpuRiLiM) ; 
*o called, according to Gerlach (^Comm. in loco), 
from the great defeat of the Ephraimites (Judg. 
xii. 4), or perhaps from the connexion of Ephraim 
with the trans-Jordanic half-tribe of Manasseh 
(Stanley, S. and P., p. 323). Here Absalom's 
forces were totally defeated; and as he himself 
was escaping, his long hair was entangled in the 
branches of a terebinth, where he was left hanging 
while the mule on which he was riding ran away 
from under him. Here he was despatched by Joab 
in spite of the prohibition of David, who, loving 
him to the last, had desired that his life might 
be spared ; and who, when he heard of his death, 
lamented over him in the pathetic words, my 
son Absalom! would Ood I had died for thee! 
Absalom, my ton, my ton ! (2 Sam. xviii. 33). 
He was buried in a great pit in the forest, and 
the conquerors threw stones over his grave, in 
proof of bitter hostility (cp. .losh. vii. 26. The 
practice is still continuwl ; see Thomson's T%e 
Land and the Book, ii. 234). The sacred his- 
torian contrasts this dishonoured burial with the 
tomb which Absalom had raised in the Kino's 
diik (cp. Gen. xiv. 17) for the three sons whom 
he had lost (cp. 2 Sam. xviii. 18 with xiv. 27), 
and where be probably had intended that his 
own remains should be laid. Josephus (Ant. 
vii. 10, § 3) mentions the pillar of Absalom as 
situate 2 stadia from Jerusalem. An existing 
monument in the valley of Jehoshaphat just 
outside Jerusalem bears the name of the Tomb 
of Abtalom ; but the Ionic pillars which sur- 


ronnd its base show that, if a tomb at all, it be< 
longs to a much later period. [G. £. L. C] [F.^ 

The KM:ftUeil Tomb of AbMlon. 

AB'SALOM (T.» 'A/9«<r<r<JA«.^oi, A. 'K^itM- 
iu>x [and M in 1 Hacc. xiii. 11]; Absalom), the 
father of Mattathias (1 Mace. xi. 70 ; B. ^oA^iw- 
SJ)s) and Jonathan (1 Hacc. xiii. 11). [B. F. W.] 

AB'SALON CAiB«r<ra;u2M: Abesalom), an 
ambassador with John from the Jews to Lysias, 
chief governor of Coele-Syria and Phoenicia 
(2 Hacc. xi. 17). [W. A. W.] 

ABU'BUS OA/SoviSifs; Abobus), father of 
Ptolemaeus, the captain of the plain of Jericho, 
and son-in-law to Simon Haccabaeus (1 Mace, 
xvi. 11, 15). [W. A. W.] 

ABYSS. The word is absent from the A. V., 
but is of frequent occurrence in the R. V. as a 
translation of 4 Hfivirvos : and the use of this 
Greek word, as a substantive, in the sense of the 
unfathomable depth (&, 0u6is'), is confined to 
Biblical and Ecclesiastical Greek. The LXX. 
use ifivvtros (see Trommius, Concord, a. n.) to 
denote three Hebrew words : (a) DiriFi in the 
Pentateuch, poetical, and historical Books ; (6) 
n^Vt? in Job xii. 23 (A. V. and R. V. v. 32, 
« the deep "), and H^S in Is. iliv. 27 (A. V. 
and R. V. "the deep"); (c) an"! in Job xiivi. 
16 (A. V. and R. V. " a broad place "). In the 
N. T. the word is contrasted with heaven, as i\ 
synonym with Hades, the abode of the dead 
(Rom. X. 7), and with special application to the 
place of woe and of the devils {e.g. Luke viii. 
31 ; Rev. xvii. 8, xx. 3). Cremer points out 
that the application of the term to Hades be- 
comes less frequent in Ecclesiastical Greek (Bihl.- 
theol. Wdrterb. d. NTlichcn GrScitat, s. n.). [F.] 

AC'ATAN ('AKOTily; Eccetan). See Hak- 
KATAN (1 Esd. viii. 38). [W. A. W.j 

AC'CAD C1?S ; 'ApxiS; Archad; Babylonian 

*- ^ y *~]^t »^' "' -^-iH "the city of 
Akkad "), one of the chief cities of the land of 

Digitized by 



Sbiiiir, mentioned (Gen. x. 10) with Babel, 
£rwh, and Calneh, aa being the beginning of 
Ximrod's liingdom. Thia city, which a supposed 
to be the same aa the Agade (an earlier form) of 
tie inscriptiona, lay near Sepharraim (Sippara, 
DOW Abo-babbiUiX 1^ >»i'<» west of Baghdad, 
aui waa probably the capital of the land of 

Aikad ( ^ ^^y ^^^ . mit AUadCj, nearly 

alwayi mentioned with Somer or Shinar. These 
two important nations, the pioneers of early oiri- 
iisstion, snppoaed to be of Turanian race, peopled 
a great part of Ueaopotamia before the Semitic 
Babylonian and Assyrian supremacy. They 
spoke an agglutinative language, which seems 
to lure died out aboqt 1200 B.O., giving place 
to Semitic Babylonian, tbongh Akicadian and 
Somerian were lued as sacred or literary tongues 
to a very late date. The boundaries of the 
conotrr are unknown, but it probably lay \x- 
tween lat. 32" and 35", and long. 44" and 46". 
The native uame of the country was Uri, 
and the Assyrian and Babylonian kings gene- 
rally called themselves " king of Snmer and 
Akkad " (Aaayr. or Bab., iatr Sumiri u AJiiadi; 
Akkadian, Lugal Kmgi -Vn(ki).) The group 

^ ^=J<^p ^T^f was also used to designate 

the Und of Armenia (Assyr. or Bab., Vr(A or 
Crarfu (Ararat); Akkad., Jiffa). The close 
<onnexion between the Semitic and Akkadian 
inhabitanta of Mesopotamia is shown by the fact, 
that even in the earliest times the kings bore 
both an A kk adia n and a Semitic name, the one 
being a translation of the other. The Akkadians 
probably merged into the Babylonians about 
1500 RC. [Babylomia.] [T. G. p.] 

ACCABON. mrooN.] Accaron is the 
form nsed by Saewolf for Acre (,E. T. 48). [W.] 

AC'CHO (ySB, Get. derives the name from 
(he Arabic, hot tand, a sense not contradictad by 
snbaeqnent dtmatal or topographical changes; 
'Ajix«, 'tuni, Strabo; Aocko; R. V. Acco ; the 
Ptolehais of the Ifaccabees and N. T.), now 
called 'AUia, or more nsnally by Europeans, Saint 
Jean fAert, an important seaport town on the 
Syrian coast, about 30 miles S. of Tyre. 'Akka 
u situated at the northern extremity of the Bay 
<^ .^cre, which terminates southwards in the bold 
bioff of Carmel, and is the only inlet of import- 
«>ee on the Syrian coast south of St. George's 
Bay near BeinU. Inland the hills, which from 
Tyre southwards press closely npon the seashore, 
l^radndly recede, leaving in the immediate 
ceighbonrhood of 'Akka a fertile plain, watered 
fcy the small river iVaAr Ifamein (Belns), which 
discharges itself into the sea a short distance 
aoBth of the town. Its military importance, 
«hich has led to its being called " the key of 
Palestine," is due to its position, which enables 
the Power that holds it to close the coast road 
fnm Syria to Egypt, and to operate, from a con- 
veaient base, against any hostile force attempt- 
iag to cross the plain of Esdraelon ; it also has 
lear at hand, at Haifa, a safe anchorage for 
tliipping, and its own harbour was sufficient to 
sfforid protection to the galleys and vessels used 
ia the Middle Age*. The town itself is trian- 
gular in form, the base facing the north and the 
ajcx the south ; it is snrronnded on the land 



side by double ramparts, flanked by towers and 
bastions ; and there are remains of an outer and 
inner port. Few traces of the old town are to 
be found ; the original name has alone survived 
all the changes to which the place has been 

In the division of Canaan among the tribes 
Accho was assigned to Asher, but it was never 
conquered by the Israelites (Judg. i. 31). No 
further mention is made of it in 0. T. history, 
and it is always reckoned among the cities of 
Phoenicia (Strab. xvi. 2, § 25 ; Plin. v. 17 ; 
Ptol. V. 15). It is described by Josephus as a 
maritime city of Galilee, situated in the great 
plain (£. J. ii. 10, § 2). When Shalmaneser IV. 
advanced against Tyre, which had revolted 
against him, Accho, with Sidon, Palaetyrna, and 
other cities joined the Assyrians and assisted 
them with vessels and men {Ant. ix. 14, § 2). 
It afterwarda revolted, bat was recaptured by 
Sennacherib, and a little later was ceded by 
£tarbaddon to the king of Tyre, in return for 
service* which that monarch had rendered to 
the Assyrians. It passed into the hands of the 
Babylonians, and afterwards into those of the 
Persians, who used it as a place of assembly for 
their troops daring their expedition* against 
Egypt (Strab. xvi. 2, § 25). According to the 
first distribution of Alexander's kingdom, it wa* 
assigned, with Phoenicia and Syria, to Ptolemy 
Soter, from whom it probably derived its name 
Ptolemais. During the wars between Syria and 
Egypt it several times changed hands ; and it* 
importance, as commanding the road down the 
Syrian coast, probably dates from this period. 
In 218 B.C. it was surrendered to Antiochus the 
Great by the treachery of Philopator's lieu- 
tenant, but was recovered by the Egyptians in 
the following year, and remained in their bands 
until it was finally incorporated in the kingdom 
of Antiochus. In the reign of Antiochus Epi- 
phanes, Simon Haccabaeus defeated a confedera- 
tion of the people of Ptolemais, Tyre, and Sidon, 
and drove his enemies back within the walls of 
Ptolemais, but did not take the city (1 Mace 
V. 22; Ant. xii. 8, § 2). It was teken by 
Alexander Bala* (ilnt. xiii. 2, § 1), who wa* 
married within it* walls to Cleopatra, danghter 
of Ptolemy Philometor (^n(. xiii. 4, §§ 1, 2). It 
afterwards came into the possession of Demetriu* 
Nicator, who gave it, with its lands, to Jonathan 
for the expenses of the Temple at Jerusalem (1 
Mace X. 39); when, however, Jonathan went, 
at the invitation of Tryphon, to take possession 
of the city, he was treacherously seized and his 
escort pnt to death {ArU. xiii. 6, § 2). Ptolemais 
was besieged by Alexander Jannaeus, but the 
siege was raised on the approach of Ptolemy 
Lathyrus, who had landed from Cyprus with a 
large force to assist the besieged. The people 
having refused to admit Ptolemy, he, on his 
arrival, took the place by force (Ant. xiii. 12, 
§§ 2-6) ; but it was afterwards captured by Cleo- 
patra, whom Alexander Jannaeus had summoned 
to his assistance (Ant. xiii. 13, §§ 1, 2). It was 
transferred by Cleopatra with her daughter 
Cleopatra (Selene) to the Syrian monarchy, and 
it was under her rule when attacked and taken 
by Tigranes during his expedition against Syria 
(Ant. xiii. 16, § 4 ; B. J. i. 5, § 3). It opened 
it* gates to the Parthians under Pacorus, who 
was advancing along the coast to the assistance 

Digitized by 





of Antigonus (^n*. lir. 13, § 3 ; S. J. i. 13, § 1), 
and ultimately passed into the bands of tlie 
Romans, who raised it to the rank of a colony 
under the title of Colonia Claudii Caesaris 
Ptolemais (Plin. t. 19, § 19). The only notice 
of it in the N. T. is in connexion with St. Paul's 
passnge from Tyre to Caesarea (Acts xxi. 7). 
Herod bnilt a gymnasium there (5. J. i. 21, 
§ 11), but of this no trace has been found. 

The post-biblical history of Accho will be found 
in P. F. Mem. i. 160-167, and Guirin, Galilee, 
i. 510-525. Accho is perhaps alluded to in 
Ocina (Jud. ii. 28); its mediaeval names were 
Accaron and Aeon ; and the last name snrvires, 
where one would little expect it, in Lombard- 
street, where the church of St. Nicholas Aeons 
is the successor of the 
church of St. Thomas of 
Aeon, or Acres Hospital, 
founded by a member of 
the order of Augustine 
it rf^^'^^^^fli monies after the capture 
•-' ' -J^J^^*'*^' of Acre, under the pa- 
tronage of St. Thomas 
of Canterbury. Coins of 
Acre exist in which the 
(MnoTAixlio. city is represented as a 

fi;;ure on a rock sur- 
rounded by the sea. In the right hand she benrs 
three ears of corn; at her feet is the image of 
a river with open hands. [W.] 

AC'COS CAk»<4i ; A. 'KKxit ; Jacob\ father 
of John and grandfather of Eupolemus, the 
ambassador from Judas Maccabaeus to Rome 
(1 Mace. viii. 17). [W. A. W.] 

ACCOZ. [Koz.] 

ACELDAMA Q\Kt\iani. ; Lachmann and 
Tischendorf [KB.], 'AKfXJo/iix ; Saceldama; 
K. V. Aieldama ; xttpioy al/uirot, " the field of 

blood ;" Chald. KD"'! ?i?n), the name given by 

the Jews of Jerusalem to a "field" (xaalov) near 
Jerusalem purchased by Judas with the money 
which he received for the betrayal of Christ, and 
so cnlled from his violent death therein(Acts i. 19). 
This is, apparently, at variance with the account 
of St. Matthew (xxvii. 8), according to which 
the " field of blood " (ieffihs atitaros) was pur- 
chased by the priests with the thirty pieces of 
silver after they had been cast down by Judas, 
as a burial-place for strangers, the locality 
being well known at the time as '* the field of 
the potter"* (rhy iyphy rod Ktpa)i4us). See 
Alford's notes to Acts i. 19. And accordingly 
ecclesiastical tradition appears, from 600 A.D., 
to have pointed out two distinct (though not 
unvarying) spots as referred to in the two 

Bp. Jacobson {Speaker'$ Comm., note on Acts 
i. 19) has pointed out that the variance is ima- 
ginary. The money received by Judas as the 
" reward of iniquity " was invested by others. A 
similar use of language is to be noted when the 
Jews (and not the Romans) are said to have 

• The prophecy referred to by St. Matthew, Zecbariah 
(not Jeremiah) xl. 12, 13, does not In tbe present state 
of tbe Hebrew text agree with tbe qaotation of the 
Kvangellst. Tbe Syriac Verrion omits tbe name alto- 
gether. See ^xaktr's Omm. on Halt, xzvli. 9, addi- 
tional note. 

crucified Jesus Christ (Acts r. 30), Joseph of 
Arimathaea to have hewn out the new tomb, 
and Sanl to have offered sacrifice (1 Sam. ziii. 9). 

Aceldama, now called Hakk ed-Dumm, is 
shown at the east end of a broad terrace on the 
southern slope of the modern valley of Hinnoni, 
not far from the pool of Siloam ; and the name 
is more p.irticularly applied to a large vaulted 
chamber built against the thick bed (mah/ii) of 
limestone in which most of the large tombs on 
the right bank of the ravine have been exca- 
vated. The chamber is deep, and its floor is 
covered by a thick bed of bones and soil ; in the 
face of the rock, within the building, there are 
two sepulchral chambers, with "loculi," and 
traces of the steps which led down to them are 
still visible. Against the face of the rock arc 
buttresses of nia.sonry which formed part of an 
earlier building than the existing one (see 0. S. 
planof Jerusalem, notes, and photo.). The cham- 
ber is probably the same as that described by 
Maundrell as "a square fabric twelve yards 
high, built for a charnel-house ; " the corpses 
were let down into it from tbe top, and appa- 
rently left uncovered. 

The tradition which fixes Aceldama npon this 
spot reaches back to the time of Jerome, who 
describes it as being "ad australem^ plagam 
mentis Sion;" and it is mentioned by Anto- 
ninus Martyr, Arculfus, Sacwulf, and almost 
every traveller to the present day. Arculfus 
distinguishes between Aceldama, then a small 
field covered with a heap of stones, and the 
spot, apparently, as at pre-sent, on the Hill of 
Kvil Counsel, where Judas hanged himself on a 
fig-tree,' The latter site was afterwards trans- 
ferred to the vicinity of Absalom's pillar in the 
Kedron valley, where Sir J. Maundeville found 
the "elder tree "of Judas, and Maundrell was 
shown "anotl)fr Aceldama." In La Cittt de 
Jherusalem (p. 16) a stone arch, which gave its 
name to a street within the city, is identified 
with the place of the suicide of Judas. At a 
later period the site was re-transferred to the 
Hill of Evil Counsel, where, according to tradi- 
tion, stood the country-house of Caiaphas in 
which Judas made his bargain. In the 12th and 
also in the 14th centuries, Aceldama belonged 
to the Latins, and there was a small cbnrch 
there ; but in the 17th century it was in the 
hands of the Armenians, who sold the right of 
interment at a high price. " Aceldama " was 
the name popularly given to the estate pur- 
chased by the infamous Judge Jefiries with the 
money extorted by him during the "bloody 
assize " (Mncaulay). 

It was believed in the Middle Ages that the 
soil of this place had the power of very rapidly 
consuming bodies buried in it (Sandys, p. 187), 
and, in consequence cither of this or of the 
sanctity of the spot, great quantities of the earth 
were taken away ; amongst others by the Pisan 
Crusaders in a.d. 1218 for their Campo Scmto 
at Pisa, and by the Empress Helena for that at 

■> Euscblns, from whom Jerome translated, bas here 
if popttotf. This may be a clerical error, or It may 
add another to the many Instaoces existing of the 
change of A traditional site to meet circamstances. 

Antoninus Martyr however siys, '* De Oethsemane 
fl.^cendimns ad portam Hlrrosolymae per gradus mnltos. 
In dextera parte portae est oUvctnm et flcnlnea. In qoa 
Judas laqueo se snspendlt " (ili'n. xvIL). 

Digitized by 



Komc (Rob. i. 355 ; Baumer, p. 270). Besides the 
cii>rDeI-hoa5e above meDtioned, there are several 
large hollows in the gronnd in thia immediate 
aeighbonrhood which may have been caused by 
(uch eicavationa. KtuSI states (Tbp. Jer. 193) 
that he saw people digginf; clay at Aceldama. 
SchaltJ (Jer. 39) and Porter {Oiant Cities, 147) 
speak of a bed of clay at that place. Clay is 
still obtained from the hill above the valley of 
Hinnom. [G.] [W.] 

ACHA'IA CAX"*") signifies in the N. T. a 
Ronixn province, which included the whole of 
the Peloponnesos and the greater part of Hellas 
proper with the adjacent islands. This province 
with that of Macedonia comprehended the whole 
of Greece : hence Achaia and Macedonia are fre- 
qnently mentioned together in the K. T. to 
nidicate all Greece (Acts xviii. 12, xii. 21 ; 
Eom. IV. 26, svi. 5 [where Asia is the correct 
reading]; 1 Cor. xvi. 15; 2 Cor. ii. 1, ii. 
2, li. 10 ; 1 Thess. i. 7, 8). A narrow slip of 
oountry upon the northern coast of Pelopon- 
nHss was originally called Achaia, the cities of 
which were confederated in an ancient League, 
which was renewed in B.C. 280 for the purpose 
of resisting the Macedonians. This League sub- 
seqoently included several of the other Grecian 
states, ukd became the most powerful political 
My in Greece'; and hence it was natural for 
the Romans to apply the name of Achaia to the 
Peloponnesus and the sonth of Greece, when 
they took Corinth and destroyed the League in 
B.C. 146. {iia\ovcri 8e oIi'k 'ZWiSos 4\X' 
'Axolat irrt^va ot 'Puiuuoi, ttSrri ix"?^*^""^' 
*EA\ip>as Si* 'Axwi" T^re roS 'EWitruioS 
rposonfmSrwr, Paus. vii. 16, §10.) Whether the 
Roman province of Achaia was established im- 
mediately after the conquest of the League, or 
not till a later period, need not be discussed 
here (see Diet, of Geogr. i. p. 17). In the 
division of the provinces by Augustus between 
the emperor and the senate in B.a 27, Achaia 
was one of the provinces assigned to the senate, 
and was governed by a proconsul (Strab. xvii. 
p. 840; Dio Caas. liii. 12). Tiberius in the 
SKond year of hia reign (a.d. 16) took it away 
from the senate, and made it an imperial pro- 
vince governed by a procurator (Tac. Ann. i. 
76); bnt Claudius restored it to the senate 
(Suet. Claud. 25). This was its condition 
when Paul was brought before Gallio, who 
is therefore (Acts rviii. 12) correctly called 
(R. V.) the "proconsul" (is-tf^orot) of 
Achaia, which is translated in the A. V. " de- 
puty " of Achaia. [J. S. H.] [W.] 

ACHA1CXJ8 Cf^xo^i' ; Achaiau), name of 
a member of the Oiristian household of Stepha- 
nas (1 Cor. iTi. 17). [G.] 

A'CHAN (J3», written n3» [Achab] in 
1 Ch. ii. 7 ; B. '^x<h, A. 'Axiv in Josh. ; ^cAan ; 
BA. 'Axif in Chron. ; Achar), the son of Carmi, 
u Israelite of the tribe of jndab, who, when 
Jericho and all that it contained were accursed 
and devoted to destruction (Josh. vi. 17-19), 
Mcreted a portion of the spoil in his tent (Josh, 
vii. 1-21). For this sin Jehovah punished 
Israel by their defeat in their attack upon Ai. 
Wben Achan confessed his guilt, and the booty 
«>s discovered, he was stoned to death with his 
whole family by the people in a valley situated 



between Ai and Jericho, and their remains, 
together with his property, were bnmt (Josh, 
vii. 24, 25). From this event the valley received 
the name of Achor (i.e. trouble) f Achob]. From 
the similarity of the name Achan to Achar, 
Joshua said to Achan, " Why hast thou troubled 
us («n-13»)? the Lord shall trouble thee (^IS^) 
this day " (ifosh. vii. 25). In order to account tor 
the terrible punishment executed upon the family 
of Achan, it is quite unnecessary to resort to the 
hypothesis that they were his accomplices in an 
act of military insubordination. The sangui- 
nary severity of Oriental nations, from which 
the Jewish people were by no means free, has in 
all ages involved the children in the punishment 
of the father ; but, independently of such con- 
siderations, according to the Jewish apprehen- 
sion of the second commandment, the sins of the 
father were visited ^upon the children by a dis- 
tinctly judicial medium. Achan was guilty of a 
distinct breach of the covenant made by God 
with His people, and his family were treated as 
guilty of the father's sin (Josh. vii. 15 ; xxii. 20) 
They were punished upon the ground of being 
implicated in his sin (cp. Mozley's Lectures on 
the Old Testament, pp. 115, 116). This is also 
the view taken by the Talmud, which is prompt 
to recognise that Achan's confession of his sin 
(Josh. vii. 20) was accepted : ' He was punished 
in this life (" The Lord shall trouble thee this 
day," Josh. vii. 25); but he has part in the life 
to come ' (Midr. Wafikra Sabba, § 9 [on Lev. vii. 
11]. Hamburger, SE.' e. n. "Achan ; " Wiinsche, 
BiU. Sabb. Lief. 22, p. 54). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

ACHAB (see Achan), a variation of the 
name Achan, which seems to have arisen from 
the play upon it in 1 Ch. ii. 7 : " Achar, the 
troubler (13^1/) of Israel, who committed a tres- 
pass in the devoted thing " (R. V.). [W. A. W.] 

A'CHAZ CAx«f ; .Achaz). Ahaz, king of 
Judah (Matt. i. 9). [W. A. W.] 

ACH'BOB (liasr, a mouse; BA. [usually] 
'Axofi^p ; Achobor)'. 1, Father of Baal-hanan, 
king of Edom (Gen. xxxvi. 38, D. Xofiiip; 1 Ch. 
i. 49). 2. Son of Micaiah, n contemporary of 
Josiah (2 K. xxii. 12, 14; Jer. xxvi. 22 [LXX.= 
.Txxiii. omits], xxxvi. 12), called Abdon [No. 4] 
in 2 Ch. xxxiv. 20. [A. C. H.] [F.] 

ACHIACH'ABUS (Heb. and Chald. [ed. 
Ncubauer] n|3'i?K ; "Ax'iX'P"' **• 'Ax«'x«pos, 
R.' 'Ax'tixV' > i*"'** ■Achioharus. On the fanci- 
ful reproduction of this name as =]nriK *nK, 
see ^mAer's Comm. on Tobit, add. note' to i. 2i- 
The supposition that the name = jiintt 'PIK — 
Postremos is not less fanciful), the chief minister, 
"cupbearer, and keeper of the signet, and 
steward, and overseer of the acconnts " at the 
court of Sarchedonus or Esarhaddon, king of 
Nineveh, in the Apocryphal story of Tobit (Tob. 
i. 21, 22; ii. 10; xiv. 10). He was nephew to 
Tobit, being the son of his brother Anael, and 
supported him in his blindness till he left Nine- 
veh. From the occurrence of the name of Aman 
in xiv. 10, it has been conjectured that Achia- 
charus is but the Jewish name for Mordecai, 
whose history suggested some points which the 
author of the Book of Tobit worked up into his 

Digitized by 




narratire; bat there is no reason to have re- 
course to such a supposition, as the discrepan- 
cies are much more strongly marked than the 
resemblances (see Speaker's Comm, note on Tob. 
liv. 10). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ACHI'AS C^chias), son of Phinees; high- 
priest and progenitor of Esdras (2 Esd. i. 2), 
but omitted both in the genealogies of Ezra and 
1 Esdras : perhaps confounded with Ahijah, the 
son of Ahitub and grandson of Eli. [W. A. W.] 

A'CHIM CAx«fM; -Achim, Matt. i. 14% son 
of Sadoc, and father of Blind, in onr Lord's 
genealogy ; the fifth in succession before Joseph 
the husband of Mary. The Hebrew form of the 
name would be yy, Jachin (Gen. xlvL 10, A. 
'lax*ilh A.*"" "Axetft D. '\axtl», Jachin; 
1 Ch. xxiv. 17, A. 'Iax«(vi B. Tofioik, Jacliin). 
It is a short form of Jehoiachin, the Lord mil 
establish. The name, perhaps, indicates him as 
successor to Jehoiachin's throne, and expresses 
his parents' faith that God would, in due time, 
establish the kingdom of David, according to 
the promise in Is. ix. 7 (r. 6 Heb.) and else- 
where. [A. C. H.] [P.] 

ACHI'OE CAXx^P. •■<'• T^K*riK, tt«irott«r of 
light [comp. nin'nt<,Num. xxxjv. 27]; Achior; 

confounded with 'Ax«'x<vx"> 1'o'>- ^'- 1^? Gk.), 
a general of the Ammonites in the army of 
Holofernes, who is afterwards represented as 
becoming a proselyte to Judaism (Judith t. vii. 
xiii. xiv.). [B. F. W.] 

A'CHISH (B^3N; 'Ayxois; Achis),ti PhiUs- 
tine king at Gath, son of Maoch (1 Sam. xxrii. 2), 
called in the 34th Psalm (title) Abimelech 
[No. 1], possibly the dynastic name of the 
Philistine kings (cp. Gen. xz. 2), Achish being 
his personal name. David twice found a refuge 
with him when he fled from Saul. On the first 
occasion, being recognised by the servants of 
Achish as one celebrated for his victories over 
the Philistines, he was alarmed for his safety, 
and feigned madness (1 Sam. xxi. 10-1.3). 
[David.] From Achish he fled to the cave of 
AduUam. 2ndly, David fled to Achish with 600 
men (1 Sam. xxrii. 2), and remained at Gath a 
year and four months. 

Whether the Achish, to whom Shimei went 
in disobedience to the commands of Solomon 
(1 K. ii. 39, 40), be the same person is uncer- 
tain. Riehm {HWB. a. n.) thinks that he 
was. [K. W. B.] [F.] 

ACHITOB Ckxnifi, B. 'Ax«-; Achitob). 
Ahitub, the high-priest in the genealogy of 
Esdras (1 Esd. \\u. [ Vvlg. vii.] 2 ; 2 Esd. i. 1). 

[W. A. W.] 

ACH'METHA. [Ecbataxa.] 

A'OHOK, VALLEY OF (yOO plj}?; 
^ifayi 'Ax^p ; 'EiuKax^p ; Hos. Koikia 'Axtip ; 
vallis Achor) = " valley of trouble," according 
to the etymology of the text ; the spot at which 
Achan, "the troubler of Israel," was stoned 
(Josh. vii. 24, 26). On the N. boundary of 
Judah (xv. 7 ; also Isa. Ixv. 10 ; Hos. ii. 15, 
who alludes to the meaning of the name rather 
than to the place). Jerome (OS' pp. 125, 31, 
151. 14) describes it as north of Jericho ; but this 


is at variance with the coune of the boundary 
in Joshna (Keil's Joshua, 131). It is now the 
Wddy Kelt, which runs into the Jordan valley 
to the south of Old Jericho and north of Roman 
Jericho. [G.] [W.] 

ACH'SA (naOV; B. 'Atrxd, A. 'Axai; 
Achsa), daughter of Caleb, or Chelubai, the 
son of Hezron (1 Ch. ii. 49). [Caleb.] In the 
R. V. the name is more correctly given at 
ACHSAH. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ACH'SAH (noar, Gea. ankkt ; 'Aax^; 
Axa), daughter of daleb, the son of Jephunneh, 
the Kenezite. Her father promised her in mar- 
riage to whoever should take Debir, the ancient 
name of which (according to the analogy of 
Kisjath-Arba, the ancient name of Hebron) 
was Kibjath-Sepbeb (or, as in Josh. xv. 49, 
Kibjatu-Sanna), the city of the book. Othniel, 
her father's younger brother, took the city, and 
accordingly received the hand of Achsah as his 
reward. Caleb, at his daughter's request, added 
to her dowry the upper and lower springs, which 
she had pleaded for as peculiarly suitable to her 
inheritance in a south country (Josh. xv. 15—19. 
See Stanley's S. and P. p. 161). [GuLLOTH.j 
The story is given in Judg. i. 11-15. Achsah 
is mentioned again, as being the daughter of 
Caleb, in 1 Ch. ii. 49, which in the A. v. is in- 
correctly given as Achsa. [Achsa.] But there 
is much confnsion in the genealogy of Caleb 
there given. [Caleb.] [A. C. H.] 

ACH'SHAPH {^M, Ges. enchantment ; 
Achsaph [Josh. xi. xii.], Axaph [Josh, xix.]), 
a city within the territory of Asher, named 
between Beten and Alammclech (Josh. xix. 25) ; 
originally the seat of a Canoanite king (Josh, 
xi. 1, xii. 20 [B., in both places, 'A{f((p, but 
in xix. 25 K«i^; A. in xi. 1 'Ax<^ (F- 'Ax<<3)i 
in xii. 20 *Ax<r<t^]). It is not yet identified. 
The modern Kefr Tdsif, a small village, with 
an ancient well, north-east of Acre (P. F. Stem. 
i. 146, 153), does not suit (Dillmann on Josh. xi. 
1). Others have suggested Haifa, a town which, 
from its situation, must always have been too 
important to have escaped mention in the history, 
as it otherwise would have done. The identi- 
fication with either Yasif at Haifa is, however, 
philologically most questionable. [G.] [W.] 

ACH'ZIB (y\M= falsehood; in Josh. /. c. 
B. T/if(fi$; A. omits; Achzib). 1. A city of Judah, 
in the Shefelah, named with Keilah and Mare- 
shah (Josh. XV. 44; Mic. i. 14). The latter 
passage contains a play on the name : " the 
houses of Achzib (3M3K) shall be a lie " (3t3K • 
LXX. (IS Ktyhr iyivorro ; Vulg. domus mendacii 
in deceptionemi). It is probably the same with 
Cbezib and Chozeba, which see. The name 
may perhaps be retained in 'Ain Kezbeh, at 
Beit Nettlf, 2i miles from 'AH el-Ma (Adullam). 

2. In Josh. /. c. B. "ExofciiS ; A. 'Axfti^ [A.» 
'A(ti^, A.' superscr. x] • Achtiba: in Judg. I. c, 
B. 'AirxaC*i > A. 'Ao-xcfScf ; Achaeib. A town 
belonging to Asher (Josh. xix. 29), from which 
the Canaanites were not expelled (Judg. i. 31) ; 
afterwards Ecdippa (Jos. B. J. i. 13, §4,*EkS(«-- 
vuy). Josephus also (_Ant. v. 1, § 22) gives the 
name as 'Apit^ . . . ^ koI 'Aiernois. In /tin. 
Bierosolym, Eodippa is placed 8 Roman miles from 

Digitized by 



FtoleoMu, on the road to Ty^re; by Jerome (OS.* 
f. 134, 13) 9 Koman miles. Here was the Ca»alt 
Btberti of the Cnuaders (Schuiz ; Ritter, Pal. 
p. 782) ; and it a now ez-Zih, on the sea-ehore at 
the month of Wady el-KOm ; a small Tillage on 
an irtiiicial monnd, with aoimportant mios (P. 
/. Mem. i. 148, 155, 193 ; and cp. Manndrell, 
p. 427). Achzib is mentioned in the Assyrian 
iaacriptions, ander the form Akzibi, as one of 
the towns dependent on Sidon, which were 
captnred by Sennacherib during his third cam- 
paign (Schrader, AVI 7.' p. 170). Afler the return 
trom Babylon it was considered by the Jews as 
thg northernmost limit of the Holy Land; it 
possessed a synagogue and was fortified. See 
(he qootationi from the Oemara in Reland 
(p. 544). [a] [W.] 

ACITHA (B. 'Axt>0i ; A. 'Axi^ ; AgittaX 
Haknpha (1 E«L r. 31). [W. A. W.] [F-] 

ACrraO CT.' omiU] A. 'KkMv, probably 
an error for 'Ax<rAp, the reading of M ; AcMtob, 
i.e. a<B'rB(, brother of goodness), one of the 
ancestors of Judith (Judith viii. 1 ; see Spcaket's 
Coewi.). [B. F. W.] 

ACBABATTINE. [Abadattine ; Ak- 


— ^The title of this Book, as given in the oldest 
tathorities, is either " Acts " or " Acts of Apos- 
tles." The former (wfi^cu) appears at the com- 
mencement and in the headings of the pages in K ; 
tbe latter (yfiita iewoariKm) in B D (but with 
the itacism itfifys in D), and in the subscrip- 
tion of K. Accordingly the Book is quoted 
indiftrentlr br the early Fathers as " Acts," 
"The Acu'" (Orig. Op. i. p. 434, iv. pp. 6, 25 ; 
fomp. Eoaeb. H. E. vi. 25 ; TertuU. c. Jfarc. v. 
3, (fe Praetcr. 22, and elsewhere), or " Acts of 
Apostles," "The AcU of the Apostle*" (Iren. 
iii 13. 3; Clem. Alex. Strom, v. 12, p. 696: 
TertolL e. ifbrc r. 1, 2, and elsewhere ; Orig. 
(^. L p. 22, iL p. 538, &c). Longer titles, 
siuh as "Acts of the Holy Apostles " («fH<(«r 
Tar aylair JbroffT^Xw), found in the sabscription 
ofEG H, may be dismissed at once from onr 
touiileration. The anthor of the Mvratorian 
Cmn (c ^.D. 180 ?) refers to the Book as con- 
taining " acta omnium apoetolornm " (p. 18, 
•d. Trtgelles) ; but he does not give this defi- 
niltly as a title, and by inserting " omnium," 
«bich howerer is not a correct description, he 
tbriouly desires to distinguish it from apocry- 
I^ histories of indiridual Apostles, such as the 
"Acta Petri," &c Whether we should con- 
wlet the larger title a later eipansion of the 
siorter, or whether on the other hand " Acts " 
V an abridgement of " Acts of Apostles " for 
noTenieoce, may be a matter of question. On 
the whole, perhaps the latter yiew is the more 
probable ; since the long and short forms are 
itmi hi the same writers, and moreover, when- 
erer the title of the Book is distinctly recorded 
«s inch— for inatonce by Ensebins {H. E. iii. 25), 
ky Athanasjus (Op. ii. p. 767), by Chrysostom 
(Of. iii. p. 54), by Euthalius, and by Photius 
(*KfUl. Qn. 123)— the word iMa<n6XMy is 
aenr wanting. We gather also from the evi- 
nce, that in the original form the definite 
«rticl« were absent. Thus, for instance, Chry- 

•atom (in the passage just referred to), having 


distinctly given the title without the articles 
(to^i' Ix*' ▼V imypcup^y, npii*is iwo<rr6- 
Aatr), nevertheless in the same context writes, 
iri tSk vpdjf egy tuv dTotrrdAwv. This example 
shows that no stress can be laid on the fact 
that elsewhere the Book is quoted in early 
writers as " The Acts of the Apostles." In 
Wicliffe's Version, which was translated from 
the Vulgate, it is headed " Deeds of Apostles " ; 
but in the Authorised (1611) the heading is 
"The Actes of the Apostles," as also in the 
previous English Versions of the 16th century 
generally, which were made from the Greek. 
But, though it seems clear that the earlier 
title was "Acts of Apostles" (itpi^tis iiro- 
ariXmr) without the definite article, the value 
of the fact in its bearing on the contents is 
diminished by the consideration that in titles 
and headings the omission of the article was 
common in ancient times, as it is with ourselves. 
Thus in Matt. i. 1 the words are "Book of 
generation (or genealogy) of Jesus Christ" 
(B/j3Xoi yfy4trftn k. t. A.). Moreover, we have 
no ground for assuming that this title, whether 
wpotfir iwo<rri\wr or rpdfut simply, was given 
to the Book by the writer himself. In other 
cases in the N. T. we find indications that the 
earliest existing headings are somewhat later 
than the writings themselves (Lightfoot, Colos- 
sians, p. 16), The later word irpa{aTi!(rTa\at 
is not a title of this individual Book ; but, being 
compounded of irpd{<ir and iir6aroAos, desig- 
nates lectionaries which contained lessons from 
the Acts and Apostolic Epistles (Scrivener's 
Introduction, pp. 71, 279, 301). 

2. The Scope and Contents.— The Acts of the 
Apostles, like the Third Gospel, is addressed to 
one Theophilus. Was he an actual person, a 
disciple or friend of the writer? or have we 
here a fictitious name, a representative of the 
Christian reader generally ? The former is the 
view commonly taken by modem writers. He 
has been made a native of Antioch, of Alex- 
andria, of Rome, &c. by different critics, all 
without any shadow of authority which deserves 
consideration. If he were a real person, we 
might with greater probability place him at 
Philippi, for the writer of the Acts apparently 
had close relations with this place. Yet the other 
opinion is not to be hastily rejected ; for it is 
at least consonant with the literary character of 
St. Luke's two treatises, and more especially of 
the prefaces. This view is thrown out as a 
suggestion by Epiphanius {_Baer. li. 7, ttrovy 
riri Btofik^ firt ypd^r . . . f) royr! lai9pAitif 
9*hy iyawiyri). It seems also to be present to 
the mind of Origen, though he does not express 
himself very clearly (Horn, in Zuc. 1, Op. iii, 
p. 933, Delarue). So also St. Ambrose, " Scrip- 
turn est evangelium ad Theophilum, hoc est ad 
eum quem Deus diligit" (Exp. Evang. Luc. 
i. 12, Op. i. p. 1270, ed. Ben«l.). In modem 
times it has found some rather lukewarm sup- 
porters (e.g. Renan, L'J^lise ChrAienne, p. 256). 
As the Greek equivalent to the Hebrew Jedidiah, 
Theophilus is not uncommon as a Jewish name. 
Thus It is borne by the Jewish high-priest (a.d. 
37-41) the son of Annas (Jos. Ant. xviii. 5, § 3, 
xix. 6, § 2), who has been identified — an extremely 
improbable identification — with the person here 
addressed by St, Luke, Again, we find two per- 
sons so called in an inscription in a Jewish 

Digitized by 




cemetery at Home (Schiirer, Gemeindeverf. der 
Juden in Som, p. 39). It was a freqaent 
heathen name likewise (Pape, WSrttrb. Griech, 
Eigennamen, a. v. ; Fabric. Bibl. Qraec. vii. 
p. 106 SI]., ed. Harles ; comp. Tac ilnn. ii. 55). 
Naturally also it was common among the Chris- 
tian;, e.g. the apologist Tbeophilus, Bishop of 
Antioch (c. A.D. 160). A reminiscence of this 
later Tbeophilus, combined with the tradition 
that St. Luke himself was an Antiochene, may 
have given rise to the Clementine statement 
that Tbeophilus was a person of importance in 
Antioch {Jiecogn. x. 71, "Tbeophilus qui erat 
cunctis potentibns in ciritate sublimior "), 
who consecrated his boose as a basilica, where 
the chair of St. Peter was established. .In 
Apost. Const. tU. 46, a Tbeophilus is repre- 
sented as the third Bishop of Csesarea of Pales- 
tine, and appointed to the see by the Apostles 
themselves, bis predecessors being Zacchaeus 
and Cornelius. Probably our Tbeophilus is 
meant, as it is the practice of this writer tu 
find an episcopal see for every worthy whose 
name is mentioned in the N. T. In the Armenian 
Epistle of the Corinthians to St Paul (Aucher, 
Armen. Oramm. p. 177) one Tbeophilus is repre- 
sented as a joint writer of the letter. 

The adoption of the name Tbeophilus or 
Philotbeus, as a representative godly Christian, 
has parallels in both ancient and modern times. 
Thus the treatise of Hippolytus, de Antlchristo 
(pp. 1, 36, Lagarde), is addressed to bis " beloved 
brother Tbeophilus," evidently a fictitious name ; 
and in the Symposium of Methodius (ii. I, p. 14, 
.lahn) one of the divine maidens bears the name 
Theophila. So likewise Law's Atonement is a 
Dialogue betieeen EasiAiu) and Tbeophilus, and 
Wordsworth's treatise on the Church is desig- 
nated Theophiius Anglicanus ; while in Ken's 
Manual of Prayer for the Winchester scholars he 
addresses his reader as Philotbeus. 

If this view be correct, this second treatise 
is drawn up, like the first, for the instruc- 
tion of the godly reader who seeks in- 
formation respecting the foundation of the 
Church (here addressed under the imaginary 
name Theophiius). It is no abjection that he 
is designated KpiTurrot (Luke i. 3), a title 
given to those in high position (Acts xxiii. 26, 
zziv. 3, ixvi. 25) ; for there is no reason why 
the writer should not have wished to commend 
the faith of Christ to persons of this class. 

Its aim, purport, and contents are set forth in 
the preface (i. 1-8). The first treatise is there 
described as an account of "all things which 
Jesus began both to do and to teach (ffpfaro i 
'iTiaroSs TOKiK T« Kal SiSdffKfir), until the day 
on which, having given commandment through 
the Holy Ohost to the Apostles whom He had 
chosen. He was taken up (into heaven)." This 
language suggests (1) that, if the writer had 
given ony title to the work, he might well have 
styled it "Second Treatise" (Stircpos \6yos); 
and (2) that he regards it as strictly a con- 
tinuation of the first, for this is implied in 
iipieero, "began." But here a question arises. 
Is the " doer and teacher " the same person in 
the second part as in the first ? In other words, 
is Jesus Himself here regarded as continuing 
in the history of the Church the work which 
He began in His personal ministry? This is 
Baumgarten's view, and it has been followed by 


some later critics. In its favour are the facti, 
(a) that the form of the sentence suggests the 
same agent, and O) that our Lord is again and 
again represented as interposing in person in the 
course of the narrative. If so, the title Tpi^vi 
iTotrriKoy is misleading, and obscures the 
author's main conception. But this view is 
not altogether free from the charge of arti- 
ficiality. At all events we might expect that, 
if this had been the writer's leading idea, he 
would have emphasised it more plainly. It 
seems on the whole therefore more probable that 
the Apostles are repi-esented as continuing the 
work which Jesus inaugurated in person. If so, 
the common title of the Book is fairly adequate, 
and Photius (^Amphil. 123, p. 716, Migne) is 
right when he speaks of the Gospel as "com- 
prising the Acts of the Lord " (rit SamnuAt 
TfpUxouiTa T/id^cii). Similarly Irenaens (iii. 
15. 1) describes the second treatise as "seqnens 
testificatio ejus (Lucae), quam habet de 
avtibus et doctrina apostolorum," with an 
obvious reference to the "doing and teaching" 
of our Lord as contained in the first. In this 
case the ffptaro may be answered by ixpt {s 
ilUfpas K. T. A., i.e. " the whole history of the 
doings and teachings of Jesus from the begiitmg 
till the final day of the Ascension"; as it is 
taken by Chrysostom {Op. ix. p. 5, iv' ipxi^ 
fiixpf rdfious). This view also accords with 
the fact that special stress is laid on tiie 
selection of and charge to the Apostles, that 
their names are given again (thongh previously 
mentioned in the Gospel), and that the com- 
pletion of their number is recorded. Bengel, 
following Chrysos torn, describes the relation of 
the two treatises somewhat differently, "non 
tam Apostolorum quam Spiritus Sancti de- 
scribens, sicut prior liber Acta Jesu Cbriiti 
habet " ; but this is not the antithesis present 
to the mind of the writer himself. 

Thus the two treatises are regarded respec- 
tively as the ministry of Jesus and the ministry 
of the Apostles, or (if we take the other view) 
the ministry of Jesus in His own person and the 
ministry of Jesus through the Apostles. The 
first has been given in full by St. Luke («fl 
nimav k. t. A.); the second, not being yet 
concluded, could not be so given. The contents 
of the first have been directly described. This 
description is expressed in such language (t&> 
nir wpiror «t. t. A.) as to lead the reader to 
expect an antithetical clause {{y Si r^ Stvr^pv 
ti^Y4(ro/uu) describing the contents of the 
second. But this antithetical clause never 
appears, and in place of it the sentence runs oS 
into a narrative of facts. In this narrative 
of facts therefore we look for the explanation ; 
and we are not disappointed. The Lord is 
represented as conversing with the disciples 
after the Resurrection and preparing them for 
their mission. His words are prophetic of the 
future, and thus implicitly involve a table of 
contents : 

" Yc shall reoelve power, when the Holy Ghost," *c. 
(II. 1-13). 
" And ye shall be witnesses onto Me, 

(I.) Both In Jerusalem (II. u-vlll. 1), 
(11.) And in all Judaea and Samaria (vlll. 3- 

xi. 18). 
(ill.) And to the nttennoet parts of the earth " 
(zl. I»-xxvlll. 31). 

Digitized by 



TTie first two »ection» are complete; the 
falrilnMnt of the third U giren not sctnallr, 
bot pottntiallv'. Such an earnest of it is afforded 
u to leave no donbt of its ultimate accomplish- 
ment. St- Panl tiaveb to the far West; he 
preache;! the faith in Rome withoat hindrance ; 
and thus Christianity has obtained a firm foot- 
ing in the metropolis of the hiimaQ race, the 
stMnjhold of heathendom. 

After this anticipatory abstract of the history 
of the Christian Church, our thoughts are led 
forwtrd to the great and terrible day, the 
conjummation of all things, when this history 
shall be wound up. But again this is effected, 
not by his own words, but by the narrative of 
the sayings and doings of others (i. 8-11). The 
departure of Jesus by the Ascension is thus 
linked with His return in the second Advent. 
The n.irrative of the Acta spans over this interval 

These considerations will explain the close 
of the Book. Whatever apparent abruptness 
there may be in the ending, the writer was 
clearly not interrupted so as to leave his work 
unfinished. He closes with the event which 
his aim required. The occupation of Rome, the 
capital of the world, was the one eventful crisis 
which closed an epoch. Xor did he contemplate 
s "third treatise," as some have imagined. 
There is indeed no conceivable plea for any 
thiri treatise, if our view of his main design be 
correct. Nor again can any chronological 
9r|;nment be drawn from his stopping at this 
particular point ; as for instance that he was 
uDicquainted with St. Paul's visit to Spain or 
with the martyrdom of the two Apostles. He 
was not writing the biography of either Apostle. 

It will be observed also that the close of the 
second treatise is strictly analogous to the close 
i>f the first: 

rolflhnenl of I Luke xzlv. 44-49. Acts ixvili. 2S-M. 

pTDfihedes. i 
Jo^tiil tenal- Lake xxlv. S0-S3. Acta zxvUL 30, 31. 

OltlOIL I 

The following then is the table of contents : — 
(V) Omnexton witb the prevlons 

narrative . . 1. 1, 3. 

(U.) Christ's tlnal commands and pro- 
phecies respecting the King- 
dom of God . .1. 3-8. 
(ilL) The resurrection, and annoonce- 

ment of the Second Advent . i. D-11. 
(It.) The names and attitude of the 

Apoetles .... 1. lJ-14. 
(t.) The vaunt place In the apcsto- 

late Uled .... I. \i-M. 

A The HAraic Period (ii.-v.). 

(L) Consecration of the Apoetles and 
firM dlsdples by the ont- 
pouring of tile Holy Ohoet . II. 1-lS. 
(U.) The ingathering of the flrst- 

fmiu on tile day of Pentecost U. 14-4i. 
(UL) The inner life and tlie extension 

of the inbot Chntch . . il. 42-4T. I 
Ov.) The first miracle (of mercy and | 

restorsUon). The address of j 

Peter and the conflict witb the | 

Tillers consequent thereupon ill. 1-lv. 31. 
(v.) Tlie unity «nd communion of 

goods of the early Church . tv. 33-37. I 


(vt.) The sin of Ananias and Sap- 

pbira. The second miracle , 

(of retribution and Judg- 
ment) .... v.«l-ll. 
(viL) The mlracnlous working of the 
Apostles. Their imprison- 
ment, their appearance before 
the priests and mlers, and 
their dismissal ... v. 12-41. 
This period doMS with a notice 
of tlieir energetic and inces- 
sant preaching of Jesus as 
the Christ . . . . v. 42. 

The Transitional Period (vi.-xii.). 
n.) Appointment of a diaoonate 
(chiefly or wholly Hellenist) 
to meet complaints of Hellen- 
ists as to the distribution of 

alms vi. \-1. 

(li.) The labours, apprehension, 
speedi, and martyrdom of 
Stephen .... vi. 8-vil.W. 
(ill.) The consequences of the mar- 
(o) Scattering of the dis- 
ciples in Judaea and 
Samaria ; 
(fi) AnUgonIsm of Saul . viil. 1-1 
(iv.) Samaria evangelised through 
Philip, whose work Is con- 
firmed by ibe Apostles Peter 
and John. First conflict with 
a blse form of religion (out- 
side Judaism) In the person 
ofSlmon Magus . . . viiL B-M. 
(v.) (^inversion of the Ethloplsn 

eunuch, a proselyte . . viii. 26-40. 
(vl.) Conversion of Saul and vision 
of Ananias. Sant Is healed 
and disputes with the Hel- 
lenists at Jerusalem . . Ix. 1-30. 
(vil.) Peace In the churches "through- 
out the whole of Judaea and 
Galilee and Samaria" . . ix. 3i. 
(vill.) Peter's miracles at Lydda 
(Aeneas) and at Joppa (Dor- 
cas) U. 32-13. 

(Ix.) Visions of Cornelius and of 
Peter. Peter visits, converts, 
and Baptises Cornelius and 
his companions. Their Bap- 
tism Is anticipated by an out- 
pouring of the Holy Qhost . x. 1-48. 
(x ) Peter reports the case to the 
Church at Jerusalem and ol>- 
talns its approval . . xl. 1-18. 
(xl.) Disciples scattered at the per- 
secution of Stephen preach In 
Phoenicia, at Cyprus, and at 
Anttoch, to the Greeks (v. 1. 
Hellenists). Tbeir action 
confirmed by the Apostles 
through Barnabas . xl. It-M. 

(ill.) Saul preaches at Antloch, where 
the dladplea are first called 
ChrlsUans .... xi. 29, 26. 
(xlU.) The Christians of Jerusalem i ^^ ^_^ 
relieved by the QentileV^J jj 
churches . . .1 

(xlv.) Herod's persecution of the 
Church. Martyrdom of James 
and Imprisonment of Peter. 
Relrsae of Peter, who goes 
dttmhtre, and punishment of 
Hfrod .... xll. l-2a 

At the close la a notice of the 
triumphant progress of the 
Word of God . . . xll. 24. 

Digitized by 



C. TTte OentUe PeriocHxm.-xxviu.). 
I. Oaiuecntion of Bunabu and Saul to 

the ipoetoUte .... xlll. 1-3. 
II. FIrat miBsionvjr Journey of Paul 
(acoompanted bj Barnabas): 
(1.) Freacbing In CTpnu and con- 
version of Serglns Panlus . xlU. «-U. 
(11.) Journey through Pamphylla 

(desertion of John Mark) . xlU. 13. 
(lU.) Paul In the synagogue at An- 
tlocb of Pisidia. Rejection 
by the Jews and acceptance 
by the Qentiles . . . xUl. 14-C2. 
(It.) Preaching at Iconlum (stoning 

of Paul) . . . . xlv. 1-7. 
(t.) Healing of the Impotent nun 

at Lystra .... xlv. 8-18. 
(vl.) Subsequent preaching and re- 
turn to Antloch . 
<vU.) Apostolic Council at Jerusalem 
(liberation of the Gentile 
Christians from the obliga- 
tion! of the Law). . , 

III. Second missionary Journey of Paul 
(accompanied by Silas): 
(L) Separation of Paul and Barnabas 
(11.) Paul confirms the churches 
already founded on the pre- 
vious Journey^ and. after visit- 
ing the district of Phrygla 
and Qalatla, is summoned by 
a vision Into Uacedonla 
(iU.) Preaching at Pbiltppi. Im- 
prisonment and release 
<lv.) Preaching and persecution at 

Tbessalonlca and Beroca 
(v.) Paul at Athens preaches on the 
Areopagus .... 
(t1.) Bis long residence at Corinth 
and appearance before Gallio 
(vlL) He returns to Antloch, calling 
at Ephesus and visiting Jeru- 
salem on the way . . xvill. 18-23. 
(vUl.) Apollos at Ephesna and Corinth, xvill. 34-28. 

IV. Third mlaslonaiy Jonraey of Paul : 
(i.) Three years' residence at Ephe- 

suB, ending with the timinlt xU. 1-41. 
(11.) Visit to MacedonU and to 
Greece, whence he returns to 
Palestine by way of Mace- 
donia XX. 1-16. 

(IU.) Address to the Epheslan elders 

, at Miletus . . . . xx. 17-38. 
(It.) Subsequent voyage, sqjoum at 
Caesarea, and arrival at Je- 















xvU. 1-16. 




. 1-17. 

V. Two years' s<iJonm In Palestine : 

(I.) Tumult in the Temple and de- 
fence of Pan! 

(11.) Address to the Sanhedrin 
(Ui.) Journey to Gaesarea 
(Iv.) Accusation of Tertullus and 
defence of Paul before Felix. 
Subsequent conduct of Felix, 
(v.) Treatment of the prisoner by 
Festns. Speech of Paul be- 
fore Festus and Agrlppa 
VL Journey to and sojourn in Rome : 
(I.) Voyage and shipwreck . 
(11.) Sojourn at MellU . 
(111.) Subsequent Journey and arrival 
at Rome .... 
(Iv.) Conference with the chief Jews 
ends unsatisfactorily, and he 
turns to the Gentiles . . xxvlil. 17-2». 
(v.) Snceeas of his preaching . ixvlii. 30, Jl. 

xxl. 1-16. 

1 xxl. 17- 
/ xxU. 3». 
( xxU. 30- 
( xxlll. 10. 
xxlil. 11-35. 

xxlv. 1-37. 

!xxv. 1- 
xxvl. 33. 

xxvll. l-U. 

XXTlU. 1-10. 

. xxvlii. 11-16. 


The Book hod begun with the discounes of 
Christ relating to the career of " the Kingdom 
of God" (Ktyoty rii wtpl rflt fiaaiKttat tou 
©soi;). These discourses elicit the question 
from the disciples, "Dost thou at this time 
restore the Kingdom (tV 0eun\tl<u>) to Israel?" 
We are now told at the close that the chief 
Apostle of the Gentiles " proclaims the Kingdom 
qf God " (jaipiaativ r^v $a(ri\ttca> tou Btti) in 
the chief citjr of the Gentiles. Here is the 
indirect answer to the Apostles' question, so far 
as any answer could be given. The subject of 
the Book then is the history of the Kingdom 
of God, with more special reference to the 
relaxation of the terms of admission, the in- 
gathering of the Gentiles, and the transference 
of the centre of gravity of CHiristendom from 
Jerusalem elsewhere. 

This history comprises three periods. Oftheae 
the second, the e^h of transition, is the most 
instructive; and indeed the narrative of the 
Acts hinges on it.- This period itself may be 
divided into two parts; First (i.-vii.), thit 
which deals with Hellenists, Samaritans, and 
proselytes of the gate, persons of mixed natioo 
or religion, neither wholly Hebraic nor wholly 
Gentile; and secondly (viii.-xiv.), that which 
treats of the extension of the Church among 
(Entiles proper. At the end of each of these 
two divisions, as if he had arrived at a fredi 
landing-place, the author after his manner 
inserts an encouraging notice of the progress of 
the Gospel. Obviously he has paid special 
attention to the transitional period, gathering 
together every notice which seemed to illustrate 
either the principles, the agents, or the recipients, 
in this gradual enlargement of the bounds of 

3. External Testimony. — The external autho- 
rity in favour of this Book is full and unanimous. 
Only at a comparatively late date do we find 
any exception to the testimonies which assign it 
to St. Luke, and even then its canonical authority 
is not questioned. If we place ourselves in the 
later decades of the 2nd century, we arc con- 
fronted with witnesses from all parts of tht 
Church, and tho evidence leaves nothing to be 
desired. (1) Irenaeus, who represents three 
Churches — Asia Minor, Rome, and Gaul- 
quotes or refers to it between lifty and sixty 
times. The quotations range over nearly the 
whole Book. He gives St. Peter's speech at 
Pentecost (ii. 22-36X St. Peter's speech at the 
Beautiful Gate (iii. 12-26), St. Paul's speech on 
the Areopagus (ivii. 24-31), and the speeches of 
St. Peter and St. James at the apostolic council, 
together with the apostolic letter (xv. 7-11, 
13-21, 23-29) in full or nearly so (iii. 12. 3, 9. 
14). As this third book was published during 
the Roman episcopate of Eleutherus (a.i>. 175- 
189), we know the latest possible date of the 
testimony. He several times distinctly ascribes 
it to St. Luke, and argues from this fact (i. 23. 
1, iii. 13. 3, iii. 14. 1 «?., iv. 15. 1). He 
attributes scriptural authority to it (f.g. iii. 
12. 5, 9). He not only argues from its Lucan 
authorship himself, but assumes this as com- 
mon ground with his adversaries. In fact he 
quotes it just as any strictly orthodox divine 
would do in the present day. It is difficult there- 
fore to understand the statement that "it is 
imdeniable that no distinct and unequivocal 

Digitized by 



nferencc to tb« Acts of the Apostles, and to 
Lake «s their author, ocean in the writings of 
tlie Fathers before one by Irenaens about the 
end of the 2Dd century " (^Sapematural Seligion, 
iiL p. 3). (2) Clement of Alexandria (c. a.d. 
190-200) represents more especially the Church 
whose name he bears; but he roentions ob- 
Ugstions to six diiferent teachers — in Greece, 
m £gypt, in Palestine, Assyria, and the East — 
who had received the " tradition handed down 
direct from father to son from the holy Apostles 
Peter and James, John and Paul " (Strom, i. 1, 
f. 32i). He quotes the Acts repeatedly, and in 
one passage {Slnm. v. 12, p. 696) gives the 
uune of the writer Lnke. (3) The Muratorian 
C<i»M probably represents Rome, and is gene- 
nlly placed about A.D. 170-180 (since the 
author speaks of the episcopate of Pius, c. A.D. 
140-1S5, as " nnperrime temporibns nostris "), 
hat may be a few years later. This writer (ed. 
Tregelles, p. 18), in a passage which is some- 
what corrupt, but of which the general tenor 
•eems clear, after the four Gospels mentions 
"Acta omnium apostolorum" as written by 
Luke and addressed to Theophilos, adding that 
he wrote down the events of which he had per- 
wnal knowledge (" corprindit qnia [1. quae] 
sub praesentia ejus singula gerebantur "), and 
that evidently he was not an eye-witness of the 
martyrdom of Peter and the journey of Paul to 
Spain. (4) Tertnllian is the chief representa- 
tive of the African Chnrch. His literary acti- 
vity covers the last years of the 2nd and the 
early years of the 3rd centuries. He quotes 
the Acts many times. About 150 references or 
quotations are given by RSnsch (Das Neve 
Ttttament TertuUiara, p. 291 tq.), hut a certain 
percentage of these may be doubtful. He 
quotes it generally as Acta or Acta Apoitolorwn 
and ascribes it to St. Luke (de Jtjtm. 10). He 
cites it too as Scripture (see e. g. Fraescr. Haer. 
22), and designates it Apostolicum Inatrumentum 
(/Wis. 12) or Scriptura Apostolicorwn (i/arc. 
T. 2). (5) Polycratea of Ephesua (a.d. 189- 
198) represents Aaia Minor at the close of this 
centnry. He lays great stress on the primitive 
tradition, which be had inherited through 
several relatives who were Bishops (Enseb. H. E. 
V. 24). He quotes Acts T. 29 verbatim, though 
not by name, in the words " They that are 
pester than I have said. Hit right to serve God 
mtlier Han men" (sreifapx*'*' ^'' ^*¥ mSXXoi' 
t irtpwtois), a saying ascribed in the Acts to 
" Peter and the Apostles." 

We find then that in the last decades of the 
ind century the Book is quoted profusely and 
without any sign of misgiving as authoritative 
!>criptnre and as the work of St. Luke. The 
testimony comes from all quarters of the 
Charch ; and the witnesses are persons who 
were mixed up in various religious controversies 
asd bad alliances far and wide, striking (in some 
iiutances) deep into the post. There can be no 
doubt therefore about the universal verdict of 
tbe Church at this time. Thus at the earliest 
moment when we have sufficient materials for a 
judgment, the evidence in favour of the Book is 

The earlier testimony is of the same kind as 
ht most of those Canonical Books of which the 
Mtheaticity has never been questioned. The 
>!><«tolic Fathers do not directly quote Romans 


or 2 Corinthians or Galatians, nor arc these 
Epistles named by any Charch writer before 
Irenaens. Of Acts xx. 35, "To remember 
(jurtiiioytita') the words of the Lord Jesus, how 
He said. It is blessed rather to give than to 
receive (ji&Wov SiSSrat fi \aii$iivta>)," we have 
reminiscences in Clemektof Rome, § 13, "espe- 
cially remembering (jiffunniivoi) the words of 
the Lord Jesus which He spake " (comp. § 46), 
and § 2, " more gladly giving than receiving " 
(ffiioy SiSdvTft il Kaiifiiroints), for in the 
context of this latter passage the Corinthians 
are praised for "giving heed to the words" of 
Christ. Again in § 18, " What shall we say of 
David, to whom witness is borne (r^ fitfioprv' 
fitlliivif), unto whom God said, I have found a 
man after My heart, David the son of Jesse,, 
with oil," &c., Clement is compounding the ori- 
ginal passage in the Psalms, fxxxviii. (Ixxxix.) 
20, with the quotation in Acts xiii. 22, "To 
whom also He said, bearing witness (jiaprv 
p^aas), I have found David the son of Jesse a 
roan after my heart, who will do," &c., where 
the features borrowed from the Acts are (1) 
the mention of the " witness " ; (2) the ad- 
dition of "a man after my heart" (comp. 
1 Sam. xiii. 14) ; and (3) the farther addition 
of " the son of Jesse " — none of these being 
found in the original passage of the Psalms. 
This threefold coincidence is not easily explained 
away. The coincidences in Iokatids are 
somewhat less close, but not insignificnnt. 
Magn. 5, "to go (xupety) to his own place," 
recals Acts i. 25, " to go (wo/MvDqytu) to his own 
place." In Philad. 11 we have the phrase ivj^p 
litiioprvfrniiivos, which occurs also in Acts vi. 3. 
In Smyrn. 3, " After His Resurrection He ate 
and drank with them (<rwt^arf*v amoii koI 
mriitity)" there is an allusion to Acts x. 41, 
rmt^irfOiuy koI ffvyfrlo/up cArf fLtrit rh 
ivaarrivai k. r. K. In POLTCABP the coinci- 
dences are of the same kind, but stronger. 
§ 1, " Whom God raised {liytipti''), loosing the 
pangs of Hades (A^<rat vit a^ot toS fSov)," 
closely follows Acts ii. 24, " whom God raised up 
(irdtmiirty), having loosed the pangs of death 
(Kiras riis itSiyas roS OovcEtov)," where there i» 
a V. 1. fSou, which is shown from the authori- 
ties (D, e, Vulg., Memph., Iren.) to have been 
current at least as early as the 2nd century. 
Though the individual expressions (e.g. uS7y*s 
fSov) may be found elsewhere, there is nothing 
approaching to the parallelism throughout the 
sentence, so that it cannot be regarded as acci- 
dental. Again, in § 2 we nave the expression 
"judge of quick and dead," as in Acts x. 42. 
There are also other coincidences (§ 2 to xx. 35, 
§ 6 to vii. 52, § 12 to viii. 21), on which how- 
ever no stress can be laid. Of Papias (Euseb. 
H, E. iii. 39) we can only say that his anecdotes: 
deal with personages mentioned in the Acts, 
Judas Barsabbas and the daughters of Philip (if 
he be the same Philip), and that his story of 
Judas the traitor is used by Apollinaris of 
Laodicea in the 4th century to reconcile the 
accounts of his death in St. Matthew and in the 
Acts, and may have had some such reference ns 
told by himself. In Hebmas, who gives not a 
single quotation (strictly speaking) either from 
the Old or from the New Testament, we stumble 
on coincidences with the Acts, which however 
would have no great value in themselves. Thas 

Digitized by 



Hermas (^Mand. ir. 3) uses the word inif)Sia'yi'w- 
0TT)i, " heart-knower," of God, which occurs 
twice in the Acta (i. 24, xy, 8), but is found 
nowhere else in the LXX. or N. T. Again, be 
speaks of being thought " worthy of bearing the 
Name," and of being " healed " or " saved by 
the Name " ( Via. ir. 2, Sim. ix. 28), expressions 
which are close parallels to Acts ir. 12, t. 41. 

In the Apologists there are similar coinci- 
dences. Thus in JcsnN Maktyr we have in 
two several passages (A'o/. 36, 76) a reference 
to prophecy as announcing vaSrirbs [S] Xpurrds, 
"the Messiah would be passible," as in Acts 
xxvi. 23. Here the coincidence consists not in 
the idea, but in the manner of expressing it, the 
word iradqTit not occurring elsewhere in the 
LXX. or N. T. So again the summary of events 
after the Crucifixion in Apd. i. 50 seems to 
be taken from Acts i. 8 sq. (comp. ii. 33), the 
expression " to receive power " (^Kanfidytiy 
Siyofur) being common to both, besides other 
coincidences. Again, Dial, 68, " How saith 
the Word unto David that God would take a 
son for Himself from his loins (iarh rqs i<r<pios 
airov) , . . and would seat (itafidrei) him on the 
throne of His glory," is best explained as a 
reminiscence of Acts ii. 30, " God sware onto 
him by an oath that he would set (jcaBiaat) of 
the fruit of his loins (t^> icr^tios o^oS) upon 
his throne ;" for in both passages " loins " 
(ia^os) is substituted for " body " (itoiKias), 
and " set " {KoBlifUi) for " place " (rWeo-Soi) of 
the LXX. of Psalm cxxxi. (cxxxii.) 1 1, though in 
neither case does the Hebrew suggest such a 
substitution. Again in Dial. 16 we read, " Ye 
slew the Just One and before Him the prophets," 
which has a close parallel in Acta vii. 52 (comp. 
Is. Ivii. xy. Again, the connexion of " common 
or unclean things " with " refraining to eat " is 
matched by Acts x. 14, 28, xi. 8 ; and there are 
other coincidences likewise. It seems difficult, 
with these facts before us, to resist the inference 
that Justin was acquainted with the Acts. The 
coincidences in the other Apologists are much 
slighter. Thus Tatian {Orat. ad Oraec. 6) 
writes, "Though yon consider us . . . babblers 
(_ntpno\6yous)," the word used of St. Paul by 
the Athenians in Acts xvii. 18. In Theophilus 
again (ad Autol. ii. 1) there is the same play on 
yiv<i<rKtw, ivayiviaKfO', which appears in Acts 
viii. 30. 

Of other writers in the 2ud century Dio- 
NTSius OF Corinth is reported by Eusebins 
(//. E. iv. 23) OS recording (J17X01) that " Diony- 
sius the Areopagite, when turned (irporpaircls) 
to the faith by the Apostle Paul in accordance 
with the records (rit StSriKuixiya) in the Acts, 
was the first to be entrusted with the bishopric 
of the diocese (xapouciat) of Athens." From 
this p.nssage indeed it does not necessarily 
follow that Dionysius actually mentioned the 
Acts ; but, if the language of Kusebius may 
be interpreted strictly, Dionysius of Corinth 
must have said that his early namesake was 
«onverted by St. Paul (not 6 xporpairtls, 
but nparpairtis), as therein stated. In the 
V. 1) the last prayer of "Stephen the perfect 
martyr" is given from Acts vii. 60, just as 
elMwhere in this same document the language 
used of Zacharias (the father of the Baptist) is 
taken from Luke i. 6. These obligations to the 


two treatises of .St. Luke can only be evaded by 
postulating doubles of both writings (see Super- 
natural Seligioji, iii. p. 25), but this is an alter- 
native which need not t>e seriously discussed. 

It should be added also that in all the Ver- 
{ 8ION8 of the 2nd century (the Syriac, Latin, and 
Egyptian), so far as our information goes, this 
Book formed a part. 

Moreover the early Apocryphal Acts and 
other historical romances show an acquaintance 
with this work, to which they are frequently 
indebted for their personal and geographical 
notices, where they cross the historical path of 
the canonical Acts. Such are the Acts of 
Peter and Paul, and those of Paul and Thecla. 
So too Cornelius (Horn. xx. 13) and others are 
mentioned in the Clementine HomUiei, while 
Theophilus also appears in the Rccognilions. 
The Somiliea moreover contain several expres- 
sions found in the Acts, such as " heart-knower," 
ffom, X. 13, wphs Kcif>SioyrmrTi)v 9tiy (comp. 
Acts i. 24, XV. 8); "What purporteth this 
to be ? " Horn. xiii. 6, xiv. 9, ti 0cXei tovto 
«?»« (comp. Acts U. 12, xvii. 20) ; " What hin- 
deretb me to be baptized ?" ffom. xiii. 5 (see also 
xiii. 11 ; comp. Acts viii. 36). Similar resem- 
blances also appear in the Secognitions. 

It was indeed rejected by several Herettics 
of the 2nd century, not however in a single 
instance (so far as we can discover) because 
they questioned its authorship, but in many 
cases obviously on this very account. Those who, 
like the Ebionites, denied the apostlesbip of St. 
Paul, were forced to repudiate the authority of 
his disciple. Those on the other hand who, 
like the Marcionites, maintained a direct anta- 
gonism between St. Paul and the Apostles uf 
the circumcision, could not do otherwise than 
reject a work which represented them as meeting 
each other on friendly terms. For the Ebionites 
see Iren. iii. 15. 1. Again, as regards the Mar- 
cionites, Irenaeus argues with them throughout 
on the hypothesis of its Lncan authorship, as if 
this were common ground (iii. 12. 12, iii. 14. 
1 iq.). When dealing with the Valentinians 
and other Gnostics, he distinctly states that 
they accept the Book as authoritative, but try 
to get round it by false interpretations, or by a 
distinction between an esoteric and exoteric doc- 
trine (iii. 12. 12, iii. 14. 4, iii. 15. 1, 2). Thus 
these Valentiniaus are valuable witnesses — all 
the more valuable because the acceptance of the 
Book involved them in great difficulty. 

It should be added also that, as the Third 
Gospel and the Acts were evidently the work of 
one man — and the admission of this fact naay 
now be regarded as practically universal — all 
the evidence which testifies to the authorship 
of the former is available also for the latter, and 
conversely. But the testimony in favour of St. 
Luke as the author of the Third Gospel is abso- 
lutely unbroken, and no shadow of suspicion 
overclouds it for nearly eighteen centuries. 

The unanimity and directness of testimony 
which we have observed at the close of the 2nd 
century continue in the succeeding ages. At 
the close of the 4th century however, we find 
Chrysostom saying that he is induced to explain 
the Book, because many are ignorant of its 
existence and its authorship (Camm. in Act. 
Apost. i. 1, Op. ix. p. 1). As it is freely 
quoted without any suspicion cast on its author- 

Digitized by 



•kip hy >ll the great fathers of his own genera- 
tiui, u well as before and after, this can only 
fflein that it was more or less neglected by the 
geoenl reader. This neglect may be accounted 
for by the fact that it would not be read regu- 
larly in churches like the Gospels or the 
Apostolic Epistles, and copies would not be 
msltipUed to the same extent as in the case of 
these other Scriptures. As it did not bear its 
SBthor'i name in the title (in this respect 
(iifferiog from the other Books of the N. T.), 
igsotsDce on this point becomes the more ex- 

Still more perplexing, and still less recon- 
cilable with the facts, is a notice in Photins 
(Ampliil. Qu. 123) at the close of the 9th cen- 
tury : '' Some say that the author of the Acts 
vu Clement of Rome, others Barnabas, and 
ethers again Luke the Evangelist; but Luke 
himself settles the question (4riKpb>ti)," &c. As 
there is not the faintest trace of any difference 
of opiaion in all the preceding eight centuries, 
I am disposed to think that Photius is here 
gnilty of a confiuion with the Epistle to the 
Hebrews, these three persons being named by 
ancient Fathers as claimants for the authorship 
of this letter (Orig. in Enseb. H. E. vi. 25 ; 
Tertull. de Pvdic. 20; Euseb. H. E. iU. 38; 
Hieron. Vir. lU. 5). 

4. The AuthorMp. — We have seen that the 
ucirersal tradition of the first eight centuries 
sicribes the Book with no faltering voice to St. 
hake ; and that this evidence is fui-ther fortified 
by a still greater mass of testimony — equally 
onaoimous — which independently ascribes the 
Third Qospel to this same person. How far is 
this assumption supported by internal evidence ? 
The first person plural " we " is used in ccr- 
tam parts of the narrative, where the writer is 
dcKiibiog the journeys of St. Paul. He there- 
fore profeasea to be a companion of St. Paul. 
This first person appears in the ordinary text 
for the first time at Troaa (xvi. 10), during the 
second miasionary journey (c. A.D. 51 or 52), 
and continues to Philippi, where it is dropped 
(ni 17) as suddenly as it had appeared. It is 
taken up again after several years (a.d. 58) 
dirisg the third missionary journey at this 
uoifr place Philippi (xx. 5), and continues till 
St Paul arrives at Jerusalem and confers with 
Janies and the elders (xx. 18). When again he 
Kts sail for Italy (xxvii. 1), it accompanies him 
ud remains in his company during the voyage 
sad shipwreck and until his arrival in Rome 
(iiriii. 15, 16, for in ver. 16 the best supported 
reading is tia4i^Baiur). Bat besides these occur- 
races in the ordinary text, it is found likewise 
>3 D at a much earlier point (xi. 28), where the 
prophecy of Agabns is mentioned, at Antioch. 
Tboagh the variations in D seem in many pas- 
sages to give contemporary traditions, yet the 
apricbnsness of this US. elsewhere forbids us 
to rejarf"this aa the. original reading. 

Who then is this writer who uses the first 
?nwo? The obvious answer is that which 
■jentifies him with the traditional author of the 
Tisk, St. Luke. This person was certainly a 
tnistT companion of the apostle (Col. iv. 14; 
fliilem. 24; 2 Tim. iv. 11); and though the 
aotices in St. Paul's Epistles refer to a some- 
what later date, he might very well have been 
vith the apostle at this time. Not a single 


Epistle of St. Paul was written during the precise 
periods covered by " we" in the Acts, and there- 
fore the absence of Luke's name in the Epistles 
prior to the Roman captivity is not even a prittid 
facie objection. Moreover, Luke is described as 
'•the beloved physician" (Col. iv. 14), and a 
tendency to the use of medical terms has been 
observed both in the Third Gospel and the Acts. 
If many of the examples adduced must be set 
aside as proving nothing, the residuum is quite 
sufficient to establish the main point (see esp. 
Hobart's Medical Language of St. Luke, Dublin, 

But though the natural inference from the 
use of the first person plural seems plain 
enough, it has given rise to various opinions. 
These may be divided into four classes : — 

(i.) That which regards it as a mere literary 
fiction to give an air of credibility to the narra- 
tive. This view has been held by two or three 
critics, of whom Schmder (^Der Apostel Paulua, 
1836) may be taken as the type. As no one 
now upholds this view, I need not take the 
trouble to refute it. 

(ii.) That which identifies it with St. Luke, 
who is regarded as also the ultimate author of 
the work. This is the vastly preponderating 
opinion even in the present day, and until quite 
recent times it was the sole possessor of the 
field. Its consistency and verisimilitude have 
been already shown. 

(iii.) That which identifies it with St. Luke 
as the original authority for this portion of 
the narrative, but maintains that the Book, as 
a whole, was compiled by some later person. 
This is the view of Baur and Zeller, with 
several subsequent critics, of whom the latest 
is Holtzmann (Zeitach. f. Wiu. Theol. 1881, 
p. 408 sq. ; £anj. p. 385, 1885). 

(iv.) That which identifies it with some one 
else besides St. Luke. The persons selected for 
this distinction are: (a) Timothecs. This is 
the view of Schleiermacher, De Wette, and 
others, notably Bleek (see esp. Introd. to New 
Teat. i. p. 355 sq., Engl, transl.). It appears to 
have been first suggested by Kiinigsmann, De 
FontSma Comm. Sacr. qui Lucae tumwn prae- 
ferunt, &c., 1798. (jS) Silas. This hypothesis 
is vigorously maintained by Schwanbeck ( Ueier 
die Quellen der Schriften des Lukaa, i. p. 168 aq., 
265 aq.), though he was not the first to suggest 
it. It is sometimes connected with the identifica- 
tion of Silvanus (Silas) with Lucanns (Lucas), 
as «.j. by Hennell (Unterauchung iiber den 
Uraprung dea Chriatenthum, 1840). This identifi- 
cation is put forward by Van Vloten (Zeitachr. 
f. Wiaa. ThetA. 1867, p. 223 aq.\ comp. ib. 
1871, p. 431 aq.y, as if he were the originator 
of the theory. He is answered by Cropp (ib. 
1868, p. 353 aq.). (7) T1TD8. This view 
seems to have been suggested first by Horst 
(Sur lea Sourcea de la deuxiime partie dea Actea, 
&C., 1849; see Holtzmann, EM. p. 385), and 
haa been adopted by Krenkel, Jacobsen, and 
others, notably by Hooykaas {Bible for I'oung 
People, V. 33 ; see Salmon, Introd. p. 312 aq.). 
In connexion with this theory should be men- 
tioned the identification of Titus with Silvanus 
(or Silas), maintained by Zimmer (Zeitsclir. f. 
kirchl. Wiaa. u. tirchl. Leben, 1881, 4, p. 169 
aq.; Jahrb. f. Proteat. Theol. 1881, p. 721 aq.), 
who supposes Silaa the prophet of Antioch to be 

Digitized by 



.1 diflerent pergon from Titus Silas the companion 
of St. Paul. His theory is discussed by Jiilicher 
{Jahrh.f. Protest. Theol. 1882, p. 538 s}.). 

The two solutions (j8), (7), may be quickly 
dismissed. The identification of Silvanus with 
Lucanus on the ground that silva and lucua are 
synonymes is about as reasonable as would be 
the identification of persons bearing the names 
Wood and Forest and Grore, or Lea and Field 
and Meadows, or Mountain and Hill, or Rock 
and Cliffe and Stone. The objection to the other 
identification is of a diSerent kind. Everything 
points to the separation of Titus and Silvanus. 
Thus the two are mentioned by their respective 
names in one and the same Epistle by St. Paul 
(2 Cor. i. 19, ii. 13, vii. 6, &c.). Moreover, 
Titus was a Gentile (Gal. ii. 3), while Silaa 
(Silvanus) was plainly a Jew (Acts xr. 22) ; for 
it is altogether arbitrary to distinguish the 
Silas of XT. 22, 27, 32 [34], from the Silas of 
XV. 40, ic. 

Having thus cleared the way, we may deal 
generally with the hypotheses which belong to 
the third and fourth classes. 

Of the third we may remark : (1) That the 
" we " sections are absolutely identical in style 
with the rest of the Acts, and indeed with the 
Third Gospel also, so that they can only have 
been written by the ultimate compiler of both 
nan-atives. (2) That accordingly these " we " 
sections contain numerous cross references to 
other parts of the narrative. (3) That the 
ultimate compiler (whoever he was) shows not 
only literary ability, but literary care. This 
point is strongly insisted upon (among others) 
by Renan, who speaks of the Third Gospel and 
Acts as forming one work excellently put toge- 
ther (tria bien ridig^, composed with reflection 
.•»nd even with art, ic (£«> Apdtres, p. xi.). 
But it is incredible that an author evincing this 
literary capacity and aim should commit the 
school-boy blunder of inserting paragraphs 
written by another without even taking the 
trouble to alter the personal pronouns. It is 
not sufficient to point to such carelessness in 
mediieval chroniclers as Schwanbeck does. The 
examples are not parallel. We have in the 
Acts "not one of those low organisations which 
do not resent being pulled asunder," but "a 
highly organised structure, showing evident 
marks that the whole proceeded from a single 
author" (Salmon, Introd. p. 316). (4) Lastly: 
the hypotheses belonging to this class have not 
a shadow of evidence in their favour. On what 
grounds then should they claim to displace the 
traditional view? Is the strongest historical 
attestation to count for nothing? 

It will be seen at once that some of these 
objections apply equally to the fourth class. 
But the individual hypotheses again, which 
belong to this class, present additional difficulties 
of their own. (o) The assignment to Timotheus 
is irreconcilable with Acts xx. 5, 6, where the 
writer, having mentioned him among others 
who accompanied St. Paul, adds, "But these 
(ovToi Si) had gone before and were waiting for 
n.s (irfM»\9iJi<T(5 tutvov iipmi) in Troas ; " where 
ovTot naturally refers to all those previously 
mentioned, and the restriction to the two last, 
Tychicns and Trophimus, is not justified by 
the form of the sentence, (fi) The attribution 
to Silas has nothing to recommend it. Silas 


or Silvanus is a prominent figure during the 
Apostle's second missionary journey in the Acts ; 
and this prominence is borne out by the notices 
in St. Paul's Epistles relating to this period 
(1 Thess. i. 1 ; 2 Thess. L 1 ; 2 Cor. i. 19). On 
the contrary, he nowhere appears during the 
third missionary journey, either in the history 
or in the letters, whereas the "we" occnr:! 
frequently during this period, (y) The only 
ground for suggesting Titus is the negative fict 
that he is not mentioned by name in the 
narrative,' though he is known to have been 
with St. Paul during part of this period 
(2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 6 tq., xii. 18), and is a 
prominent person among the Apostle's com- 
panions. But what is the value of this negative 
fact? What advantage has the Titus gness 
over the Luke tradition? Unless indeed it be 
" thought a disadvantage to an hypothesis that 
it should have some amount of historical 
testimony" (Salmon, p. 313). Moreover, of 
these attributions generally we may remark 
that the propriety in the change from the first 
to the third person, and conversely, as pointed 
out above (p. 31), ceases, and the use of the 
pronouns, from being orderly and consistent, 
becomes a chaos. 

Nor is it easy to understand how St. Luke's 
name should have thus been persistently assigned 
to the work, if he had had nothing to do with it. 
As Salmon has pointed out (p. 372X it is not 
attached to this second treatise in any uncial 
MS. But the Third Gospel had the name of 
St. Luke prefixed, and the Acts bore evidence 
on the face of it that it was written by the same 
author. Hence the attribution. Indeed the 
sequence of facts is a most powerful argument 
in favour of the genuineness of the work. These 
are as follows : (1) The Gospel bears the name 
of Luke ; but Luke was a companion of St. Panl. 
(2) When we examine the Gospel, we find not 
only that it brings out into special prominence 
certain points in Christ's teaching which illus- 
trate the cardinal doctrines of St. Paul, the 
universality and the freedom of the Gospel, 
justification not by works of law but by faith, 
and the like ; but also that, where St. Fanl 
refers to incidents in our Lord's life, as for 
instance to the Last Supper (1 Cor. xi. 23 tj. ; 
comp. Luke xxii. 19 tq.) or to the appearances 
after the Resurrection {e.g. 1 Cor. xv. 5, £^ 
Ki)^ : comp. Luke ixiv. 34, H^Bri Sf^iwi), his 
references present striking resemblances to this 
Gospel rather than to the others. Yet there is 
not a word nor a hint of any connexion with or 

• In Acts xvlll. 1 the reading Is most probably Tiruw 
'lovoTov, though some read Ttrov 'lovorov, some Ttnw 
simply, and some 'Iovvtov simply (the received reading). 
At all events the alternative lies between the first and 
the last, as the variation must have arisen from the 
addition or omission of the same recurring letters 
" Titus " were read here, be could hardly be the same 
person ; for be is mentioned bete as a Jewish proeelytf. 
and his surname Justus Implies that he was an observer 
of the Moealc law ; whereas the Apoetle's companion Tltoa 
bad been converted to Christianity before this (Qal. U. 1) 
and Is called a " Oentlle " without any qaallficatlon. 
Moreover this Justus was a resident In Corinth, whereas 
St. Paul, writing to the Corinthians (2 Cor. U. cc .), 
mentions Titos in such a way as to preclude the suppo- 
sition that he was one of themselves. 

Digitized by 



aay tnowledge of the Apostle. (3) The Acts 

fniasei to be written by the same persoa as 

the Third Gospel, of which it is a later 

eoatisiuition ; and this profession is fully borne 

out by its style and character. (4) We read 

arer more than half this second treatise without 

any indication that the writer wns a companion 

of'Sl. Panl. (5) Then at length the tolien of 

companionship occurs. Yet even now it is not 

•Kstinctly stated, but the fact is inferred from 

tile incidental occurrence of the first person 

plaral, which makes its first appearance quite 

aosiupiciausly. And not only so, but in its 

^Iweqaent disappearance and re-appearance 

it shows a congruity which cannot fail to 

strike the mind. Who will be bold enough 

to eiplaio these harmonies as a fortuitous 

<»nconrse of pseudo-historical atoms? Yet it 

would require greater hardihood still to ascribe 

litem to a sustained and elaborate artifice. 

Apart from the hypotheses which we have 
hitherto considered, stands the view propounded 
in H. H. Evans, St. Paul the Author of the Acts 
y the Apo»tlts and of the Third Gospel (London, 
ISM). The Pauline authorship is maintained 
by this writer on the ground of certain 
resemblances of diction. He does not attempt 
to deal with the first person plural or to 
grapple with the difficulties which beset his 
theory on all sides. 

5. Atithentkity and Genuinetiest. — In discuss- 
in; the anthenticity of any work, two main 
(iinsions of the subject present themselves: (t) 
The intenuil characteristics, as indications of 
Tsrisimilitnde or the contrary ; (2) The external 
lests, XH evidences of veracity or the contrary. 

(1.) In treating of the internal characteristics, 
I most satisfy myself with pointing out a few 
heads, giving here and there an example, but 
without any attempt to do more than indicate 
lines of investigation which the reader may 
«iny out for himself. 

(i.) There is first of all the change of moral 
•"ut tpiritvat atmosphere. As we pass from the 
>«gimiing to the end of the Book, we find that 
the religious climate, so to speak, is quite 
<^ged, and we are breathing a different air. 
In short we have passed from the Hebraic to the 
Ueilenic This change manifests itself through- 
"St, in the speeches and in the actions, in the 
aoda of feeling and in the local customs and 
i>>titDtions. Yet the transition is not sudden. 
It is a gradual growth, as the Church emanci- 
iBtes itself, both locally and morally, from the 
intelage of its Hebrew infancy. Between 
the two extremes the intermediate Hellenistic 
t«nit«ry is duly traversed. In short, the work, 
"ganled from this point of view, betokens a 
triter who either had witnessed the progressive 
arter himself^ or made use of successive contem- 
^irary documents ; but such a narrative would 
^ quite impossible from one who some genera- 
ti<«s later attempted to furnish a story of the 
){«st«Iic doing*, trusting mainly or solely to 
kit own &ciilty of invention. 

(iL) Kot unconnected with this feature is the 
sqseace and connexion (^ events. We may 
••fa as an example the incidents which pre- 
farei the way for the extension of the Church 
t« the Gentiles. What conld be more natural, 
•nd jet what more unlike the work of a forger 
^'xa these fragmentary disconnected notices, 
BIBtE MCr. — VOL. I. 


which, as we see after the fact, must inevitablv 
have led to the result, but which no one could 
have foreseen or devised, and which require 
careful piecing together before wo can trace 
their bearing and direction. These are : (1) The 
murmuring of the Hellenist widows, vi. 1 ; (2) 
the creation of the diacouate, vi. 2 sq. ; (3) the 
composition of this diaconate, comprising espe- 
cially Stephen and Philip, vi. 6 sy. ; (4) Ste- 
phen's disputations, speech, and martyrdom, 
vi. 8-vii. 60 ; (5) Saul's appearance on the scene, 
vii. 58, viii. 1 ; (6) the scattering abroad of the 
disciples as the consequence of this persecution, 
viii. 1 ; (7) the preaching of Philip in Samariu 
and elsewhere, as the result of this scattering, 
viii. 5-40 ; (8) the wider dissemination of the 
word and the first preaching to the Gentiles 
through the outlying members of this scattered 
band (xi. 19, 20). A little reflection will show 
that all this is inconcei\-able, except as an 
account of facts which actually occurred. 

(iii.) Another point is the disproportion ami 
iaeqaality of the narrative. This argument is 
strongly insisted upon by Kenan (p. xv.) among 
others: "Ce qui distingue Thi-stoire compos^e 
d'apr&i dea documents de I'histoire ^rite en 
tout ou en partie d'original, i^est jtistement la 
disproportion." A narrator who allows himself 
carte blanche to invent will take care that the 
different parts of his narrative bear some 
proportion to each other. On the other hand, 
a recorder of facts is limited by the historical 
knowledge at his disposal. At some points he 
has very ample information ; at others it entirely 
fails him. Now nothing is more striking than 
the want of proportion in the Acts. In some 
parts the history of a few months occupies 
several chapters ; in others the history of many 
years is disposed of in two or three verses. 
Sometimes we have a diary of a journey or 
voyage ; elsewhere a bald statement of the main 
fact is given. But nowhere is this disproportion 
more striking than in some of the sfteeches, 
notably in that of St. Stephen. This is by far 
the longest record of a sfieech in the Book, 
extending over 52 verses. Having all this 
space at his disposal, a forger would have made 
it both pertinent and complete. He would have 
provided a well-reasoned defence against the two- 
told crime with which Stephen is charged. But 
here we have nothing of the kind. There is a 
long and at first sight irrelevant account of the 
early history of the Jewish peoi)le, which 
occupies 49 verses, and the last three are taken 
up in n denunciation of his accusers. Direct 
answer to the charges there is none. Only 
when we examine it more carefully, we discover 
two things : first, that the incidents in the 
long historical narrative illustrate the transitory 
character of the present dispensation and of tin; 
local sanctuary ; and secondly, that the latter 
part of the speech (vii. 48-53) is interrupted 
and hurried. Thus the whole speech, as we 
have it, is a preamble, and the argumentative 
application which should have formed the main 
part of his defence does not appear at all, or at 
least is confined to two or three short sentences, 
doubtless because the clamours of the bystanders 
bring the speaker prematurely to a close. But 
until we discover the key to its meaning, this 
rambling discourse is quite unintelligible under 
the circumstances, and such as no forger would 


Digitized by 



or could hare invented. It is only conceivable 
as a substantially true record of what was 
actually said. Another instance of similar 
disproportion is the speech on the Areop.igas 
(xrii. 22-.31), where there is no distinctive 
Christian teaching till the last verse, and here 
only one point is touched upon. In this case 
however the probable explanation is that it 
was not so much the speech itself, as the report 
of the speech accessible to the historian, which 
was fuller at the commencement and hurried at 
the end. But the bearing on the point at issue 
— the truthfulness of the narrator — is the same. 

(iv.) We have also another indication of 
genuineness in the minor discrepancies and 
errors, or what appear to be such in the 
account. Thus we have three separate accounts 
of St. Paul's conversion (ix. 3 »?., xxii. 6 sq.y 
xxvi. 12 sg.). The divergences may not be irre- 
concilable, but they do not reconcile them- 
selves. The reasonable explanation is not that 
the writer himself invented the three accounts, 
but that he obtained them from difierent sources, 
and reproduced them as he found them. Again 
the inaccuracies in the references to Old Testa- 
ment history in St. Stephen's speech arc probably 
due to the strict reproduction of a report taken 
under necessarily unfavourable circumstances. 
In some cases at all events (r.^. vii, 43, the 
substitution of " Babylon " for " Damascus "). 
we seem to see that they are due to hurried 

(v.) The naturalness of the language, as indi- 
cating direct knowletlge of the facts, should also 
be noticed. The incidental appearance and dis- 
appearance of the " we," to which attention has 
been directed already, is a good illustration. 
Another example appears in the order of the 
names Barnabas and Paul (or Saul). Barnabas 
is the earlier disciple (iv. 36), and the mediator 
between Saul and the elder Apostles (ix. 27, 
zi. 22-26). Accordingly, in the earlier part of 
the history the order is always " Barnabas and 
Saul " (xi. 30, xili. 2). But when their missionary 
journeys commence, and they stand on Gentile 
ground, St. Paul's supremacy of character asserts 
itself, and the order is tacitly changed to " Paul 
and Barnabas " (xiii. 43, 46, 50 ; xv. 2, 22, 35). 
There are indeed exceptions in this latter part, 
but they only "prove the rule." At the apo- 
stolic council and in the apostolic letter, the 
old sequence " Barnabas and Paul " is again 
resumed (xv. 12, 25) ; and so too at Lystra, 
where Barnabas is identiHcd with Zeus and 
Paul with Hermes, the former naturally takes 
the precedence for the moment (xiv. 14). As 
inst.inccs of naturalness in the language repre- 
sented to have been used by the speakers, we 
m.iy allege the distortion of facts by Claudius 
I.ysia'; (xiiii. 27) to save his own credit, or the 
exaggerated compliments paid to Kelix by Ter- 
tullus (xxlv. 2 »7.), which are explained but not 
justiried by his career as governor. 

Altogether, it may be affirmed that if there 
had been no miraculous element in the narrative, 
and if it had had no bearing on religious con- 
troversy, the form and contents of this work 
would have placed it beyond all suspicion, as 
re^arls genuineness and authenticity. 

(2.) From the consideration of the internal 
characteristics we turn to the external tests, as 
an evidence of truthfulness. 


(i.) In the earlier part of the narrative we 
hare rarely an opportunity of testing the inci- 
dents by reference to other Christian documents ; 
but the latter portion, giving the history of 
St. Paul, may be compared with and checked by 
the Apostle's own letters. This work has been 
done admirably by Paley in his J7uro« Paulinae : 
and the main result is conclusive. He has 
elicited a mass of " undesigned coincidences," 
which renders the hypothesis of a fictitious 
history impossible. The comparison of the four 
greater Epistles, more especially (Romans, 1 
Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians), belonging 
to the years 57, 58, elicits striking examples. 
Any reader, for instance, who will take the pains 
to go carefully over Poley's discussion of the- 
passages relating to the contributions for the 
Christian poor at Jerusalem, observing how they 
doretail into one another, may satisfy himself of 
the validity of the argument. Vet it is plain 
that the writer of the Acts was unacquainted 
with these Epistles, or at all events that, if he 
had ever seen them, he made no use of them 
in compiling his history. Otherwise, we are 
wholly unable to explain the omission of any 
reference to the incidents and persons mentioned : 
for example, in Rom. xv. 19, 28, xvi. 1 sq., 23 ; 
1 Cor. i. 11 sq., xvi. 15 sj. ; 2 Cor. ii. 12, vii. 5, 
xi. 24, xii. 3 sq. ; Gal. i. 17, ii. 11 sq. ; to 
say nothing of the absence of any allnsion to 
Titus in connexion with Corinth or of the 
different aspects which the third visit to Jeru- 
salem bears in the Acts (xv. 1 sq.') and in St. 
Paul's Epistle (GaL ii. 1 sq.). 

(ii.) Another point of comparison with ex- 
ternal documents relates to the language ascribed 
to the different Apostles in the Acts. St. James, 
St. Peter, and St. Paul, all have speeches 
assigned to them. Is their language such a» 
might be expected from the writers of the 
Epistles bearing their several names ? The very 
few sentences ascribed to James do not aSbi^ 
much scope for comparison. Yet the sentiments 
attributed to him are what might have been 
expected from one who was the recognised head 
of the Church of Jerusalem, as well as from the 
writer of the Epistle which bears his name. It 
has been observed also that of the canonical 
writers James alone uses the common formula 
Xalptiy as the heading of his Epistle (James i. 1), 
which appears likewise at the beginning of the 
apostolic letter, evidently represented in the 
Acts as dictated by him. "The speeches and 
sayings of St. Peter afford considerably more 
material for comparison. In the diction, and 
still more in the ideas, they exhibit such paral- 
lels with the Epistles bearing the name of this 
Apostle, as to suggest identity of authorship, 
notwithstanding the alterations in form which 
they hare necessarily undergone by trans- 
mission. On this subject see Weiss, JVr 
Petrinische Lehrhegriff, p. 6 sq. and passim ; 
Kiihier, Die Seden des Petrus in der Apostel- 
geschichte. Stud. u. Krit, 1873, p. 492 sq. ; 
Salmon, Introd. p. 335 sq., ed. 2, as well as the 
commentariei on this Book, esp. Nssgen, p. 47 317. 
For St. Paul the material is much more ample, 
and the result correspondingly more conclusive. 
The speech at Miletus (.\cts xx. 18 sq.) more 
especially has been cnrefuUy analysed, and 
exhibits throughout both Pauline matter and 
Pauline diction. Moreover, it is not fanciful to 

Digitized by 



tnce more spccid correspondences with the 
UtUn belonging to the sereral periods at 
which the speeches are represented as being 
ilelirered. Thus the one Christian doctrine 
which is mentioned in the speech on the Areo- 
pagus (iTii 31) — the second Advent and the 
Judgment — is the one prominent topic of the 
Hpijtles to the Thessalonians, written at this 
thne. Again, the speech at Miletus, already 
mentioned, exhibits resemblances to the Epistles 
of the third missionary journey which preceded 
this epoch, and with the Epistles to the Philip- 
pians and Ephesians which succeeded it. 

(iii.) The geographical and historical tests 
which the snbject-matter of the Acts invites us 
to apply, are exceptionally wide and various. 
If, for instance, we confine ourselves to geography, 
we accompany the Apostle by land and by sea ; 
we follow him about in Jerosalem, in Palestine 
ind Syria, in Asia Minor, in Greece, in Italy. 
The topographical details are scattered over this 
wide expanse of continent, island, and ocean ; 
ind they are both minute and incidental. Yet 
the writer is never betrayed into an error. The 
account of the .\postle's journey to Home (for 
eitmple) is so accurate and consistent, that a 
modem writer has been enabled almost to repio- 
dnce a log-book of the voyage (James Smith's 
Vcyagt amt Shiptcreck of St. Paul). The amount 
of geographical and topographical illustration 
which the narrative of the Acts admits may be 
seen from such books as Conybeare and Howson's 
Ufe and Epistles of St. Peail and Lewin's Life 
aid EpisUet of St. Paul ; and these works will 
sfford a measure of the strength of the argument 
to be derived from such considerations. 

When we turn from geography to history, the 
tests are still more numerous, and lead to still 
more decisive results. The laws, the institu- 
tions, the manners, the religious rites, the 
tnsgisterial records, of Syria and Palestine, of 
Asia Minor, of Macedonia and Greece, all live in 
the pages of this narrative. It will suffice to 
mention one or two of the more striking facts. 
When St. Paul first visits Europe, he sojourns 
>t two important Macedonian cities in succession, 
Philippi and Thessalonica. In neither case does 
the political constitution follow the normal type 
of I Greek city ; yet in both the local govern- 
n)«iit b correctly and significantly indicated. 
Philippi was a Roman colony (xvi. 12). Accord- 
ingly here we find all the apparatus and colour- 
'DJ of a colony, which was a miniature repro- 
iaetion of Rome herself (see PhUippiaru, p. 51 
*{')■ There are the local magistrates, the 
ilaamrirs, who, alter the wont of such colonial 
nagiutcs, arrogate to themselves the title of 
praetors {<rrpajnyoi, xvi. 20, 22, 35, 36). Thero 
>r; the attendant lictors (^affSovxpi, xvi. 35). 
Dk majesty of Rome is appealed to again and 
'tiin (xvi. 21, 37, 38). But when we turn from 
I'lulippi to Thessalonica, all is changed. Thes- 
silonica was a free city, with a magistracy of 
its own. A collision occurs here, as at Philippi, 
>ai the alleged oflenders are again brought before 
th« magistrates. These magistrates are men- 
ti'ined, though quite incidentally, as politarchs 
(TtXtT<!^as, xvii. 6, 8). It so happens that 
'his word (woXir^X^t) has not hitherto been 
fomid anywhere in extant Greek literature, 
though woXiTofixo; appears, in a general sense, 
1 «n obscure passage of Aeneas Tacticus, c. 26 


(p. 81, Schweigh.). From inscriptions however, 
found at Thessalonica itself (Boeckh, C. I. 0., 
No. 1967 ; see Greek Inscriptions in the British 
Museum, II. clxxi. p. 32, with the notes), we 
learn that this was the local name of the chief 
magistrates of Thessalonica, who were seven in 
number. It should be added also that at Thes- 
salonica mention is made (xvii. 5) of a popular 
assembly (Sq/tot), which is likewise in keeping. 
Again, at Corinth, the notice of the chief 
magistrate is in strict accordance with history, 
though the chances of error were very great. 
The province of Achaia at this epoch was bandied 
about between the senate and the emperor, being 
transferred and retransferred from one to the 
other, and was governed by a proconsul (&i/0v- 
WttToi) or propraetor {iyrKTrpirriyos') accord- 
ingly. At this moment (a.D. 52 or 53) it was 
in the hands of the senate, and the designation 
of the chief magistrate as ii'0i/iraT«^i' in the 
Acts (xviii. 12) is therefore correct. But it had 
only been retransferred to the senate a few- 
years earlier (a.d. 44) by Claudius (Suet. Claud. 
25 ; Dio Cass. Ix. 24), after being in the em- 
peror's hands for some thirty years (since A.D. 
15) ; and somewhat later under Nero (a.d. 67) 
it ceased to be a Roman province (Plin. N. H, 
iv. 6 ; Suet. Nero, 24, &c. : see Clinton, Fast. 
Ram. i. p. 50), and remained autonomous till 
Vespasian again restored the provincial govern- 
ment. Moreover, the person represented as 
holding the proconsulate at this time, Gallic, is 
mentioned by his brother Seneca {Epist. 104, 
§ 1) as residing in Achaia, though his office is 
not named. In this passage however Seneca 
mentions an illness and consequent sea-voyage ot 
Gallic during his residence in Achaia, and Pliny 
(iV. H. xxxi. 33) refers to this same incident in 
Gallio's life as taking place post oonstilaium, but 
without any mention of Achain. Thus the notice 
in the Acts links together the statements of the 
two profane writers, for the proconsulship of 
Achaia would be a natural sequel to the consul- 
ship. Moreover, the time harmonises ; for as 
Seneca was not restored to favour till A.D. 49, 
after eight years' banishment, his brother's 
promotion to office would naturally take place 
after that year, and probably not long after. 
Gallia's character also, as here given, accords 
with the description of him by his brother 
Seneca {Quaest. Xat. iv. Praef.), and his friend 
Statins {Site. ii. 7. 30 57.), who both use the 
same epithet " dulcis." The easy-going magis- 
trate was the amiable, sweet-tempered com- 
panion. Similarly, the description of Sergius 
Paulus, as procottsul of Crete, is confirmed by 
notices and inscriptions, though here again any 
one but a contemporary would be very liable to 
error,owing to the transference and retransference 
of the province (see Contemporary Seriew, May 
1878, p. 290). Not only do the inscriptions 
show that at this time it was governed by 
proconsuls, but one discovered a few years ago 
by Cesnola (^Cyprus, p. 425) mentions "the 
proconsulship of Paulus" (€ni riAYAOY 
[AN©]YnATOY). On the probobility that 
this is the Sergius Paulus mentioned by Pliny, 
see Contemp. Pev. 1. c. 

.^mong other Greek cities which St. Paul is 
represented as visiting, eomparatively full ac- 
counts are given of his sojourns nt two especi- 
ally, Athens and Ephesus. It is instructive to 

D 2 

Digitized by 



■tndy the narratives of his residence at these 
two places, in themselves aad in comparison 
one with another. Athens is the most Hellenic 
of all cities, the heart and citadel of Greece ; 
whereas at Ephesus there is a very strong inter- 
mingling of the Oriental spirit and institutions 
with the main stream of Hellenism. The di- 
verse tone of these two typical cities of heathen- 
dom appears to the life in the Apostle's conflicts 
with his audiences on either occasion. The 
one is inquisitive, philosophical, courteous, and 
refined ; the other fanatical, superstitious, and 
impulsive. Nor does the truthfulness of the 
narrative manifest itself only in the moral and 
religious atmosphere of the two places. It 
descends even to the details. At Athens (Acts 
xvii. 16 S7.) we are confronted with some nf 
the main topographical features of the city — the 
Areopagus and the agora. There are the repre- 
sentatives of the two dominant philosophical 
schools, the Stoics and Epicureans. There is the 
predominnnt attitude uf inquiry in this metro- 
polis of newsmongers, and here even the charao- 
teristic Athenian term of abuse {inrtpiio\Syos) 
finds its proper place. There is the large number of 
foreign residents, which was al ways a distinguish- 
ing feature of Athens. There is the reference 
to the numerous images and temples which 
thronged the city ; to the boastful pride of the 
citizens in their religious devotion to the gods, 
consistent as it was with no small amount of 
theological scepticism ; to their jealousy of the 
introduction of strange deities, as manifested in 
the case of Socrates and at various points in 
their history ; to their practice of propitiating 
the offended powers after any plague or other 
infection, by erecting an altar to " an unknown 
god " or " unknown gods " ; to their custom of 
deifying attributes of character, frames of mind, 
and conditions of body, so that " Resurrection " 
(.\nast.isis)'' would seem to them to be only 
another addition to their pantheon, which al- 
ready included "Pity," ".Modesty," "Rumour," 
"Persuasion," "Impulse," &c. (Pausan. i. 17). 
Ijutly, there is nn appropriate allusion to rh 
Octal', an expression which would commend 
itself to his philosophical audience, but which 
occurs nowhere else ic the New Testament ; and 
an equally appropriate appeal to the sentiments 
of the Stoic poets Aratus and Clcanthes (rwv 
icafi* Ofias Taii)T»i'), who had proclaimed the uni- 
versal fatherhood of Zeus. The amount of 
illustration which has been gathered together 
from classical sources by such writers ns Wet- 
stein, Conybearc and Howson, and Reiian (not to 
mention the numerous commentators on the 
Acts), is sufficient evidence how true to local 
colouring is this description of St. Paul's visit 
to Atheus, even in the finest touches. When 
we turn from Athens to Ephesus (xiz. 1 aq.), 
the indication of the truthfulness of the narra- 
tive is equally complete. Here however the 
verification is found more in ancient inscriptions 

•i Compare the account of the Russian revolt in 1826 
(Alison's BUIory of JSurope, 11. p. 239) : ■■ Meanwhile the 
leaders of the revolt, deeming their victory secure, began 
to hoist their real colours. Cries of ' Constantfne and 
the OmMtitution' broke from their ranks. *Wbat Is 
that ?' said the men to each other. 'Do yon not know?' 
said one; 'It la the ICmpress (Constltontda).' 'Not ot 
all,' replied a third ; ' It Is the carrlatte In which the 
emperor Is to drive at bis coronition.' " 


than in extant literature. The recent excav.v 
tions at Ephesus more especially have added 
largely to our stores of illustrations. On this 
subject see a paper by the writer of this article 
in the Contemporary Reticr, May 1878, p. 29i 
$q. We have mention, in St. Luke's account, 
of the magical books, of which wc read else- 
where under the name 'E^tiria ypifiiiam: of 
the chief buildings of the city, not only th« 
Temple of Artemis but the Great Theatre, with 
which the recent excavations have made ns 
familiar ; of the great oliiclals of the city ami 
province — the proconsul as the chief imperial 
magistrate, the town-clerk as the chief muni- 
cipal authority, and the Asiarchs as the princi- 
pal religious functionaries ; of the court days, 
by implication divided into two, the regular and 
the S|)ecial, as we know to have been the cose ; 
above nil, of the prevailing cultus of the place. 
" Artemis of the Ephesiaus " dominates every- 
where. The characteristic religious phraseology 
of her worshippers is reproduced — the city is 
the " temple-sweeper," the verger, of the " great 
goddess;" the silver models of her shrine which 
were carried away as keepsakes by pilgrims t« 
Ephesus, appear in the narrative ; the image 
which " fell down from Zeus " has its place 
there ; everything is strictly in keeping. 

These instances of geographical and historical 
propriety are taken from Greece and Asia 
Minor, and the illustrations are drawn from 
classical writers and inscriptions. But the 
pictures relating to Jerusalem and Palestine are 
found to be drawn with eqnal fidelity, where 
we can test them. Of topographical accuracy 
an example will be given presently in the 
vivid description of a scene which takes place in 
the Temple area (p. 38). The historical fidelity 
of the narrative may be illustrated by the part 
assigned to the Sadducees. It is not among 
the high-priests and leaders of the hierarchy that 
we should have expected to find a Sadducean pre- 
dominance. Yet the author of the Acts boldly 
represents the high-priestly circle as members of 
this sect (iv. 1, v. 17); and this representation 
is confirmed by the direct testimony of Josephus 
(,Ant. XX. 9. 1). Moreover it has been more 
than once observed that, whereas the Pharisees 
are the chief opponents of Christ and Hi* 
disciples in the Gospels, the Sadducees take the 
lead in the Acts, and that this change is ex- 
plained from the fact of the Apostles making 
the Resurrection the foundation of their preach- 
ing, and thus striking at the root of Sadducean 
doctrine. From this point of view, it is notice- 
able that in the Konrth Gospel, though the sect 
of the Sadducees is not mentioned by name by 
St. John, the most virulent opposition of the 
high-priestly party led by Caiaphas begins fir»t 
at the point where we should expect it to begin, 
after the miracle of the raising of I^zarus 
(John xi. 47 tq.'), and that it was a main object 
with them to put Lazarus to death (John xii. 9~ 
11) and thus get rid of this evidence for a resur- 
rection. Accordingly the course of events a< 
related on a subsequent occasion, when St. Paul 
pleads before the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem 
(Acts xziii. 1 tq.), is perfectly consistent and evi- 
dently historical. The Apostle had offended the 
Sadducean high -priest Ananias, who presided; 
and he recovered his position with his andience 
by declaring that he and his forefathers were 

Digitized by 



Plitm«e(, anil tb»t the main subject of his con- 
KnlioD was the doctrine of the Resurrection, 
nliich the Pharisee* held in common vith him, 
thus dividing the assembly and securing (as it 
»ould appear) the sup]wrt of the majority. 
Wlitther this declaration was strictly defensible 
(u it was certainly true), I need not stop to 
inquire ; but it is what a sagacious man would 
lutnrally do under the circumstances, and tho 
I'act that it is frankly recorded is a token of the 
Dsmtor's Teracity. 

The evidence then in favour of the authenticity 
cf the narrative is far fuller and more vnrie<l 
than we had any right to eipect. But certain 
dbjtctimi hare been taken, which it is necessary 
t» remove. 

(i.) Thus it is asserted that the dictim it 
the tame throughout, and that therefore the 
speeches ascribed to the principal characters 
are nnhistoricnl. It is not Stephen or Peter 
or Paal who sjieaks, bat Luke or pseudo-Luke 
himself. Long li^ts of words and modes of 
eipression have been drawn up, which are 
regarded as charauteristic of the writer's style. 
These eitend over the whole of the Gospel 
u well as the Acta. There is frequently very 
great exaggeration in these lists (e.g. Super- 
Mtmd ReiigiiM, iii. pp. 72 tq., 146 >q., &c.). 
imlerant expressions are included ; Septuagint 
quotations are treated as if they were the 
narrator's own language ; words used in wholly 
ditferent senses {e.g. Rtiita, " footstep," and /SJ/io, 
"tribunal") are treated as parallels; terms 
whirb are necessitated by the subject-matter are 
regarded as characteristic of the author ; the 
cvmmonest words in the language are invested 
with a special value. Thus an entirely false 
impression is conveyed. But, after all these 
iparioas examples are set axide, there is a 
certain residuvin of resemblance in the diction 
(<«e e.j. Lekebnsch, p. 35 sf.). Characteristic 
words and phrases of the author appear in the 
-peeehes, as well as in the narrative portion, 
lint this was inevitable. It was impossible that 
the speeches could be reported word for word. 
Sometimes they must have been spoken in 
inmaic; in other cases only shorthand and 
'rajmenlary reports were in the author's 
hois; in others again be may hare heard 
thou by word of mouth; in all probably 
they were much abridged. A certain infusion 
of his own phraseology was a natural uon- 
wqnence, and it does not aifect their substantial 
xxaraer. It appears even in the example 
iihich I have already given of an evidently 
P'oliae utterance — the speech to the Ephesian 
•Idtrs at Miletus. The measure of the extent 
to which it would affect the language is seen 
l>y the example of the Third Gospel. Here we 
IK able to compare St. Luke's account with 
<)>< parallel narratives of the two other 
''raoptists ; and the historical character remains, 
Mwithstanding the literary editing of the third 
trugi^lut. There is no reason to suppose that 
)h d«alt more freely with his materials in the 
itts, where we have no such means of testing 
Aea. Indeed, as he was nearer to the events 
■Ji4 more familiar with the persons, we should 
^iptct, if anything, a closer adherence to the 
trm in which he received the reports. 

C>i.) A second objection, or rather a second 
(^ of objections, is based on the representation 



here given of the principal agents in the plant- 
ing of the Church, more especially of the 
relations between St. Peter and St. Paul ami 
their respective followers. These objectioiii> 
start from the assumption that there was nii 
irreconcilable opposition between the Apostle^ 
of the Circumcision and the Apostle of the 
Gentiles ; that their views of Christianity were 
diametrically opposed ; and that the former 
never emauci|>ated themselves from a strictly 
Judaic and national conception of Christ's 
Kingdom, whereas the idea of the latter was 
cosmopolitan and universal. The author of the 
Acts, it is assumed, living at a Inter date, was 
desirous of iiiiding a meeting jioint for conflicting 
imrties, and thus invented positions, words, and 
actions for the chief Apostles, so as to bring 
them into accord. His aim was conciliation, and 
he twisted or forged history accordingly. This 
is too wide a question fvr discussion here. The 
objection indicated involves a petiiio piincipii. 
Our chief authority for the relations existing 
between the leading .Apostles is this very Book 
itself We can only say that to ourselves such 
passages as I Cor. i. 1'2 tq., 23 ; Gal. i. 18, ii. 
6 tq., 14 tq., seem to indicate a substantial 
harmony in principle between the two supposed 
antagonists ; * that they are placed on the same 
level by the two earliest of the apostolic 
Fathers (Clem. Rom. 5 ; Ignat. £om. 4), and are 
quoted as of equal authority by the third 
(Polyc. Phil. 2, 5, 6, &c.) ; that the main stream 
of Christian history betrays no evidence of this 
fundamental antagonism as the substratum of 
the Catholic Church ; and that the first distinct 
mention of it occurs in an obviously fictitious 
narrative, which cannot date betiire the second 
half of the second century, though doubtless 
even from the apostolic times there were some 
extreme men who used the names of the two 
A]>ostles as |>arty watchwords. 

According to this conception of early Chris- 
tianity, it would be impossible that St. Peter 
should have seen the vision obliterating the 
distinction of meats clean and unclean, which 
led to the conversion of Cornelius, or that St. 
Paul should have taken part in the Nazarite 
vows, and so have been guilty of complicity 
with Jewish customs, on his last visit to 
Jerusiilem. Above all, the representation of 
the attitudes of the respective leaders at the 
so-called apostolic council is called in question, 
both as impossible in itself and as irreconcilable 
with the notices of what is apparently the same 
occasion in Gal. ii. 1-10. 

As regards the apostolic council, I may 
)>erhaps tie allowed to refer to a full consideration 
of the question in my Galatiant, p. 123 tq. The 
subject is too long for discussion here. It has 
been treated from various points of view, not 
only in Introductions, Apostolic Histories, and 
Commentaries, but also in separata articles 
and monographs. Among the latter are Grimm, 
Hud. «. Krit. 1880, Hft. 3 ; Hilgenfeld, Zeittchr. 

r So f«r ta regards St. Peter's attitude towards tbe 
Psnline doctrine of fa(th and grace, we can only say that 
the Acts represents him as adopting It (xv. 9, 11), Just as 
tbe Epistle bearing his name (1 Peter I. 6, 9, 13. &c.) 
adopts it, though not giving it the same special promi- 
nence, and as Indeed It is distinctly implied that be 
adopted It In St. Paul's argument Gal. 11. 14. 

Digitized by 




/. Wias. T/teol. 1858, p. 74 57.. p. 317 aq.; 
Holsten, Zum Evangelium dcs PaiUus u. dcs 
Petrua, 1868 ; Holtzmann, Zeitschr. f. Wiss. 
TIteol. 1882, p. 436 sq., 1883, p. 129 sq. ; Keim, 
Am dem Urchrislenthum, p. 64 sq. ; Lipsius in 
Schenkcl's Bibellexikon, i. p. 194 sq. ; Pfleiderer, 
■fahrb.f. Protest. Theol. 1883, p. 78 sq., p. 241 sq.\ 
\t.e\isi,Remude Thiologie, 1858, 1859; K. Schmidt 
ill Herzog-Plitt, Reed Eiwykl. i. p. 575, 1877 ; 
Schneckenbiirger, Stud. u. Krit. 1855, p. hhisq. ; 
Volltmar, Theol. Zeitschr. aus d. Schiceiz, 1885, 
p. 33 sq. ; Weizsacker, Jahrb. f. Deutsch. Theol. 
1S73, p. 191 srj. ; Wittichen, Jahrb. f. Protest. 
Theol. 1877, p. 653 sq. See also other references 
in Holtzmann, /, c. p. 436 sq. The opinions of 
Baur, Lcchler, Neander, Ritschl, Schwcglcr, 
Zeller, and others, nil] be found in their several 
works mentioned at the end of this article ; and 
the question is discussed at length in some of 
the Commentaries (e.g. Ovcrbeck and NBsgen). 

But it so happens that at the very two points 
in the narrative where St. Paul is represented as 
making the largest concessions to the Judaic 
Christians, and where therefore the author is 
supposed to diverge most widely from historical 
truth in order to gratify this assumed motive, 
we find in the character of the context indica- 
tions which, in any other case, would be 
regarded as striking evidences of veracity in 
an ancient narrator. These are the account of 
the third visit to Jerusalem, including this 
apostolic council in the 15th ch.npter, and the 
conduct of the Apo.stle on his last visit to this 
same place in the 21st chapter. 

(1.) The account of the apostolic council is 
preceded by one avowal of weakness in the fac- 
tions and quarrels in the Church (xv. 1, 2 sq.), 
and succeeded by another in the contention and 
separation of Paul and Barnabas (xv. 36 sq.}. 
These frank confessions at all events atTord a 
strong presumption of truthfulness. The whole 
narrative is essentially simple, straightforward, 
and natural, as a record of events. The princi- 
pal speakers, Peter and James, express opjnions 
and use language, as we have seen, which at all 
events present resemblances to the Epistles 
extant in their names. The " apostolic decree " 
bears such manifest traces of genuineness, and 
would have been so impossible at a late date, 
that few even of those who impugn the repre- 
sentation of St. Paul's action have ventured to 
question it. The relative positions of Peter and 
James harmonise with the circumstances, the 
official superiority of James at Jerusalem being 
recognised. The relative positions of Paul and 
Barnabas show still more subtle traces of 
authenticity, as I have already pointed out. 
Where the author is narrating in his own per- 
son, the order " Paul and Barnabas," which 
would be natural to him, is adopted (xv. 2, 22, 
35); but where the Church of Jerusalem is 
interested, as in the order of hearing accorded 
to the two (xv. 12), and again in the apostolic 
letter itself (xv. 25), tho order is reversed — 
Barnabas being the older disciple, and better 
known to the Christians in Jerusalem. As a 
minor indication of truthfulness again, we may 
mention that Peter here, and here only in the 
Acts (in the speech of James), is called by his 
Hebraic name in its Hebraic form "Symeon" 
(comp. 2 Pet. i. 1). Indeed, the whole narra- 
tive is such that no one would have hesitated to 

accept it as a genuine record, if this preposses- 
sion as to the mutual relations of the Apostles 
at this crisis had not stood in the way. 

(2.) The same is true of the later incident, 
the concession of the Apostle to the Jewisii 
Christians in the matter of the Nazarite vows, 
on the occasion of his last visit to Jerusalem. 
The account is preceded by a diary of the 
voyage to Caesarea (xxi. 1-8) and the sojouni 
in Caesarea (xxi. 9-14), which is singularly 
plain, straightforward, and lifelike, which siitis- 
ties every test of truthfulness, and which in tlie 
purposelessness of the incidental touches is only 
explicable as a narrative of an eye-witness. Thi» 
is especially true likewise of the verse imme- 
diately preceding the, visit (xxi. 16), which re- 
cords the journey from Caesarea to Jerusalem, 
" taking with us one Mnaaon of Cyprus, a primi- 
tive disciple, with whom we were to lodge." 
There is no reason for this mention of Mnason, 
of whom we never hear again, except that tlio 
fact struck the narrator. The whole accouut 
again belongs to the " we " sections, and mani- 
fests the life-like character which pervades 
these sections. Moreover, it is allusive. It 
omits to explain certain points to the reader, 
because they were obvious to the writer. Such, 
for instance, is the reference to " the seven 
days" (xxi. 27), which has puzzled the com- 
mentators. Again, the narrative of the tumult 
in the Temple, which follows, is not only full 4>l 
life, but (what is more important) instinct witli 
local colouring. The alarm that the Apostle 
had introduced the Gentile Trophimus, the 
Ephesiau, into the Temple, is illustr.ited by M. 
Ganneau's discovery (Palestine Kxploration Fund. 
1871, pp. 132 sq., 172 sg.)of the inscription on 
the stone barrier (Sp^cucTot) which divided olT 
the Court of the Israelites, forbidding any 
foreigner to pass it on pain of death, as cor- 
rectly recorded by Josephus (Ant. xv. 11.5; 
comp. Bell. Jud. v. 5. 2, vi. 2. 4); and hence 
doubtless St. Paul drew his illustration of the 
middle wall of partition (rh luairoixor toC' 
<ppayiix>v) separating Jew and Gentile in 
Ephes. ii. 14, not without a remembrance (ne 
may well suppose) of this incident of Trophimus 
the Ephesian, which was the beginning of hi> 
captivity. Again, in the tumult which follows, 
the same characteristics are still more promi- 
nent. The "tribune," the "cohort," the 
"descent" (r. 12), the "steps," the " fortress" 
— is the meaning of all this? A minute 
topographical knowledge underlies the narr.i- 
tivc. The tower of Antonia, dominating the 
Temple area and ascended thence by a long flight 
of stairs, with the armed cohort stationed there 
to keep order during the Festivals (Joseph. B. J. 
ii. 12. 1, TTJs 'Ptt/toTKqi tnrflpas iwip ri/y roS Upov 
ffToav i^fffrdffjis, KvoirKoi tc itfl rits iopras 
irapaipvXdTToviri k.t.X.), are the facts familiar 
to the writer which explain and vivify the inci- 
dents. But they are assumed, not stated. Upon 
this follows immediately the reference to the 
Egyptian pretender, who, as we learn from 
Josephus (Ant. 11. 8. 6; 5. J. ii. 13. 5), some 
three years before this time had threatened 
Jerusalem. He had disappeared, and nothing 
more was heard of him. What more likely 
than that the Roman captain should suppose 
that he had started up again to disturb the 
pe-tce ? The manner in which he is mentioned 

Digitized by 



here is altogether natural and unstudied. On 
(lie other hand, it it at all probable that a writer 
in the 2nd century would be capable of the very 
subtle and ingenioni artifice which would be 
ioTolred in thi> reference, if the narrative were 
not gennine ? In fact the whole of thi» pasaage 
txfoR and after the account of the Mazarite 
TOWS hangs together ; and it is marked through- 
oat with many and various tokens of authenticity. 

Not unconnected with the objection based on 
the conciliatory tendency of the Book, is the 
supposed parallelism between the careers of the 
two .Apostles in the former and latter parts of 
the urrative respectively. Paul is miraculously 
released from prison at Pbilippi (xvi. 26 sq.y, 
^li Peter was at Jerusalem (xii. 6 tq."). Paul 
strikes the sorcerer Elymas blind (xiii. 6 sq,), 
as Peter struck the liars Ananias and Sapphira 
dead (v. 1 aq.). Sick persons are healed by 
handkerchiefs and aprons brought from the body 
of Panl (xii. 11 */.), as they are healed by the 
-shadow of Peter falling upon them (v. 15). And 
so forth. When the incidents are extracted 
from their contexts and marshalled in pairs, 
thtr produce a great impression, and it is not 
surprising that many able critics of different 
schools have laid stress on this parallelism. On 
Bearer examination, however, it is difficult to 
tind any indication that this design was present 
to the mind of the writer, though he could 
hardly have concealed the fact, if he had enter- 
tained it. Nor, except in the miraculous 
release from prison, Is there any close corre- 
spondence ; and in this case the eS'ect of the 
parallelism, as an indication of any such pur- 
pose, is destroyed by the fact that a third mira- 
«nlaas release from prison, earlier than either, 
it recorded (v. 19), in which "the Apostles" 
generally are involved. But in fact parallelisms 
far more close are common in bistor}'. 

(iii.) But a -wholly different objection has 
been nrged to the genuineness of the Book. 
Several persons and incidents mentioned in the 
Acts have a place likewise in Josephus. As the 
two writers were treating of the history of the 
same country daring the same period, we should 
hardly have expected it to be otherwise. 
But it is urged that the writer of the Acts 
borrowed from Josephus, and therefore cannot 
hare been St. Luke. This objection was started 
by Holtxmann (Za'iscAr. /. Wia. Theot. xvi. 
[1873], p. 83 tq.), and followed up by Krenkel 
(ill. p. 441 sqS by the author of Supernatural 
Beiijim {Forlnightty Review, 1877, p. 502 tq.\ 
aid by Keim (^Urchrittenthum, p. 1 sij., 1878). 
Holtzmann was answered by Schiirer (^Zeitschr, 
f. Wilt. Tneol. xii. [1876], p. 574 sy.), to whom 
h« made a counter-reply (i>. xx. [1877], p. 535 
«7.). As regards the narrative of facts, the 
dircrgences between the two are a sufficient 
answer to the charge of plagiarism. Indeed, 
tbe genuineness of the narrative in the Acts has 
been assailed on two wholly different and irre- 
eoncilable grounds. On the one hand, its 
eoincidences with Josephus are taken t<r prove 
that it is the work of a late pretender ; on the 
*ther hand, its divergences from this same his- 
t"rian are regarded as evidence that the narra- 
tive is inauthentic The attempt to reconcile 
these two contradictory grounds of attack by 
the supposition that when the author followed 
Josephus, be trusted his memory and was 


betrayed by it, will hardly carry conviction to 
any one. We may remark in passing that it is 
an unproved assumption that, wherever there 
are divergences between the two, Josephus is 
right and St. Luke is wrong. Probabilities are 
often the other way. When, for instance, 
Josephus {B. J. ii. 13. 5) gives the number of 
the sicarii who followed the Egyptian as 30,000, 
and the author of the Acts as 4000, we can 
have no hesitation in preferring the smaller 
number to the larger. Moreover, Josephus is 
not always consistent with himself in his dif- 
ferent works, and is full of inaccuracies when 
dealing with O. T. history (^Dict. of Christ. 
Biogr. s. v. Josephus, iii. pp. 445, 455). As 
regards resemblances of diction, no coincidences 
have been alleged which make out even a prima 
facie case of plagiarism. Thus, when Holtz- 
mann compares Ant. ii. 5. 1 (^iSov riis 
'lovtalas tretpmrfiomos) with Luke iii. 1 
(jiytliovtvomot Xlmrlov niAdrov ri\s 'IomSoIoj), 
or when Krenkel sets side by side Josephus' 
account of his own boyhood ( Vit. 2) with St. 
Luke's account of Christ's childhood (ii. 42 sq.\ 
laying stress on the occurrence of such words 
as "intelligence" {ainaii) and "progress" 
{■Kprnciirrtty), and on the fact that the one was 
fourteen yean old (wwr tty irepl T«ir<rai>«vic(u- 
Siieeeroy frot) and the other twelve (8tc iy4ytro 
iruy SiiStKa . . . {nri/uiyty 'IriaoOt i ira<s), or 
when the author of Supertutttiral Setigion calb 
attention to the dedication of Josephus' treatise 
Against Apion to Epaphroditus, whom he desig- 
nates Kpirurrf iySpHy, as Theophilus is desig- 
nated Kpirurrt by St. Luke, and then ransacks 
the preface of Josephus, which extends over 
several pages, to find words such as irapoicoAav- 
0tiy, ainiiwryii, iucpiPis, ixix'ifno', we are able 
to measure the value of this objection. To take 
the last case. The epithet Kpirurrot is very 
common as applied to persons in high position ; 
it occurs many times, for instance, in the 
inscriptions in Wood's Ephesua. In one single 
inscription (Oreat Theatre, No. 17) it is found, 
twice within six lines, applied to two different 
persons (M<SSf(rra> i Koirurros, KopyriMf 
TlptlirKif T$ KparloT^ aySmrir^') ; and in 
another (City and Suburbs, No. 5), twice within 
four lines, applied to four different persons, 
three of them being women (IlfiSuiSoi r^s 
Kparltrrtis irtenKfjt, Apixoyros itMriwiTpca 
BtetylSos r&y Kpaalaruy). Again, in every 
case the words used by both these writers in 
common are the obvious words to express the 
things signified, as any lexicon will show ; and 
where two authors are dwelling on similar 
topics (e.g. the authorities for contemporary or 
nearly contemporary history), they cannot fail 
to employ similar language; nor is it easy to 
explain how any one who could write the Third 
Gospel and the Acts should be driven to 
Josephus to replenish his vocabulary with such 
ordinary words as "attempt," "accurately," 
" eye-witness," " observe," and the like. 

(iv.) Another objection to the genuineness 
and authenticity of the narrative is the alleged 
fact that it contains certain unhistorical state- 
ments. For the most part however the errors 
adduced do not affect the veracity of tbe his- 
torian himself. Thus, for instance, it is af- 
firmed that St. Stephen's speech, as tested by 
tbe Old Testament, contains several inac- 

Digitized by 




{■uracies. These would doubtless require con- 
sideration, if we were discussing the nature and 
limits of inspiration ; but for the question of the 
veracity of the author they hare no value at 
all. We bare no ground for supposing that he 
was in any degree responsible for them. Nearly 
all the alleged historical errors are of this 
kind. The speakers are to blnme, not the 
author who records their speeches. One or two 
eiaroples, however, do not belong to this class. 
The chief and most formidable of such historical 
dillicultiesis connected withTheudas, thereligious 
insurgent or pretender, whose name is mentioned 
in the speech of Gamaliel (Acts ▼. 36) as having 
been put to death " aforetime " (irpi roiriti riy 
TlfLtpiy), and his followers, about four hundred 
in number, dispersed. A person of this name 
ap|iears likewise in Josephus (Ant, xx. 5. 1), 
where he is described as a wizard (yirit)t *'^o 
pretended that he was a prophet ; undertook to 
divide the waters of the Jordan, so that it might 
be traversed dryshod ; and was followed by the 
great mass of the common people (rhv rKtitrrov 
SxKoy). The procurator Kadus promptly sent 
a detachment of cavalry after him. The leader 
himself was beheaded, and of his followers some 
were slain and others captured alive. It is 
assumed that the Theudas of Josephus is the 
same with the Theudas of St. Luke ; and if so, 
there is an insuperable chronological discrepancy. 
The procurator Fadus entered upon his office 
A.D. 44, but the Theudas of St. Luke must be 
placed long before this time : for (1) the speecli 
of Gamaliel itself is supposed to be spoken some 
years earlier, and (2) Gamaliel describes the 
insurrection of Judas the Galilean, as subse- 
quent to that of Theudas (ver. 37, /wri rovrovX 
and the insurrection of Judas certainly took 
place " in the days of the taxing," x,e. soon after 
the birth of Christ (see Joseph. Ant. xviii. 1. 1, 
XX. 5. 2 ; A J. ii. 17. 8). Though the narrative 
of Josephus is disfigured by demonstrable errors 
and inaccuracies, yet it is hardly possible that 
he can have been mistaken here. We must 
therefore suppose the Theudas of Gamaliel to be 
a different person, as Origen does (c. CcU, i. 57, 
SevSSt Tfib T^i •ftviamt '\riaov yiyovi rtt wapii 
'lavtaiois). Beyond the name there is no close 
resemblance ; and Theudas contracted from 
Theodorus, Theodotus, Theodosios (frequently 
written Theudorus, Theudotus, Theudosius), 
as the Greek equivalent to several Hebrew 
names — Jonathan, Mattaniah, Matthias, Ma- 
thanoel, &c — would be commonly affected by 
the Jews (on these names, Theodoras, &c. 
among the Jews, see Zunz, Qesamm. Schriften, ii. 
pp. 6, 7, 10, 22). Josephus himself mentions 
four pretenders named Simon, and three named 
Judns — these Inst all within ten years (see 
Gloag, i. p. 197). The Theudas of Gamaliel, 
therefore, will probably have been one of the 
many pretenders of whom Josephus speaks as 
troubling the peace of the nation about this 
time (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 10. 8 ; B. J. ii. 4. 1), 
without however giving their names. There 
is something to be said for the solution of 
Wieseler (^Synopsis, p. 90 $q., Eng. trans.), who, 
on the ground of the name, would identify him 
with Matthias the son of Margalothus, an 
insurgent in the time of Herotl ; for this pei-son 
has a prominent place in Josephus (^Ant. xvii. 
6. 2 sj.). In connexion with this charge of 


falsification the language respecting Judas of 
Galilee, attributed to Gamaliel in the context, 
deserves notice. He speaks of Judas' rebellion 
as commg to nothing. This was luitural enough 
on the lips of Gamaliel before the sequel had 
i-evealed itself, but would be out of place at .t 
later date; for two sons of this rebel Uader. 
James and Simon, broke out in rebellion under 
Claudius, and were crucified by the procnrator 
Tiberias Alexander (Ant. xx. 5. 'J); while a third 
son, Menahem, headed a formidable rebelUok 
shortly before the commencement of the Jewish 
war, and he too was put to death (£. J. ii. IT. 
8 Sf. See Nosgen, p. 146 tg.). 

6. The Time and Place of Writing. — What 
was the date of the Acts ? To this we can give 
no certain answer. It has been shown that tlie 
conclusion of the history is intentional, thai 
there is no abruptness in it, and that therefore 
we cannot draw any inference from it, as tkoagb 
the book were written at the point of timr 
where the narrative closes (p. 27). This in- 
dication of date having failed us, no clue remains. 
The fancy of Hug and others that oCtt) irrlr 
(fn^lios (" this is desert ") in viii. 26 refers t» 
the destruction of Gaza immediately before the 
fall of Jerusalem (Joseph. B. J. ii. 18. 1), and 
therefore points to a date not earlier than about 
A.D. 80, is based on a misconception. The word* 
are perhaps not the author's own, but the 
Angel's, and they certainly refer not to the city, 
but to the road. They would thus be an in- 
struction to Philip to take this route, because it 
passed through an uninhabited and unfrequented 
country, where he would be unmolested in hia^ 
iuterview with the Ethiopian. The Book itself 
contains no reference to any event later than 
the close of the narrative itself. It must how- 
ever have been written later than the Gospel, 
and we are thus led to investigate the date of 
this " former treatise." Here it is confidently 
assumed that the turn given to our Lord's 
predictions of the coming troubles (Luke xzL 
20-24X as compared with the parallel passages 
in the other Evangelists, shows that this Gospel 
was written after the destruction of Jemsalcnt. 
I am unable to see the force of this argument. 
The destruction of Jernsnlem seems clearly to 
be indicated in Christ's prophecies in the other- 
Evangelists likewise, and the difference of lan- 
guage does not seriously affect the case. Yet. 
though the reason given may not be valid, the- 
date so assigned is perhaps not far wrong. It 
would at all events be a probable date for n 
writer who was a younger disciple and a personal 
follower of St. Paul. Not a few of those who 
recognise St. Luke as the author of the work 
have accepted this date as approximately correct. 

The place of writing is altogether indeterr 
minable. Something may be said in favour of 
Philippi. At all events the writer seems t» 
have spent some time there (see above, p. 35), 
and the use of the first person at this point, 
without any explanation, may suggest some 
corresponding local knowledge on the |iart of 
the recipient. Again Antioch is far from im- 
probable, since St. Luke according to an old 
tradition was born at Antioch, and some det&ils 
connected with this city are given with ex- 
ceptional particularity (vi. 5, xi. 26, liii. 1 sg,, 
XV. 22 tq.). Again Rome has a certain claim 
to be considered, since the writer accompanieil 

Digitized by 



SL Pinl «o the Tifiit with which the narrative 
cloMS. Other places which have been suggested, 
such u Aleiandria or Ephesus, hare nothing to 
noommemi them. 

7. Sourcet of Information, — ^The aiUfiorities 
of which the writer made nse must remain a 
matter of specalttion. It has been inferred 
from the preface to the Gospel, that St. Lnke 
diicanled all written sources of information, 
such as anr memoirs of Christ's life and teaching 
which others before him may hare published, 
ud depended entirely on oral tradition, as 
rKeired directly from eye-witnesses. It does 
not teem to me that his language suggests this 
sUkt limitation. The " tradition " of which he 
there speaks might be written as well as oral. 
Hot again, eren supposing that he had confined 
himself t« the oral communications of eye-wit- 
MiHs in the first treatise, are we justified in 
ununing him to have acted in precisely the 
ame way in composing the second. As a 
i)u«stian uf probability, the life and words of 
Christ, being the subject-matter of Christian 
tesching, would form a more or less definite 
bolj of oral tradition ; but the doings of the 
Apostles had no snch importance that they 
should assume this form. The question as 
reguils the Acts resolves itself into one of 
iolemil eridence and probability. So regarding 
it, we are forced to the conclusion that, for some 
puts at least (the speech of Stephen will serve 
as an example), he must hare used written notes 
talcen down at the time; for this speech is in- 
ronotirable as a fiction, and almost equally so 
as SB oral tradi tion. When we take into account 
the common use of shorthand among the ancients, 
there is no improbability in this supposition ; 
liaoe the gravity and interest of the defence on 
sQca a critical occasion must have impressed itself 
on all, more especially on the disciples. 

The materials then would be partly oral, 
partly written. The written materials would be 
here and there a document, such as the letter of 
the apostolic council (xv. 23 sq.); here and there 
Dotes of speeches taken down at the time or 
immediately afterwards; and occasionally also 
diaries or memoranda of facts. Besides these, 
he would receive a large amount of oral in- 
fonnation ; and for some portions of his narra- 
tive he was himself an eye-witness. His chief 
aathority would naturally be St. Paul, with 
<hom at different epochs he spent large 
portions of time. But he likewise lodged a 
oatiderable time (iutifas vKtUvt) with Philip 
Iht Evangelist (xzi. 10), and from him he may 
have received written or oral information re- 
iimtiBg the earliest history of the Church, 
BSR especially the doings of the deacons, in 
vUch Philip himself "pars magna fuit" (rili. 
>-4<)). From this source also he might hare 
'Mred bis information respecting the conversion 
«f Cornelius, for Caesjirea seems to have been 
l^ilip's permanent home before as well as after 
this event (viit 40, xii. 8). For portions of 
this earlier history also he may have been 
indebted to John Mark, in whose company we 
^ him at a later date (Col. iv. 10, 14 ; Ph'ilem. 
H; ump. 2 Tim. iv. 11). For all that related 
to Barnabas (Col. iv. 10) and to St. Peter (1 Pet. 
'. 13), Mark would be a competent authority. 
His isterroune with men like Timothy and 
TycUcu also most have been considerable ; and | 



they may have supplied information for the 
latter part of his narrative, where St. Paul 
failed him. How close may have been St. Luke's 
intimacy with any of the Twelve, we cannot 
say. ' To any such intimacy we find no reference 
within the compass of his own narrative; but 
an acquaintance with St. Peter afterwards, at 
Rome, is consistent with the notices. 

8. The Motite and Design of the TTor*.— The 
motive and design of the work have been con- 
sidered already, when its contents were under 
discussion. Addressing one Theophilus, either 
an actual person or an imaginary representative 
of the Christian student, St. Luke merely pur- 
poses to give for the edification of his readers a 
history of the Christian Church from its founda- 
tion to its establishment in the metropolis of 
the world. If there were suiScieut grounds for 
postulating a theological principle as the basis 
of the narrative, it would be the continued 
working and presence of Jesus, no longer in the 
ilesh, but in the Church. 

But n large number of recent critics hare 
seen in this work a motive of a wholly different 
kind. They have regarded it as written with 
an apologetic or conciliatory purpose. In the 
present case these two epithets come to the 
same thing. For, if apologetic, it was intended 
either to defend St. Paul from the charge of 
hostility to the Jews, or St. Peter from the 
charge of opposition to the free admission of the 
Gentiles ; if cvnciliatori/, its motive was to bring 
together and amalgamate two parties in the 
Christian Church — the Judaic, which clung to 
the name of St. Pttcr, and the Gentile, whose 
watchword was the lil>eralism of St. Paul. 

It will be seen at once, that such a view of 
the purpose is consistent with a frank recogni- 
tion of the genuineness of the work and of the 
truthfulness of the narrative. Its aim would 
then be the correction of prevailing misunder- 
standings. Such was the position of Schneck- 
enburger(1841), who was the first to emphasise 
the real or supposed parallelism between St. 
Peter and St. Paul, as showing the apologetic- 
design of the author;'' but he himself herewith 
maintains the substantial credibility of the ac- 
count. This same idea however was adopted by 
the critics of the Ttibingen school, who occupied 
another platform, and to whom it was a con- 
venient weapon for their destructive warfare. 
Baur {Faulus, p. 1 ag., 1845), Scliwegler (Das 
A'achapostolische Zeitalter, ii. p. 73 aq., 1846), 
and Zeller (Die Apoatelgeachlchte, p. 316 tq., 
1854), all took this panillelism as the basis of 
their theories, and regarded the Book as the 
work of a Pauline Christian in the 2nd 
century, whose object was to reconcile parties, 
and who freely invented his story accoidingly. 
Not very different is the |)asition of Hilgenfeld 
(Einleitnng, p. 576 sq.), who takes it to repre- 
sent " Unionist Paulinism " not earlier than the 
close of the 1st century. Several other critics 
also, without going to these extremes, have re- 
garded the narrative as coloured by this " con- 
ciliatory " motive. Thus Renan (Lea Apdtrea, 
pp. xiii. aq., zxviii. aq.), though confidently 
ascribing the work to a companion of St. Paul, 

^ Baur had previously suggested the idea of this ** ten- 
dency" In the TUbiitg. ZeilKhr. f. Thtal. iU. p. 38 tq, 

Digitized by 



and therefore presumably to St. Luke, and em- 
ploying its statements as generally credible, yet 
holds that the representations of the chief 
Apostles are highly coloured, so as to produce 
an impression of harmony which was not justi- 
tied by the facts. In answer to such allegations 
it is sufficient to say that St. Paul's own prac- 
tical maxim of "becoming all things to all 
men," and therefore of " becoming a Jew to the 
Jews," covers all the actions ascribed to him in 
St. Luke's narrative ; that the very context, in 
which these particular actions are related, 
manifests, as I have already shown (p. 38), un- 
mlstakeable tokens of authenticity ; that St. 
Paul's language and conduct in dealing with 
Oentile converts like the Galatians is no stan- 
dard at all for measuring his intercourse with 
the Church of Jerusalem ; and that generally 
the tone and character of the narrative ought to 
place it above the suspicion of any conscious 
distortion of facts. For the rest, if any false 
impressions were abroad about the relations of 
the two chief Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul, it 
is not unnatural that the writer should wish to 
correct them. 

9. The Chronology. — There are two fixed 
points in the chronology of the Acts, as deter- 
mined by contact with secular history. The 
fii-st of these is St. Paul's second visit to Jeru- 
salem (xi. 30, xii. 25), which is obviously syn- 
chronous, or nearly so, with the death of Herod 
Agrippa (xii. 23); but this latter event is 
known to hare happened a.d. 44 (Joseph. Ant. 
xix. 8. 2). The second is St. Paul's appearance 
before Kestus and consequent voyage to Gome 
(ixvi. 32, xxvii. 1). This occurred immediately 
after Festus had arrived in the province. But 
from various considerations it appears that the 
<lepasition of Felix and the accession of Festus 
most probably happened in a.d. 60, and must 
certainly have happened close upon that year ; 
see Wieseler, Chronol. p. 66 sq. 

Besides these two fixc<l dates, there are other 
references to events in secular history of which 
the date indeed is not definitely determined, 
but which serve as rough verifications. Such 
are the great famine (xi. 28), the banishment of 
the Jews from Rome (xviii, 2), the reign of 
Aretas at Damascus (ix. 25, 2 Cor. xi. 32), the 
proconsulship of Gallic in Achaia (xviii. 12). 

Of the two fixed dates, the first — the death of 
Herod Agrippa — is isolated, and rcndera no 
Assistance in the general .scheme of chronology. 
But the second is of the highest value. The 
notices of the intervals of time in the Acts are 
fairly continuous from the apostolic council 
(c. xv) to the end of the Book. Thus by work- 
ing backwards from the accession of Festus and 
the journey to Rome (a.d. 60), we are able to 
frame a skeleton of the chronology for the latter 
half of the Book, and we arrive at about A.D. 51 
for the apostolic council. From this point, 
still working backwards, the chronological 
notices in Gal. i. 18, ii. 1, enable us to fix some 
of the early dates. The whole system is worked 
ont most thoroughly by Wieseler. The results 
will be found in any of the common books rel.nt- 
ing to the a|>ostolic history or the life of St. 
Paul. The special books on the chronology of 
St. Paul and of the Acts are Anger, X>e tern- 
ponan in Act. Apost. ratione (Lipsine, 1833), and 
Wieseler, Chronoiogie <ks apostoliac/icn ZeU<iltcra 


(Giittingen, 1848). Lewin's/'attiSucn' (London, 
I860) is a useful work, and is not as well knovn 
as it deserves to be. 

10. The r*x(.— Accounts will be found of the 
authorities for the text of the Acts in their 
proper place in the well-known Introductions and 
Prolegomena of Tregelles (1856), Scrivener (ed. 

3, 1883), Tischendorf (ed. Gregory, 1884), and 
Westcott and Hart. Special works relating t<i 
this particular book are J. D. Michaelis, Curat 
in Vcrsionem Si/riacam Actuwn, Apostuliconaii 
(Goettiugae, 1755); Belsheim, Die Aposttlge- 
schichte u. die Offer^xirung Johannis in einer altin 
latciniachen Ueberaetzung (Christiania, 1879); 
and F. A. Bornemann, Acta Apostolontm nd CW. 
Cantabrigiensia fidem recenauit (Grossenh*ina«, 
1848). In the last, as its title suggests, tlie 
MS. D is taken as the standard of the text 
— a conclusion which is not adopted by any 
sound textual critic. But the text of D and ct 
a few other authorities which coincide with it 
in greater or less degrees, presents a difficult 
problem. The variations from the normal teit 
are greater than are found in any other portion 
of the New Testament. They are of two kinds 
— partly paraphrases and amplifications, and 
partly insertions of additional incidents or par- 
ticulars. As examples of this latter class mar 
be mentioned such passages as xii. 10, where 
the number of steps is given in the account of 
St. Peter's release from prison, or xxviii. 16, 
where the delivering of Paul and his fellow- 
prisoners to the prefect of the praetorium is men- 
tioned. In this latter passage, however, D is 
wanting. Such additions belong to the sini« 
class of which the pericope relating to tiu 
women taken in adultery (John viii. 3 sq.) i> 
the most prominent example. The editor or 
transcriber seems to have had access to some 
very early and genuine tradition ; and the fact 
that the incident in the pericope in St. John 
was related likewise by Papias (Euseb. N. E. iii. 
39) suggests that the source of these traditions 
is to be sought ultimately in the disciples who 
gathered about St. John and his successors in 
Asia Minor. 

11. The Literature. — The literature which has 
accumulated about the Acts is so vast that an 
exhaustive catalogue is quite impracticable. In 
the following list all works which are directlj 
homilctic or are intended for school purposes 
are omitted ; nor have I for the mo.«t (nrt 
included monographs and articles which treat of 
special point.s. Many of these have been noticed 
already in their respective places. After these 
deductions, the following books may be men- 
tioned : — 

A. General Co/nmentaries, including the whole 
or a great part of the New Testament. Of the 
older commentaries those of Calvin, Grotius, and 
Bengel deserve to be specially named, Amon; 
recent works Alford, Wordsworth, the Speaker's 
Commentary (Cook and Jacobson), Ellicott's 
New Testament Commentary for English Readers 
(Plumptre), in England ; and Olshausen (ed. 

4, 1862, re-edited by Ebrard), De Wette (ed. 4, 
1870, re-edited by Overbeck), Meyer (ed. 5, 
1880, re-edited by Wendt), Lechler (in Lange's 
Sibelieerk, ed. 4, 1881), in Germany, may Ix: 

B. General Introductions to the Keie Testament. 
— Bleek (Eng. trans.), 1869 ; Davidson, vol. ii.. 

Digitized by 



1842; Goi-ricke, 1868 (eJ. 3); Hilgenfeld, 
1875; Holtzm»nn, 1885; Hug (Eng. trans.), 
1827; Marsh's Michaclis, 1802 (ed. 2); Reuss, 
J860; Salmon, 1S86 (ed. 2); Weiss, 1886. 

C. Special Commentaries on the Acts. — The 
Homilies of St. Chrysostoni are the only patristic 
itjisnientary of real importance on this Book. 
Passing to recent times, we have Baumgarten, 
Braunschweig, 1852, 1854 (Eng. trans.); Gloag, 
IMinlHirgh, 1870; Hackett, Boston, 1863 (new 
«L); Hnmphrr, London, 1854 (ed. 2); NOsgen, 
Leipdg, 1882. ' A complete list of commentaries, 
special and jeneral, up to the date (1859), will 
be found in Darling's C>/cl. Bibt. p.. 1167 sq. 

]}. Special Wort-.s on the Acts. — Biscoe, Hist. 
of tie Acts, ic confirmed from other Authors, 
it 1742, reprinted, 1840 ; Klostermann, fi'ndi- 
dae Lttcanae sire de Itinerarii in libro Acto- 
nm astervatiavctore, 1866 ; Klostermann, Prch- 
Ime im Aposteltexte, 1883 ; KSnig, Die Echtheit 
Art Apostelgeschichte, 1867 ; Lekcbusch, Compo- 
sHim ». Enstehung der A.-O., 1854 ; Lightfoot, 
HAreic and Talmudioal £xercitations on the Acts 
',f the Apostles ; Oertel, Paulus in der A.-G., 
1868 ; Palev, I/orae Pau/tnae (edited by J. Tate, 
1840; by B'lrks, 1850); Schmidt, K., Die Apos- 
telgeKhichte, Band i., 1883 ; Schneckenbnrger, 
I'tier den Zaeck der A.-G., 1841 ; Schwanbeck, 
Cdier die Qvellen dtr A.-G., 1847 ; Supemataral 
Sfligim, Tol. iii., 1877; Stier, Die Seden der 
.Iposlel (ed. 2), 1861 ; S. P. C. K., The Heathen 
World and St. Paul (no date), Rawlinson, 
Plumiitre. Daries, 5Ierirale; Teller, Die Apos- 
t-l'jeschk/ite, 1854. 

E. Apostolic Histories, Lites of St. Paul, tfc. 
— Banr, Pavius, 1845 ; Conybeare and Howson, 
Ufi and Epistles of St. Paul, 1856 (2nd ed.); 
Kwald, Geschichte des apoatotischen Zeitalter, 
IxriS (2Bd ed.), being toI. vi. of Geschichte des 
V<Jies Israel; Farrar, Early Days of Christi- 
•ukity, 1882 (1st ed.) ; Farrar, Life and Work of 
■■•I. Paul, 1879 (1st ed.) ; Lechler, Das Apostol- 
itde K. das Nachapostolische Zeitalter (1st ed., 
1857; 2nd ed., 1885); Lewin, Life and Epistles 
of a. Paul, 1872 ; Neander, Pflanzung mul 
Uitmg, 1862 (5th ed.) ; Pfleiderer, ITrchristen- 
thm, 1887 ; Renan, Les Apdtres, 1866 (1st ed.) ; 
fvnt Paul, 1869 (1st ed.); Ritschl, Die Entste- 
hmj der altkatholischen Kirche, 1857 (1st ed.) ; 
Sehaff, Hat. of the Christian Church — Apostolic 
CMsUtmity, 1882 ; Schwegler, Das Nachapos- 
i'iindie Zeitalter, 1846 ; Thiersch, Die Kirche im 
■ipaaolischen Zeitalter, 1879 (3rd ed.); Weiz- 
>iicker, Das apoatolische Zeitalter, 1886. 

This list might be considerably increased, if 
there were any object in increasing it. [J. B. L.] 

ACU'A CAkovS ; Accub) or Akkub (1 Esd. 
r. 30 ; cp. Ezra ii. 45), who with 

A'CUB (B. 'AKoi<p, A. 'Aicovp ; Accusu) or 
Bj«Kmnc(l hsd. T. 31 ; cp. Ezra ii. 51), servants of 
the Temple, returned to Jerusalem. [W. A. W.") 

ADA'DAH (mini?, according to Ges. from 
*« Syr., festival; A.''A»aW, B. 'ApoviiK; Adada), 
«<ie of the dtiet in the extreme south of Judah 
mated with Dimonah and Kedesh (Josh. xr. 22). 
Wellhansen and Dillmann * think that the reading 
»ii probably miTU? (Arara), and that the place 
U the same as IfflV (1 Sam. xxx. 28). Ruins 
l>euing the name of Ar'ara are found S.E. of 
teersheba (Rob. iii. 14, 180 sq.). [S. K. D.] 



A'DAH (pnV,omament,beattty. SeeBaethgeu, 
Beitrage z. Sem. Seligionsgesch., p. 149. Cp. 
Dillmann [Gen.^ 1. c] for other derivations ; 'AW ; 

1, The first of the two wives of Lamech, fifth 
in descent from Cain, by whom were bom to 
him Jabal and Jubal (Gen. iv. 19-23). 

2. A Hittitess, daughter of Elon, one (pro- 
bably the first) of the three wives of Esau, 
mother of his first-bom son Eliphaz, and so the 
ancestress of six (or seven) of the tribes of the 
Edomites (Gen. xxxvi. 2, 4, 10 ff. 15 ff.). In Gen. 
xxvi. 34 she is called Basiiehath. [F. W. G.] 

ADA'IAH(nn», Ges. = Jah hath adorned; 
B. 'IcSeui, A. 'IcSit^; Hadaia). 1. The maternal 
grandfather of king Josiah, and native of Boscath 
in the lowlands of Judah (2 K. xxii. 1). 

2. B. 'Afeici ; Adaia. A Levite, of the Ger- 
ahonite branch, and ancestor of Asaph (1 Ch. 
vi. 41). In V. 21 he is called Iddo. 

3. B. 'Kfiii, A. 'AAtUa; Adaia. A Benjamite, 
son of Shimhi (1 Ch. viii. 21), who is apparently 
the same as Shema in t>. 13. 

4. B. 'ASaia, A. ImHos in 1 Ch. I. c; Adaias, 
Adaia. A priest, son of Jeroham (1 Ch. ix. 12 ; 
Neh. xi. 12, BN'. omits), who returned with 242 
of his brethren from Babylon. 

5. 'ASalas; Adaia. One of the descendants 
of Bani, who had married a foreign wife after 
the return from Babylon (Ezra i. 29). He is 
called Jedeus in 1 Esd. ix. 30. 

6. 'ASo/a; A. 'Aiafai; K. 'ASfui^; Adaias. 
The descendant of another Bani, who had also 
taken a foreign wife (Ezra i. 39). 

7. A. 'Axoia; BK. AaXd; Adaia. A man of 
Judah of the line of Pharez (Neh. li. 5). 

a mnV: a. 'AloTa; B. 'Afeiit, B*. 'AStii; 
Adaias. Ancestor of Maaseiah, one of the captains 
who supported Jehoiada (2 Ch. xxiii. 1). 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

ADAL'IA a^fn^,. The name in the Greek 
texts corresponding to this is K. Bapti, B. BofWcE, 
A. Bapi\ ; Adalia\ one of the sons of Haman, 
massacred by the Jews at Shushan (Esth. ix. 
7-10). Gesenius and Cassel (A B. Esther, p. 228) 
consider the name Persian, but are not agreed 
as to its etymology. [F.] 

ADAM (D'lN; 'Ati/i; Adam), the name 
which is given in Scripture to the first man. 
The term apparently has reference to the ground 
from which he was formed, which is called 
Adamah (nonS, Gen. ii. 7). The idea of red- 
ness of colour seems to be inherent in either 
word (cf. DIK, Urn. iv. 7 ; th», red, Ch^' 

Edom, Gen. xxv. 30 ; D"li{, o r«6y ; Arab. «,>V 

colore fusco praeditus fuit, rubrum tinxit, be). 
The conjecture of Fried. Delitzsch which asso- 
ciates the term with the Assyr. admu and ren- 
ders it " geschaffener " {Prolegg. tines neuen 
Heb.-Aram. WSrterb. x. A. T. pp. 103-4) is not 
universally accepted (see Franz Delitzsch, Genesis 
[1887], p. 77) ; equally conjectural is the identi- 
fication of Adam with the Egyptian Atum (see 
Transactims of the Soc. of Biblical Archaotogn, 
ix. 176). The generic term Adam, man, be- 
comes, in the case of the first man, a denomi- 
native. Supposing the Hebrew language to 

Digitized by 




represent accurately the primary ideas con- 
nected with the formation of man, it would 
seem that the appellation bestowed by God was 
givea to keep alive in Adam the memory of his 
earthly and mortal nature ; whereas the name 
by which he preferred to designate himself was 
/•A (E''K, « man of sui»lance or north. Gen. il. 
'23). The creation of man was the work of the 
liixth day. His formation was the ultimate 
object of the Creator. It was with reference to 
him that all things were designed. He was to 
be the " roof and crown " of the whole fabric of 
the world. In the first nine chapters of Genesis 
there appear to be three distinct histories re- 
lating more or less to the life of Adam. The 
first extends from Gen. i. 1 to ii. 3, the second 
from ii. 4 to iv. 26, the third from v. 1 to the 
eni of ix. (see Riehm, HWB. s. n.). The word at 
the commencement of the two latter narratives, 
which is rendered there and elsewhere genera- 
tions, may also be rendered hi$tori/. The style 
of the second of these records differs very cou- 
»idcrably from that of the first. In the first 
the Deity is designated by the word Elohim ; 
in the second He is generally spoken of as 
Jehovah L'lohim. The object of the first of these 
narratives is to record the creation; that of the 
second to give an account of Paradise, the 
original sin of man, and the immediate posterity 
of Adam ; the third contains mainly the history 
of Noah, referring it would seem to Adam and 
his descendants, principally in relation to that 

We should, however, not fail to observe that the 
interdependence of these sections is complete, not- 
withstanding their marked individuality. For 
example, ii. 4 presupposes the previous section, 
because it Is a summary of what has gone before 
and not of what follows, inasmuch as there is 
no mention in that of the creation of the heavens 
and the earth. " These are the generations " 
can, therefore, refer only to Gen. i. 1 — ii. 3. In 
like manner v. 1 implies i. 27, and v. 29 implies 
iii. 17; whereas on the other hand it is impos- 
sible to conceive any consecutive narrative which 
can have run on continuously from ii. 3 to v. 1 
nr elsewhere, without the intermediate record. 
The essential unity of the composition involves 
the unity of the narrative. The work of the 
compiler is conspicuous from whatever source 
he may have gathered his materials, and these 
materials can never have formed an independent 
whole. We can only treat the narrative as one, 
however composite it may be. 

The Mosaic accounts furnish us with very 
few materials from which to form any adequate 
conception of the first man. He is said to have 
been created in the image and likeness of God, 
ami this is commonly interpreted to mean some 
superexcellent and divine condition which was 
lost at the Fall : apparently however without 
sufficient reason, as the continuance of this con- 
dition is implied in the time of Noah, subsequent 
to the Flood (Gen. ii. €), and is asserted as 
A fact by St. James (iii. 9) and by St. Paul 
(1 Cor. li. 7). It more probably points to the 
Divine pattern and archetype after which man's 
intelligent natnre was fashioned ; reason, under- 
standing, imagination, volition, &c. being attri- 
butes of God ; and man alone of the animals of 
the earth being jwssessed of a spiritual nature 
which resembled God's nature. >Ian in short 


I was a spirit, created to reflect God's righteous- 
ness and truth and love, and cajiable of holdioj; 
direct intercourse and communion with Him. 
As long as his will moved in harmony witli 
God's will, he fulfilled the purpose of his Creator. 
When he refused submission to God, he broke 
the law of his existence and fell, introducing 
confusion and disorder into the economy of his 
nature. As much as this we may learn fron\ 
what St. Paul says of "the new man being 
renewed in knowledge after the image of Hioi 
that created him " (Col. iii, 10), the restoration 
to such a condition being the very work of the 
Holy Spirit of God. The name Adam was not 
confined to the father of the human race, but 
like homo was applicable to Koman as well as 
man, so that we find it said in Gen. v. 1, 2, 
"This is the book of the 'history' [A. V. anJ 
R. V. 'generations'] of Adam. In the day thst 
God created ' Adam, in the likeness of God made 
He him ; male and female created He them, am! 
called their name Adam in the day when they 
were created." 

The man Adam was placed in a garden which 
the Lord God had planted " eastward in Eden " 
(Gen. ii. 8), for the purjwse of dressing it and 
keeping it. It is perhaps hopeless to attempt to 
identify the situation of Kden with that of any 
district familiar to modern geography. There 
seems good ground for supposing it to have been 
an actual locality, and modern investigations 
have tended to show that this locality was not 
improbably between the Mediterranean and 
the Caspian seas. Two of the rivers which are 
described as watering the Garden of Eden 
can still be identified unmistakably with the 
Euphrates and the Tigris. Thus the LXX. call 
the Hiddekel, both in Gen. ii. 14 and in Dan. x. 4, 
the Tigris. [Hiddekel.] The Pison and the 
Gihon may likewise be traced in existing riversof 
Mesopotamia, though it is difficult to understand 
how they should have been united indeed 
the historian contemplates them as flowing 
together like the Tigris and Euphrates as they 
approach the sea, and then traces them baclt- 
wards towards their source when they became 
four distinct head streams. 

Adam was permitted to eat of the fmit of 
every tree in the garden but one, which was 
called the " tree of the knowledge of good and 
evil." What this was, it is also impossible to 
say [see Speaker's Cotntn. and Delitzsch (1887) 
in loco]. Its name would seem to indicate that 
it had the power of bestowing the consciousness 
of the difference between good and evil ; in the 
ignorance of which man's innocence and happi- 
ness consisted. The prohibition to taste the 
frnit of this tree was enforced by the menace of 
death. There was also another tree which was 
called " the tree of life." Some have supposed 
it to have acted as a kind of medicine, and that 
by the continual use of it our first parents, not 
created immortal, were preserved from death. 
(Abp. Whately.) While Adam was in the 
garden of Eden the beasts of the field and the 
fowls of the air were brought to him to be 
named, and whatsoever he called every living 
creature that waa the name thereof. Tlins the 
power of fitly designating objects of sense was 
possessed by the first man, a faculty which is 
generally considered as indicating mature and 
extctuive intellectual resources. Upon the 

Digitized by 



fiiliire of a compaDion suitable fur Adam among 
tile creatDres thus brought to him to be named, 
the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon 
him, and took one of his ribs from him, which 
He £ubianed into a woman and brought her to 
the man. Prof. S. Lee supposed the narratire 
of the creation of Ere to hare been revealed to 
Ailam in his deep sleep (Lee's Jch, Introd., p. 16). 
Thii ii agreeable with the analogy of similar 
fiassages, as Acts x. 10, xi. 5, xxii. IT. At this 
time they are both described as being naked 
withoat the consciousness of shame. 

Such is the Scripture account of Adam prior 
to the Fall : there is no luirratire of any con- 
dition saperhnman, or contrary to the ordinary 
Isws of humanity. The first man is a true man, 
«ith the powers of a man and the innocence of n 
child. He is moreoTer spoken of by St. Paul as 
being " the figure (jinros) of Him Who was to 
oine,''the second Adam, Christ Jesus (Rom. t. 
U). His human excellence therefore cannot 
ijave been superior to that of the Son of Mary, 
irho was Himself the Pattern and Perfect Man. | 
Br the subtlety of the serpent, the woman who I 
WIS giren to be with Adam was beguiled into a ! 
violation of the one command which bad been 
imposed upon them. She took of the fruit of 
the forbidden tree and gare it to her husband. 
The propriety of its name was immediately 
shovn in the results which followed : self-con- 
scionsoess was the first-fruits of sin ; their eyes 
»ere opened and they knew that they were 
r;aked. The subsequent conduct of Adam would 
ttm to militate against the notion that he was 
i] himself tbe perfection of moral excellence, 
liis cowardly attempt to clear himself by the 
iaculpation of his helpless wife bears no marks 
of s high moral nature, even though fallen ; it 
ms conduct unworthy of his sons, and such as 
inaay of them would have scorned to adopt. 
Thongb the curse of Adam's rebellion of necessity 
fell upon him, yet tbe very prohibition to eat of 
the ti«e of life after his trangression was pro- 
bably a manifestation of Dirine mercy, because 
the greatest malediction of all would hare been 
to have the gift of indestructible life superadded 
to a state of wretchedness and sin. When 
inoreovcr we find in Pror. iii. 18, that wisdom is 
<j^lared to be a tree of life to them that lay 
hold upon her, and in Rer. ii, 7, xxii. 2, 14, that 
the lame expression is applied to the grace of 
duist, we are led to conclude that this was 
tnereJT a temjkor.iry prohiljition imjmsed till the 
'wspel dispensation should be brought in. Upon 
thij supposition the condition of Christians now 
is as (aronrable as that of Adam before the Fall, 
asd their spiritual state the same, with the 
^gle exception of the consciousness of sin and 
the knowledge of good and eril. 

Till a recent period it has been generally 
teliered that the Scriptural narrative supposes 
the whole human nice to hare sprung from 
<« pair. It is maintained that the 0. T. 
vomes it in the reason assigned for the name 
*hich Adam gave bis wife afler the Fall, viz. 
"e, or Chawah, i.e. a living woman, " because 
^he ns the mother of all living ; " and that St. 
caal assuiacs it in his sermon at Athens when 
k* (ieclares that God hath made of one blood all 
tatiou of men; and in the Epistle to the 
Knaaa and First Epistle to the Corinthians, 
*i«» he opposes Christ as the representative of 



redeemed humanity to Adam as the represen- 
tative of natural, fallen, and sinful humanity. 
But the full consideration of this important 
subject will come more appropriately under 
the article Man. 

In the Middle Ages discussions were raised as 
to the period which Adam remained in Paradise 
in a sinless state. Dante {Paradiso, xxri. 139- 
142) did not suppose him to have been more than 
seven hours in the earthly Paradise. 

Adam is stated to have lived 930 years : so it 
would seem that the death which resulted from 
his sin was the spiritual death of alienation from 
God. "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou 
shall surely die " (Gen. ii. 17) : and accordingly 
we find that this spiritual death began to work 
immediately. The sons of Adam mentioned in 
Scripture are Cain, Abel, and Seth : it is implied 
however that he had others.* [S. L.] 

ADAM (D*1K ; Adomi), a city on the Jordan 
" beside (IVO) Zarthan," in the time of Joshua 
(Josh. iii. 16. See Dillmann* in loco). It is not 
elsewhere mentioned, nor is there any reference 
to it in Josephus. The name is thought by some 
to be preserved in the bridge and ford of ed- 
Ddmieh, directly east of A'um Surtabeh ; but the 
identification of Surtaheh and Zarthan involves 
an improbable change of letters (Dillmann'). 

The A. V. in Josh. /. c. follows the Keri, which, 
in the place of D*1t<9 = " by Adam," tbe reading in 
the Hebrew textVrChethib, has DIKQ = " from 
Adam," an alteration which is a questionable 
improvement (Keil, 1. 1). The R. V. has " at 
Adam." A more accurate rendering of the text 
is " rose up upon a heap, very far off, by Adam, 
the city that is beside Zarthan" (Stanley, 
S. i- P. 304, note). The LXX. (B.) rendering, 
fftp6tpa ff^oSpus itts /i4pous KoBieuatiy, arose 
from the Keri with a different signification and 
omission of part of the text ; eg. ^5{0 HKD HMD 
imx (cp. HoUenberg, p. 17). [G.] [W.] 

ADA'MAH (iionj? : B.•Af^Uit9, A. 'AJ<viI; 
Edema), one of the " fenced cities " of Maphtali, 
named between Chinnereth and ha-Ramah (Josh, 
xix. 36). It is now probably the village ed- 
Damieh, west of the Sea of Galilee (P. F. Mem. 
i. 384). [G.] [W.] 

ADAMANT (TO^^, ahdinir"; iSaiiiyrims ; 
adamaa). The word ahdmir occurs as a common 
noun eleven times in the O. T. In eight of 
these passages, all of them in Isaiah, it 
stands for a thorny tree, and is rendered 
" briers " in A. V. In some instances it is 
coupled with DJB', " thorns," and in one with 
ySp, also "thorns" in A. V. and K. V. Its 
Arabic equivalent ,yoU»», sarnvr, is applied 

to this day by the Arabs of the district to 
the Paliurm acvdeaUa, or "Christ's thorn," 

• Tbe comparison of the Biblical narrative relative to 
Adam with parallel traditions (Auyrlan, Egyptian, &c.) 
will be found in Lenormant, LtM Origina do I'JIUtoirf' 
(ed. 1880), i. 37 »q., and VlgouTonx, La Bible <t ics M- 
annxTta Modema,* I. p. 1*1 tq. 

s > ^ 3 m^ 

' Arab. .yoUtf »»> \yJ^- 

Cp. tbe Ouildee 

Digitized \yj 





which grows in the Jordan valley and the 
vranner parts of Palestine. In Galilee it 
is given to Shammis palacsiina, the Palestine 
buckthorn ; and in Arabia to various species of 
Zixyphus or Sidra, In the three remaining 
passages (Jer. xvii. 1 ; £zek. iii. 9 ; Zech. vii. 
12), it is the representative of some stone of 
excessive hardness, and is used in each of these 
last instances raetaphoricallv. In Jer. xvii. 1, 
Shamir = " diamond " in A. V. and R. V. " The 
sin of Judah is written with a pen of iron 
and with the point of a diamond," i,e. the 
people's idolatry is indelibly fixed in their 
affections, engraved as it were on the tablets of 
their hearts. In Ezek. iii. 9, shdnur = "ada- 
mant " (A. V. and R. V.) : " As an adamant 
harder than flint have I made thy forehead : fear 
them not." Here the word is intended to signify 
that firmness of purpose with which the prophet 
should resist the sin of the rebellious bouse of 
Israel, In Zech. vii. 12, the Hebrew word = 
" adamant-stone " (A. V. and R. V.) : " Ye», 
they made their hearts as an adamant-stone, 
lest they should hear the law," and is used to 
express the hardness of the hearts of the Jews 
in resisting truth. 

The LXX. affords ns but little clue whereby 
to identify the mineral here spoken of, for in 
Kzek. iii. 9 and in Zech. vii. 12 they have not 
rendered the Hebrew word at all, while the 
whole passage in Jer. xrii. 1-5 is altogether 
omitted in the Vatican MS. ; the Alexandrine 
MS., however, has the passage, and reads, with 
the Versions of Aquila, Tbeodotion, and Symma- 
chus, " with a nail of adamant." ' "Adamant " 
occurs in the Apocrypha, in Ecclus. xvi. 16 (a 
verse omitted in most Greek copies, but found 
in the Syriac and Arabic). 

Our luiglish " adamant " is derived from the 
Greek,' and signifies "the unconquerable," in 
allusion perhaps to the hard nature of the 
subst.'\nce, or, according to Pliny (xxxvii. 15), 
because it was supposed to be indestructible 
by fire.* The Greek writers* generally apply 
the word to some very hard metal, {lerhaps 
steel, though they do also use it for a mineral. 
Pliny, iu the chapter referred to above, enume- 
rates six varieties of AJamas. Dana (5yst. 
Mineral, art. Diamond) says that the word 
" Adamns was applied by the ancients to several 
minerals, differing much in their physical pro- 
perties. A fev of these are qaariz, specular 
iron ore, emery, and other substances of rather 
high degrees of hardness, which cannot now be 
identified." Nor does the English language 
attach any one definite meaning to adamant : 
sometimes indeed we understand the diamond' 
by it, but it is often used vaguely to express 
any substance of impenetrable hardness. Chau- 
cer, Bacon, Shakspeare, use it in some instances 

^ iy orvxi adoftoKriyy, LXX. A. ; ** In UDgue adunaii- 
tino," Vulg. 

' It 1b incorrect to suppose that even the diamond, 
which fs only pure carbon crystallized, is *' Invincible " 
by Are. It will bnra; and at a temperature of 14° 
Wedgwood will t)e wholly consumed, producing car- 
bonic acid gas. 

• Comp. also Senec Bercul. Fur. 807 : " Adasunte 
texto vindM." 

' Oiu* English diamond is merely a corruption of 
adamant Comp. the French dtaman<. 

for the lode stone.* In modem mineralogy the 
simple term adamant has no technical signifi- 
cation, but adamantine spar is a mineral well 
known, and is closely allied to that which we 
hare good reason for identifying with the 
shdmir or adamant of the Bible. 

That some hard cutting stone is intended can 
be shown from the passage in Jeremiah quoted 
above. In Arabic and Aramaic there is a word 
corresponding to the Hebrew slidmir,^ but in 
all three languages the derivation is not ap- 
parent. A sense of sharpness is implied by the 
application of the original word to a brier or 
thorn. Now since, iu the opinion of those who 
have given much attention to the subject, the 
Hebrews appear to have been unacquainted with 
the true diamond,' it is very pi'obable, from 
the expression iu Ezek. iii. 9, of "adamant 
harder tlian fiint," *■ that by shdmir is intended 
some variety of corundum^ a mineral inferior 
ouly to the diamond in hardness. Of thU 
mineral there are two junncipal groups : one is 
crystalline, the other granular; to the crys- 
talline varieties belong the indigo-blue sapphire, 
the red oriental ruby, the yellow oriental topaz, 
the green oriental emerald, the violet oriental 
amethyst, the brown adamantine spar. But it 
is to the granular or massive variety that the 
shdmir may with most probability be assigned. 
This is the modern emery, extensively nsed in 
the arts for polishing and cutting gems and 
other hard substances; it is found in Saxony, 
Italy, Asia Minor, the East Indies, &c, aiid 
"occurs in boulders or nodules in mica slate, 
in talcose rock, or in granular limestone, asso- 
ciated with oxide of iron ; the colour is smoke- 
grey or bluish grey ; fracture imperfect. The 
best kinds are those which have a blue tint ; 
but many substances now sold under the name 
of emery contain no corundum."' The Greek 
name for the emery is smyris or smiris," and 

< Chancer, Kowuxunt (ff Ike Rote, 1182; Shalcspesie, 
Jfid. Night Dr. Act li. sc. 2, and TroH. and Creu. 
Act iii. sc. 3 ; Bacon's Essay on Travel. 

■■ Roediger In Oesenins, 3V*. sub. voc. TDK?, >. }. 
10D. TDt?' Iwrruit, riguit. Ges. (teas.) canneda it 
with 10D. 'he root (unused in Bibl. Hcb.) of "lt3DD- 
a nail, vlience a point, liut the change of siMlaiit 
Is opposed to both these views. [S. E. D.} In Arab. 

somur. Is "an Egyptian thorn " (see Forakil. 

a 3 ^ 

ft. .Xg. Ar. czxllL lit), and ^ \.^^ . adamat. Sec 

Freytag, Ln. Arat^. s. v. 

■ Dana says that the method of polishing diamonds 
was Srst discovered in 1456 by Louis Bergnen, a dtlxn 
of Bruges, previous to which time the diamond was only 
known in its native imcut state. It is quite clear that 
sKAmtr cannot mean diamond, tor If it did the word 
would be mentioned with precious stones; but this is 
not the case. 

' l'^ pjri- That ^V. though It may sometimes 

be applied to "rock " generally, yet sometimes :=Jtinl, 
or some other variety of quarts, seems clear from Kx. 
It. 25 ; " Then Zipporab took a sliarp stone " (*l'y, 
Ttt'r). That flint knives were in common nse amongst 
Eastern nations Is well known. Compare that very 
interesting verse of the LXX., Josh. xxtv. 31. 

> Ansted's Mineralogy, } 394. 

" ir|iv(>it, or viiipit, (TiiifK est ofifiov tISos 
(Ueeycbius); VftifHt Aiftx arrri (Dioscor. v. ie6). 

Digitized by 



the Hebrew lexicographers derive this word 
from the Hebrew iidimr. There seems to be 
i» donbt whatever that the two words are 
iJiOtical, and that by adamant we are to 
noderstand the emery-stone,'' or the uncrystal- 
line variety of the corundum. 

The word Shamir occurs in the 0. T. three 
t!in« .15 a proper name^-once as the name of a 
mm* (1 Ch. xxiv. 24), and twice as the name 
..f a town. The name of the town may have 
referecce to the rocky nature of the situa- 
tion, or to briers and thorns abundant in the 
«i«hbourhood.» [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

ADAin C9"1K ; B. '\piii , A. 'Apfud ; 
Aimi), a place oB the border of Naphtali, 
named after Allon bezaanannim (Josh. xix. 33). 
Br some it is taken in connexion with the next 
name, ban-Kekeb (cp. R. V. Adami-nekeb), but 
!<e Reland, p. 545. In the post-biblical times 
Adami bore the name of Damin, probably £%. 
AJaah, sonth-west of the Sea of Galilee, and 
immediately north of W. el-Bireh ; so named 
from the purple basaltic soil (Heb. DhK, " red "). 
(P. P. item. ii. 89, 121.) [G.] [W.] 

ADAH (accurately, as in R. V., Addar, 
TW ; B. iapJiSa, A. 'AStofxi ; Addar), a place 
no the south boundary of Palestine and of Judah 
(Josh. XT. 3% which in the parallel list is called 
lUzAR-ASDAR. P*robably some place in Jebel 
Magrah, which forms the natural boundary of 
the J(fyc4 or south country. [G.] [W.] 

iiTDkR. [Mo:»THS.] 

.UTASA ('ASoo-dl, LXX. ; rh. 'AScurd, Jos. ; 
iiin-so, Adazer), a place in Judaen, a day's 
j'>iiniey from Gazera, and 30 stadia from Beth- 
horon (Jos. Ant. xiL 10, § 5). Here Judas 
)Ia<:cibuus encamped before the battle in which 
Nicanor was killed, Nicanor having pitched at 
Beth-horon (1 Mace vii. 40,45). Eusebins (05.' 
p. 240, 6) mentions it as near Guphna, and it is 
WW possibly Kh. 'Adaaeh, 6J miles from Upper 
&th-horon on the road to Jerusalem (P. F. Mem. 
iii. 30, 105). The site is still connected with a 
tradition of some great slaughter ; for the ruin 
itaads above a valley called Wddjf ed-Dunun, 
"the vallev of blood" (Conder, Handbook to 
mi, f. 294). [G.] [W.] 

AD'BEEL(^91K; A. Na/MeK -»• -«-; 
ASxei; 'A^SfijAoj,' Joseph. Ant. i. 12, § 4 ; " per- 

lufs 'mirade of God,' from (_^iS\, miracle," 
Ges. Tkes. s. r.), named as the third of the 

Bi^ Aatements are correct; the one refers to the 
pciBier, the otlier to tbe lUmc. The German Smirgel, 
or Scimergel, is evidently allied to the Hebrew and 
'i!sA icords. Boblen considers the Hebrew word to be 
'.< bdUn origin, comparing amira, a stone which eats 
>••; inn. Doubtless all these words have a common 

' TUs is probably the same stone which Herodotos 
;a 6S) says tbe Aethlopians In the army of Xerxes 
•Kd luteid of iron to point their arrows with, and by 
■»an» of which they engraved seals. 

• la the Keii. Tbe Chetblb has "VIO^, «Aamur. 

> It wiU be encagb merely to allude to the Rabbinical 
'■tUt aboat Solomon, the Hoopoe (oi. tbe moorcock or 
ikci^Xaod the worat Aamir. .See Bochart's f tero- 
*>wn, loL iU. p. 843, ed. BoaenmOIler, and Bnxtorf, 
lA Mmad. coL 2466. 



twelve sons of Ishmael (Gen. xxv. 13 ; 1 Ch. 
i. 29), and thtis presumably as the progenitor of 
an AJrab tribe. No satisfactory identitication of 
this name with that of any people or place 
mentioned by the Greek geographers, or by the 
Arabs themselves, ha* yet been discovered. The 
latter have lost most of the names of Ishmael's 
reputed descendants between that patriarch and 
'Adnin (said to be of the twenty-first genera- 
tion before Mohammad), and this could scarcely 
have been the case if tribes, or places named 
after them, existed in the times of Arabian 
historians or relaters of traditions : it is there- 
fore unlikely that these names are to he recovered 
from native authors. But some they have taken, 
and apparently corrupted, from the Bible ; and 
among these is Adbeel, written (in the Mir-dt et- 
Zem6n)^j^. C^. S. P.] 

Cuneiform inscriptions mention an Arab tribe, 
Jdiba'U, Idibm, as located S.W. of the Dead 
Sea towards the borders of Egypt (Delitzsch, 
Wo lag das Parodies, p. 301 ; Schrader, KA 7".', 
p. 148) ; and D. H. Miiller has pointed out the 

name 73nK in an inscription from Medain Silih 
(.MV." s. n.). [F.] 

AD'DANd'HK; •HJ<£i'; Adon), one of the 
places from which some of the Captivity who 
could not show their pedigree as Israelites re- 
turned with Zerubbabel to Judaea (Ezra ii. 59). 
In the parallel list of Nchemiah (vii. 61) the 
name is Addon. In 1 Esd. v. 36 the names 
Cherub, Addan, and Iinmer appear as " Chara- 
ATHALAR leading them, and Aalar." [G.] [W.] 

AD'DAR ("WK; B. 'AKtl, A. •hp4S; Addar), 
son of Bela (1 Ch. riii. 3), called Ard in Num. 
XXV.. 40. [W.A. W.] [F.] 

ADDER. This word iu the text of the A. V. 
is the representative of four distinct Hebrew 
names, and in B. V. of three, mentioned below. 
It occurs in Gen. xlii. 17 (margin, A. V. arrow- 
snake, R. V. homed snake) ; Ps. Iviii. 4 (margin, 
A. V. a^), xci. 13 (margin, A. V. asp) ; Prov. 
xxiii. 32 (margin, A.V. cockatrice, R.V. basilisk) ; 
and in Is. xi. 8, xiv. 29, lix. 5, the A. V. has 
cockatrice, the R. V. basilisk, and the margin of 
both has adder. Our English word adder is used 
for any poisonous snake, and is applied in this 
general sense by the translatora of the A. V. 
and R. V.* They use in a similar way the synony- 
mous term asp. 

l.'AcshiU) (altjpP; iunrls; aspis) is found 
only in Ps. cil. 3, "They have sharpened their 
tongues like a serpent; adders' poison is under 
their lips." The latter half of this verse is 
quoted by St. Paul from the LXX. in Rom. iii. 
13. The poison of venomous serpents is often 
employed by the sacred writers in a figurative 
sense, to express the evil tempers of ungodly 
men; that malignity which, as Bishop Home 
says, is "the venom and poison of the intel- 
lectual world " (comp. Deut. xxxii. 33 ; Job xx. 
14, 16). 

It is not possible to say with any degree of 
certainty what particular species of serpent is 
intended by the Hebrew word; the ancient 

« Adder, in systematic loology, Is generally applied 
to those genera which form the family riperidM—Atp, 
to the Ftpera Atpit of the Alps. 

Digitized by 




Versions do not help us at all, although uearl;' 
all agree in some kind of serpent, with the 
exception of the Chaldee paraphrase, which 
understands a spUer by 'acshili, interpreting 
this Hebrew word by one of somewhat similar 
ibi-m." The etymology of the term is not 
ascertained with sufficient precision to enable 
us to refer the animal to any determinate 
species, and no Arabic equivalent of the word 
hiis been found. Gesenius derives it from two 
Hebrew roots,' the combined meaning of which 
is " rolled in a spire, and lying in ambush ;" a 
desci'iption which would apply to almost any 
kind of serpent. 

TIp«m •aplintlOK. (British Uaieiini.} 

Thirty-three species of Ophidia, the Serpent 
tribe, arc known from Palestine, but only six 
of these, belonging to five genera, are poisonous : 
Xoja hajc, two vipers, Daboia xanthina. Cerastes 
JJasselquisti, and Echia arcnicola. Seven Hebrew 
words are employed to designate serpents, but 
«ne of them, dllj (nacliasit), is undoubtedly 
ijcneric. While it is unlikely tliat the two 
vipers, which occur in different parts of the 
<;onntry, were discriminated by the Jews, we 
may rc.isonably presume tliat the Jews dis- 
tinguished five species, which are very different 
in appearance and habits. The prejudice against 
all the serpent tribe was probably as strong 
among the Jews as among the Arabs at the 
present day, who kill all snakes when they have 
the opiKirtunity, and believe many of the harm- 
less s|)ecie8 to be poisonous, especially if they 
happen not to be brightly coloured. But for 
none of the harmless snakes have the Arabs 
any distinctive name, nor do we find any in 
the Hebrew. As there seems to be some reason 
for assigning pethen, ahephiplUiii, and tsipMni to 
•other species, we may fairly presume that the 
cumuion ]xiisanous snake of the country, in the 
pl.'tins Vipera euphratixt, in the higher grounds 
Vipera ammodytea, is intended by 'ncslM. The 
former species, a native of Mesopotamia, Persia, 
Armenia, and the Caucasus, is very common 
both in the Jordan valley and in the plains and 
lower hills. The latter sjiecies is chiefly con- 

•> E«33I?, 'accdM«». 

« Uta. sub voc. :— C'JB, ntrortum le ftezit, and 
3pl?. intidiatut at; but in lot. It Is taken as formed 
apparentl7 from an Arab, root, to bend backward, by 
the addition of 3. Cp. Delitncb on Ps. cxl. 4. 


fined to Lebanon. Both of them are plainly 
coloured, very dark bfown, with broad flat 
heads and prominent jaws, and with suddenly 
contracting tails. 
2. PetAon (ing). [Asp."l 
8. Taepha' or Taiph'onl (ITS^. 'jiTBV ; ixyon 
lur-riSur, Ktpdanit; rcgulua) occurs five times 
in the Hebrew Bible. In Pror. xxiii. 32 it is 
translated adder in A. V. and R. V. ; and in the 
three passages of Isainh quoted above, as well 
as in Jer. riii. 17, it is rendered cockatrice in 
A. V. and basiliall in R. V. The derivation 
of the word from a root which means " to hiss" 
does not help us at all to identify the animal. 
From Jeremiah we learn that it was of a hostile 
nature, and from the parallelism of Is. xi. 8 it 
appears thitt the taiph'oni was considered even 
more dreadful than the pethen. Bochart, in his 
Hierozoicon (iii. 182, ed. Rosenmiiller), has 
endeavoured to prove that the tsiph'dni is the 
basiliah of the Greeks (whence Jerome in Vulg. 
reads regulus), which was then supposed to 
destroy life, bum np grass, and break stones by 
the pernicious influence of its breath (comp. 
Plin. H. K. viii. c. 33), but this is explaining an 
" ignotum per ignotius." 

The whole story of the basilisk is involved in 
fable, and it is vain to attempt to discover the 
animal to which the ancients attributed such 
terrible power. It is curious to obserre, how- 
ever, that Forsk&l (Descr, Animal, p. 15) speakt 
of a kind of serpent (Coluber Hollei: a the name 
he gives it) which, he says, produces irritation 
on the s|H>t touched by its breath : he is quoting 
no doubt the opinion of the Arabs. Is this a 
relic of the baailiskan fable ? This ci-eature was 
so called from a mark on its head, supposed to 
resemble a kingly crown. Several serpents, 
however, have peculiar markings on the hea<i — 
the varieties of the Spectacle-Cobras of India, 
for example — so that identification is impossible. 
As the LXX. make use of the word basilisk 
(I's. xc. 13 = xci. 13, A. V.) it was thought 
desirable to say this much on the subject.* 

The taiph'Snt may probably be the great yellow 
viper, Daboia xanthina, a very beautifully marked 
serpent, and the largest poisonous species found 
in the Holy Land, as well as one of the most 
dangerous, on account not only of its size, but 
of its nocturnal habits, in which it differs from 
the Cobra and the Cerastes. I once killed a 
Daboia having in its stomach a leveret which 
it had swallowed whole. On another occasion I 
saw one spring on a quail which was feeding; 
it missed its prey, the bird fluttered on a few 
yards, and then fell in the agonies of death. 
On taking it up, I found the viper had made 
the slightest possible puncture in the tip of 
one wing as it snapped at it. The Daboia is re- 
markable as belonging to an exclusively Indian 
family of serpents, and which has no representa- 
tives in Africa, to which region or to Europe 
all the other poisonous snakes of Palestine 
belong. Dr. Harris, in his Natural Histori/ of 
the Bibk, erroneously supposes the fsipA'dnf to 
be identical with the Rajah zcphen of Forsk&l, 

' The ha$ilUk of naturalists Is a most forbidding- 
looking yet harmless It'card of the family Iguanidae, 
order .Spuria. In using the term, therefore, care must 
b? taken not to confound the mythical ssrpent with the 
veritable Saurian. 

Digitized by 



whieh, howcTfr, is a fi»h {Trigon zephen, Cuv.), 
Uki iK)t a MTpeot. 



Icbia knftlouU. 

4. SliephtphmQ(tii&0; iyKaJM)iuvat ; cerastes) 
occun only in Gen. xlix. 17, where it is used to 
i-iiuscterise the tribe of Dan : " Dan shall be a 
wrpent in the way, an adder (marg. or, horned 
smke) in the path, that biteth the horse's heels, 
w that his rider falleth backward " (R. V.). 
Varicos are the readings of the old Versions in 
the passage : the Samnritan interjirets sliephiphon 
by •' lying in wait ; " the Targums of Onkclos, of 
Jenualem, and of Ps.-Jonathan, with the Srriac, 
"a basilislc."* Saadias aud the Arabic edited 
l>y Erpenins have *' the homed snake ; " ' and so 
the Vnlg. Certutes. The LXX., like the Sania- 
ritan, mast hare connected the Hebrew term 
vitb a word which expresses the idea of "sit- 
ting in ambush." The original wor<l, according 
to Gownius and Rikliger, comes from a root 
proerred in Sjriac, and signifying "to glide."* 

The Hebrew word shephiphin is no donbt 
ideatical with the Arabic sif-un. If the 
tniulation of this Arabic word by Golins be 
(jmpared with the description of the Cerastes, 
there vill appear good reason for identifying 
the i/tephiphin of Genesis with the Cerastes of 
nstatalists. " Siffun, 5eri)entis genus leve, 
I'UBCtis macnltsque distinctum" — "a small 
tiad of serpent marked with dots and spots" 
(tiolins, Arab. Lex. s. v.). The Cerastes {Cerastes 
il'mdijaisti), the well-known Horned Snake, is 
> small serpent of a sandy colour, varying from 
tv^Hifth to whitish buff, according to the character 
if the soil where it is found, with pale brown or 
sometimes blackish irregular spots, very roughly 

* iDnin (iSroriBoii), derived by the Rabbis from 
DTfV'ban," metapb. •• destruction." Rasbl on Oen. 
ilii. 11 explains 'n as tpeeitt itrpentit, <ul eujui 
Mrnm nulla at wiedicina . . . Omnia quat morsu suo 
ftiU. frtiaX et excindat (Buxtorf. L-x. Ckald. s. n. 
Til. |1^ Jja In tEls sense is common (see I'ayne 
!«ilth, no. Syr. col. 1375> 


< .»» The word Is derived by Scboltens from an 

Anbic TDM to Mhicb be assign* the qnestioiutl^iC ciran- 
a| rf •• to prick '■ a •• btte." 

scaled, with broad flattened jaws and suddenly 
tapering tail, seldom exceeding a foot, or at 
most eighteen inches in length, well known in 
the sandy and rocky deserts of Egypt, Abyssinia, 
the Sahara, Arabia, and Syria. It e.itends 
through Southern Judaea and Philistia. It can 
be recognised at a glance by the peculiar horn- 
like appendages just above the eyes, covered 
with small scales, which are always developed in 
the male, and sometimes, though to a less extent, 
in the female.** 

Another |>eculiarity of the Cerastes assists us 
in identifying it with the shephiphin, viz. its 
lying in ambush in the patli, and biting the 
horses' heels. Its habit is usually to coil itself 
on the sand, where it basks in the impress of a 
camel's footprint, and thence suddenly to dart out 
on any passing animal. So great is the terror 
which its sight inspires in horses, that I have 
known mine suddenly start and rear, trembling 
and perspiring in every limb, and no persuasion 
could induce him to proceed. I was quite 
unable to account for his terror, till I noticed a 
Cerastes coiled up in a depression two or three 
paces in front of us, with its basilisk eyes 
steadily fixed on us, and no doubt preparing for 
a spring as the horse should pass. This species 
is said to have been the Asp with which 
Cleopatra killed herself. It is extremely venom- 
ous, causing the certain death of a man in 
half an hour, and is considered more vicious 
even than the Cobra, as it will attack when 
unprovoked. Its ordinary food consists of 
jerboas and desert marmots. By comparing the 
tribe of Dan to this wily serpent, the Patriarch 
intimated that by stratagem, more than by open 
bravery, they should avenge themselves of their 
enemies and extend their conquests. This was 
illustrated by the wily manner in which Samson, 
a Danite, destroyed his Philistian foes. Bruce, 
in his I'ratels in Abyssinia, has given a very 
accurate and detailed account of these animals. 
He observes that he found them in greatest 
numbers in those parts which were frequented 
by the jerboa, and that in the stomach of a 
Cerastes he discovered the remains of a jerboa. 
He ke|>t two of these snakes in a glass vessel 
for two years without any food. Anothei 
circumstance mentioned by Bruce throws some 
light on the assertions of ancient authors as to 
the movement of this snake. Aelian,' isidorus, 
Al'tius, hare all recorded of the Cerastes that, 
whereas other serpents creep along in a straight 
direction, this one and the Uaemorrhons'^ (no 

■> Hasielqnist (lliner. pp. 141. 365) has thus described 
thorn: — "Tentacula duu, utrinque unum ad laters 
vertlcls, tn margtne superlori orbltae ocull, erects, parte 
aversa parum arcuata, eademque parte parum canali- 
culata, sub.dura. membrana tenacl vestita, basi equamis 
minimis, una serie erectis, cincta, brevia, orbltae ocu- 
lurum dimldia longltudlne." 

With tbia description tliat of Geoffroy St. Hlliilre may 
be compared ; — " Au-dpssus des ycux nalt de ctiaque 
CMte une petite eminence, ou comme on a cuutume de 
la dire une petite coriie. longuc de deux uu trots llgnee, 
pre^entant dans le sens de sa loneueur des sllluos et 
dirigee en baut et un peu en an lere, d'otl le nom de 
iVraste. \a nature des cornea du Ceraste est tr^s peu 
connue. et leurs usages, si toutefois ollcs peuvent etrc do 
qndque utilite pour ranimal. sont entt^rcment Ignores." 

< Xoi'oy H oTfuw irp<i<uri>' (Aelian, dt Anim. xv. 13). 

k Aoxfta £* <irt<rica^Mi' oAtyoy lifiai, ola «<pa^Ti)< 
(NIcander, Theriac. 291). 


Digitized by 





doubt the sftme nnimal under another name) 
more sideways, stumbling as it were on either 
side (and comp. Bochart). Let this be compared 
with what Bruce says: "The Cerastes mores 
with great rapidity and in all directions, for- 

The HotBfld Ct-ruloi. (BriUib Hoiellni.) 

wards, backwards, sideways; when he inclines 
to surprise any one who is too far from him, be 
creeps with his side iotcards the person," &c. &c. 
The words of Ibn Sina, or Aricenna, are to the 
same effect. I hare noticed it more, when not 
alarmed, with a peculiar sidelong wrig!;le. So 
soon as it pcrceired itself obserred, it glided 
along in n straight line. But this sidelong 
morement is not peculiar to the Cerastes. It 
belongs to the family Viperidae, order Ophidia) 

From the root Shaphaph are possibly derired 
the proper names of SllDraAU, whence the 
familr of the Shuphamites, Shepiiuphax, and 
SuuppiM." [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

ADDI CA««, 'htifi [Westcott and Hort], 
Luke iii. 28), son of Cosam, and father of 
Melchi, in our Lord's genealogy; the third 
abore Salathiel. The etymology and Hebrew 
form of the name are doubtful, as it does not 
occur in the LXX., but it probably represents 
the Hebrew ^V, an onuiment, and is a short 
form of Adiel, or Adaiah. The latter name in 
1 Ch. vi. 41 (26 in Heb. Bib.) is rendered in the 
LXX. A. 'AJoid [B. 'Af«i<ii Adaia\ which is 
rery close to Addi. [.\. C. H.] 

AD'DO (A. 'MSii, B. 'ESStlv; Addin), Iddo, 
the grandfather of the prophet Zechariah (1 Esd. 
ri. 1). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ADDON (Neh. rii. CI; 'Hp^y; Addon), a 
rariation in the orthography of Addan (jilK 
and riN or H^)- [f •] 

ADDUS ('AMoii; .4dtfiM). 1. The sons of 
Addus are enumerated among the children of 
Solomon's serrants who returned with Zorobabel 
(1 Esd. r. 34); but the name does not occur in 
the parallel lists of Ezra or Nehemiah, 

2. A. 'loStois, B. 'laXiois; Addin. A priest, 
whose descendants were unable to establish their 
gcncilogy in the time of Ezra, and were remored 
from their priesthood (1 Esd. r. 38). He is said 
to hare married Augia, the daughter of Bcrzclns 

' The celebrated John EUls seems to have been the 
first EnglUbm&n who gave an accurate description ol 
the Cerastes (sec Pkilosopk. Transact. 1760). 

•> Doctaart (Hterot. ilL 209, Rosenm.) says that the 
Babbins derive IQ^Bt!' f^"'" ^QC> daudicart, whererorc 

11BB' to el<mdus. See, however. Levy, Chald. WSr- 
(erb. 8. V. 

or Barzillai. In Ezra ii. 61 and Nehemiah vii. 63 
he is called by his adopted name Barzillai : it it 
not clear whether Addus represents his oripnal 
name or is a corruption. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ADEB CriV ; inpausc TIB, ajlock; B.'nJuJ: 

A. 'ClStp ; Hedcr ; K. V. Eder), a Benjamite, son 
of Beriab, chief of the iubabitants of Aijalon 
(1 Ch. viii. 15). • [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AD'IDA ('AStSd, K -«i- ; Joseph.'A88<Ja ; Ad- 
dus [1 Mncc. xiii,], Adiada [1 Mace. lii.]), a tovn 
on an eminence {Ant. xiii. 6, § 4) overlookin; 
thi low country of Judah ('A. iy tj 2c^Af ), 
fortified by Simon Maccabaeus in his ware with 
Tryphon (1 Mace. jii. 38, liii. 13). Aleiandw 
was here defeated by Aretas (^Ant. xiii. 15, §2); 
and Vespasian used it as one of his outposts in 
the siege of Jerusalem (B. J. W. 9, § 1). In 
the OS.* (]). 128, 1) it is called Aditha, uJ 
placed east of Diospolis (Lydda). Now Hadltheh, 
a rillage with the remains of a considerable 
town near the foot of the hills eastward of 
Lydda (P. F. Mem. ii. 297, 322). Probably 
identical with Hadid. [G.] [W.] 

ADI'EL (^t?»"7», Furst = El is ormmnt. 
MV'.'" = ornament of God: A. 'tirliK; B. has 
a different reading : Adiel). 1. A prince of thf 
tribe of Simeon, descended from the prosperous 
family of Shimei (1 Ch. iv. 36). He took part 
in the murderous raid made by his tribe upon 
the peaceable Hamite shepherds in the rsllev of 
Gedor, in the reign of Hezekiah. 2. 'AS4^: 
Adiel. A priest, ancestor of Maasai (1 Ch. ii. 
12, R. v.). 3. BA. 'nSi^X; Adiel. Ancestor 
of Azmareth, Darid's treasurer (1 Ch. iirii. 
25). [W. A. W.] p.] 

ADIX (jn», litxuriom or delicate ; B. ■A^ 
<(y, A. -iy [in 'Ezra viii. 6 (LXX. r. 32X B. 
•A8(i', A. 'AtSly in Ezra ii. 15] ; 'HJ(»' [in Neh.]; 
AJin in Ezra ii. 15, Adan in Ezra riii. 6). 
Ancestor of a family who returned with Zenib- 
babel to the number of 454 (Ezra ii. 15, 1 £«1' 
V. 14 [B. 'ASti\los, A. 'ASaiis}), or 655, accord- 
ing to the parallel list in Neh. rii. 20. Fiftj- 
one more (or 251, according to A. V. of 1 Esd. 
riii. 32) accompanied Ezra in the second carav.™ 
from Babylon (Ezra riii. 6). They joined with 
Xehemiah in a corenant to separate themselves 
from the heathen (Neh. x. 16). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ADI'NA (Wnr, lurttriotis, s-ift; 'Mfi 

B. -«i- ; Adina). The son of Shiza, one of 
Darid's captains bevond the Jordan, and chief 
of the Rcubenites ('l Ch. li. 42). The A. V„ 
R. v., and the Syriac read respecting him, " anJ 
thirtr with him." The expression is obscure 
(Keil).* [W. A. W.] [F] 

ADI'NO ("ung; B. 'A»eiw»K, A.'AJed-; Vol;. 
paraphr.ises), the Eznite (2 Sam. ixiii. 8). See 
Jasi:ouea». The clause in Samuel (/. e.) is 
corrupt (see R. V. marg.). The true reading is 
preserved in the parallel passage (1 Ch. li. H). 
from which it is apparent that WIS is a cor- 
ruption of "ni». [W. A. W.] [S. K. D.] 

■ It does not necessarily mean that be was In com- 
mand of these thirty, Reubenlte chiefs or not; nor doe« 
the interpretation given to the LXX. (ed. S«eic\ ««i 
fir' avTy TpiaKoyra, ** and over him were thirty, i.^. 
superiors (those ennmerated in m. 36-41), appear jus- 
tifled. Cp. the LXX-Ul usage In ill. 4, xxrtl. 6. 

Digitized by 





ADINUS (A. 'laSivit, B. -«<-; Jaddimus). 
Jxnis the Levite (1 £sd. ix. 48 : cp. Neh. viii. 7 ; 
JmiH). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ADITHATM (D?nnr, Ges. = double booty ; 
A. 'Atiaiatiti ; Adit/iaim), a town belonging to 
Jndah, Ijing in the low coantry (Shefelah), and 
earned, between Sharaim and hag-Gederah, in 
Jo«h. IT. 36 only. It is entirely omitted by the 
Vat. MS. of the UCX., and the site has not yet 
l>«en identified (see Dillmana, /. c). For the dual 
ttrmination, coinp. the two names occurring in 
the same rerse; also EgLiim, Uoronaim, &c. 
L-iDIDi.] [G.] [W.] 

ADJURATION. [Exoecist.] 

ADT.AI cVlff = iT^'1», Ges. = <A<! right- 
fmaea of Jehmah ; BA. 'Aiat ; Adii). An- 
itstor of Shaphat, the overseer of David's herds 
which fed in the broad valleys (1 Ch. xxvii. 
•29). [W. A.W.] [F.] 

AD^IAH (mn» ; 'ASofii; Adatna^ one of 
"the cities of the plain," always coupled with 
j^boiim (B. V.X and destroyed with Sodom and 
(Jomorrah (Gen. i. 19, xiv. 2, 8 ; Deut. xxix, 
23; Hot. li. 8). It had a king of its own. [G.] 

ADMATHA (KntJIN, MV.''» = untamed; 
LXX. omits ; Admatlia), one of the seven princes 
of Persia (Esth. i. 14). Rawlinson {Speaker's 
dan., add. n. » loco), by manipulation of the 
letters, makes the name=Artabanus, tlie uncle 
<>rX<nes; and Cassel {Das Buck Esther, p. 33) 
identifies him with Aspathines. The etymology is 
quite oncertain (see Bertheau-Ryssel, /. c). [F.] 

ADTiIA (lOnir.pfcaswre or»o/«n«ss; B. AlSawi 

[B* E3-]. UrtSty^x ; Edna)- 1. One of the 
timilj of Pahath-Moab who returned with Ezra, 
aid married a foreign wife (Ezra x. 30). 

2. T.' MamcEt, j{»-» ■»» i«f 'AJoFib; BK*A. 
''■nit. A pried, descendant of Harim, in the 
davi of Joiakim, SOD of Jeshua (Xeh. xii. 15). 
[W. A. W.] [F.] 

AD?f AH (nn» ; 'Ztri ; Ednas). 1. A Manas- 
site, who deserted from Saul and joined the for- 
Icnesof David on his road to Ziklag from the camp 
"f the Philistines (1 Ch. xii. 20 [Heb. 21]). ^ 

S. rOTP, pleasure or softness ; BA. 'ESydat ; 
JJinaa. 'The commander-in-chief of 300,000 
uen of Jodah, who were in Jehoshnphat's army 
(iC'h.iTiLU). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ADONI-BE'ZEK (PJI'^j'lX, lord of Bczek ; 
'K{mtfk({K ; Adoaibezec), king of Bezek, a city 
'' the Canaanites. [Bezek.J This chieftain 
''a< Ttaquished by the tribe of Judah (Judg. i. 
'-•), who cut off his thumbs and great toes, and 
brought him prisoner to Jerusalem, where he 
'M. He confened that he had inflicted the 
■ane croelty upon 70 petty kings whom he had 
"iiiqaered. " Dr. Hackett '(/). B., Amer. ed.), 
IV'tiig Cassel in his note on Judg. (/. c), 
marks that this form of mutilation was not 
aMDmnion in ancient times, and was chosen in 
■r4er to unfit men for warlike service (such as 
the UK of the bow) and for active and rapid 
"jovements. It is told of the Athenians that 
^ nt off the thumbs of the Aeginetans whom 
''"T cnnqaered (B.C. 456), in order to pre- 

vent tlieir handling the spear. Adoni-bezek not 
only mutilated but humbled his captives; they 
"gathered their meat under his table." A 
somewhat similar treatment of prisoners is re- 
corded of the Parthian kings (Athen. Deipn. iv. 
p.l52d). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

ADONI'CAM, ADONl'CAN. [Adonikam.] 
ADONI'JAH (njjhK. WJi^K, my Lord is 
Jehovah ; 'Ktuviat, B. -«i- ; Adonias). 1. The 
fourth son of David by Haggith, born at Hebron, 
while his father was king of Judah (2 Sam. 
ill. 4. The Greek text here, and the Lucianic Rc- 
ccusion in 1 K. i. ii., reading T as 1, have B. 
'OpvtlK, A. 'Opvlas, Luc. -la). After the death 
of his three brothers, — Amnon, Chileab, and 
Absalom, — he became eldest son ; and when his 
father's strength was visibly declining, put 
forward his pretensions to the crown, by 
equipping himself in royal state, with chariots 
and horsemen, and fifty men to run before him, 
in imitation of Absalom (2 Sam. xv. 1), whom 
he also resembled in personal beauty, and ap- 
parently also in character, as indeed Josephus 
says {Ant. rii. 14, § 4). For this reason he was 
plainly unfit to be king, and David promised 
Bathsheba that her son Solomon should inherit 
the crown (1 K. i. 30), for there was no absolute 
claim of primogeniture in these Eastern mon- 
archies. Solomon's cause was espoused by the 
best of David's counsellors : the illustrious 
prophet Kathan ; Zadok, the descendant of 
Eleazar, and representative of the elder line of 
the priesthood; Benaiab, the captain of the king's 
body-guard ; together with Shimci and Rei, 
whom Ewald {Geschichte, iii. 266) conjectures 
to be David's two surviving brothers, comparing 
1 Ch. ii. 13, and identifying ♦IflDB' with nrOC 
{Shimma in A. V., Shimea in R. V.), and 'UT with 
m (A. V. Raddai).' From 1 K. ii. 8, it is unlikely 
that the Shimei of 2 Sam. xvi. 5 could have 
actively espoused Solomon'; cause. On the side 
of Adonljah, who— when he made his attempt 
on the kingdom — was about 35 years old (2 Snm. 
V. 5), were Abiathar, the representative of Kli's 
(i.e. the junior) line of the priesthood (descended 
from Ithamar, Aaron's fourth son), and Joab, the 
famous commander of David's army ; the latter 
of whom, always audacious and self-willed, pro- 
bably expected to find more congenial elements 
in Adonijah's court than in Solomon's. Adonijah's 
name and influence secured a large number of 
followers among the captains of the royal army 
belonging to the tribe of Judah (cp. 1 K. i. 9, 
25); and these, together with all the princes 
except Solomon, were entertained by Adonijah 
at a great sacrificial feast held " by the stone 
Zoheleth, which is by En-rogel." "The meaning 
of the stone Zoheleth is very doubtful, being 
translated rock of the tratch toner in the Chaldee ; 
great rock, Syr. and Arab. ; and explained (but 
improbably) rock of the stream of tcater by 
R. Kimchi, and by Ge».=the stone of the serpent 
[cp. Deut. xxxii. 24 Heb.], i>. the rock with its 
image of the serpent. The rock upon which the 
village of Silwin [Siloam] is built bears the name 

Zahweile (seeGanneauin MV."j. n. DpriT). En- 

• This seems preferable to the unsupported con- 
jectures that the reading of 1 K. 1. 8 was 'NIJPI '^D?' 

orv»ii rinVc'-r 

E 2 

Digitized by 




rogel is mentioned in Josh. xv. 7, Rs a spring on 
the border of Judah and Benjamin, S. of Jerusalem, 
and may be the same as that afterwards called the 
Well of Job or Joab {'Ain Ay&h. Conder identi- 
fies it with the spring now called 'Ain Ummed- 
Peraj, and known to Christians as the Virgin's 
Well). It is explained apritv} of the fuller by 
the Chaldee Paraphrast, perhaps becanse he 

trod the clothes with his feet (7J"1, see Gesen. 
J. r.); but cp. Deut. xi. 10, ivhcre "watering 
with the feet " refers to machines troddeu with 
the foot, and such as were possibly fed by the 
spring of Kogel. [Ks-uogel.] A meeting for a 
religious purpose would be held near a spring, 
just as in later times sites for wpanvxal were 
chosen by the waterside (AcU xvi. 13). 

Nathan and Bathsheba, now thoroughly 
alarmed, apprised David of these proceedings, 
who immediately gave orders that Solomon 
should be conducted on the royal mule in solemn 
procession to Gihon, a spring on the W. of 
Jerusalem (2 Ch. xiiii. 30). [GiHON.] Here 
he was anointed and proclaimed king by Zadok, 
and joyfully recognised by the people. This 
decisive measure struck terror into the opposite 
party, and Adonijah fled to the sanctuary. He 
was pardoned by Solomon on condition that he 
should " shew himself a worthy man," and with 
the threat that "if wickedness were found in 
him he should die" (1 Kings i. 52). 

The death of David quickly followed these 
events ; and Adonijah begged Bathsheba, who as 
" king's mother" would now have s|)ecial dignity 
and influence [Asa], to procure Solomon's con- 
sent to his marriage with Abishag, who had 
been the wife of David in his old age (I K. i. 3). 
This was regarded as equivalent to a fresh at- 
tempt on the throne [Absaiom ; Abxer] ; and 
therefore Solomon onlered him to be put to 
death by Benaiah, in accoi-dance with the terms 
of his previous pardon. Far from looking upon 
this as " the most flagrant act of despotism since 
Doeg massacred the priests at Saul's command " 
(New^man, Hebrem Monarchy, ch. iv.), we must 
consider that the clemency of Solomon in 
sparing Adonijah, till he thus again revealed a 
treasonable purpose, stands in remarkable con- 
trast with the almost universal practice of 
Eastern sovereigns. Any one of these, situated 
like .Solomon, would probably have secured his 
throne by putting all his brothers to death, 
whereas we have no reason to think that any of 
David's sons suficred except the open pretender 
.\donijah, though all seem to have opposed 
Solomon's claims; and if his execution be 
thought an act of severity, we must remember 
that we cannot expect to find the principles of 
the Gospel acted upon a thousand years before 
Christ came, and that it is hard for us, in this 
nineteenth century, altogether to realize the 
position of an Oriental king in that remote age. 
The Midrasit Jiabba (§ 20 on Gen. iii. 15) applied 
to Adonijah (and to others, e.g. Cain, Korah, 
Balaam, Absalom, and Haman) tlie proverb, 
" He that seeks what is not his, loses that which 
is " (cp. Hambiirger, SE.^ s. n.). 

2. B. 'ASuii/liu. A Levite in the reign of 
Jehoahaphat (2 Ch. xvii. 8). 

3. 'Mavla, A. 'AoviCa, K. 'Eiavla; Adonia. 
One of the Jewish chiefs in the time of Nehemiah 
(x. IG). He is called Adonikam (Dp'JlN; 


'MuvMiii, B. -Kof, Adonicam) jn Ezra ii. 13. 
Cp. Ezra viii. 13 ; Neh. vii. 18. [G. E. L. C] [f.] 

ADONI'KAM (DfffW. MV.» = my Jjtrd 
uplifts himself [cp. o'lshaiisen, Lehrh. p. 620]; 
BA. 'hiayMiii [in 1 Esd. v. 14], B. -<m [la 
Ezra ii. 13] ; Adonicam). The sons of Adonikam, 
666 in number, were among those who re- 
turned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Eir« ii. 
13; Keh. vii. 18 [B. 'KUutiii, ».'KUvi*i^\, 
1 Esd. V. 14, CAa/n). In the last two passages 
the number is 667. The remainder of the family 
returned with Ezra (Ezra viii. 13 [B. 'A8«»«- 
Kd^]; 1 Esd. viii. 39 [&. ■' Kturianiii'W Toe 

name is given as Adonuah in Neh. x. 16. 

* [W. A.W.] [F.] 

ADONI'BAM (m;)'lK, MV.>» = my XW 
is exalted, 1 K. iv. 6, v. 14; by an unusual con- 
traction, Adoram, n-h», 2 Sam. ix. 24 [Ai*- 
mm], and 1 K. xii.'l8"'[B. 'Kpi^l•, AdurmC\; 
also H ADORAM, Whn, 2 Ch. x. 18, A. 'M«fh, 
Aduram ; usually ''AS-ripif^ B. -«<-; ^<>'^}- 
ram). Chief receiver of the tribute duriag the 
reigns of David (2 Sam. ix. 24), Solomon (1 h- 
iv. 6), and Itehoboam (1 K. xii. 18). This list 
monarch sent him to collect the tribute from 
the rebellious Israelites, Iiy whom he was stoneJ 
to death. • [K.W.B.] [?■] 

ADONl-ZE'DEC (p-l^jhK, Ges. nmi 
MV." = lord of righteousness; 'AStin$i("^- 
Adonisedec), by some thought to be the ofBcial 
title of the Jebusite king of Jerusalem wh" 
organized a league with four other Amorite 
princes against Joshua. The confederate ting* 
having laid siege to Gibeon, Joshua marched to 
the relief of his new allies and put the besiegers 
to flight. The five kings took refuge in a cave 
at Makkedah, whence they were taken and slain, 
their bodies hung on trees, and then buriedjn 
the place of their concealment (Josh. x. 1-27). 
[JosiiOA.] [R. W. B.] [F-l 

ADOPTION (vtoOterta), an expression meta- 
phorically used by St. Paul in reference to the 
present and prospective privileges of Christians 
(Rom. viii. 15, 23 ; Gal. iv. o ; Eph. i. 5). He 
probably alludes to the Roman custom of .iJ«l>- 
tion, by which a person, not having children of 
his own, might adopt as his son one born of other 
parents. It was a formal act, effected either by 
the process named adrogatio, when the person 
to be adopted was independent of his parent, or 
by adoptio, specifically so called, when in the 
power of his parent. (See Diet, if dr. a*' 
Rom. Ant., art. ADomo.) The cftcct of it was 
that the adopted child was entitled to the name 
and sacra privata of his new father, and ranked 
as his heir-at-law : while the father on his part 
was entitled to the property of the son, and ei- 
ercised towards him all the rights and privilege* 
of a father. In short the relatiouship was to 
all intents and purposes the same as eiisteil 
between a natural father and son. The selection 
of a peraon to be adopted implied a decided pre- 
ference and love on the part of the adopter : and 
St. Paul aptly tran.sfers the well-known feelings 
and customs connected with the act to illustrste 
the position of the Christianized Jew or GcntiKj- 
The Jews themselves were unacquainted wit" 
the process of adoption : indeed it would have 

Digitized by 



Imn inconsistent with the regaUtions of the 
Mouic law aSecting the inheritance of property : 
the initances occasionally adduced as referring 
to tlie custom (Gen. it. 3, xri. 2, xxi. 5-9) are 
f-ridtatly not cases of adoption proper. Our 
"adoption as sons through Jesns Christ " is the 
kry-oote of St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians (see 
Speaker'! Comm., Introd. to the £p. to the Ephes. 
§ ; and on the whole subject GiflTard's note on 
(>om.TiiL 15 in the same work). [\V. L.B.] [F.] 

ADO'BA or ADOB. [Adoraim.] 
ADOBA'IM (D!'T^nX; B. 'Atupai; A. 
'MmpaLii; Aduram), s fortified city built by 
Ilcholjoam (2 Ch. xi. 9% in Judah (Jos.* Ant, 
viii. |i}, § 1), apparently in or near the Shefelah, 
met, although omitted from the lists in Josh. 
ST., it is by Josephus (^Ant. xiii. 9, § 1, 15, § 4 ; 
/;. /. i. 2, § 6, i. 8, § 4) almost uniformly 
rnopled with Mareshah, which was certainly 
Htoated there. For the dual termination com- 
l«r< Adithairo, Gederothaim, &c. By Josephus 
It is giren as 'ASopo, 'AS^ot ; and in Ant xiii. 
'>, § 3, he calls it a " city of Idumaea," under 
ivhich name was included, in the later times of 
levish history, the southern part of Judaea 
it^eIf (Reland, 48 ; Robinson, ii. 69). Adoraim 
i< probably the same place as ASopa (1 Mace, 
iiiL 20, Ador), unless that be Dor, on the sea- 
cout below Carmel. It is generally identified 
<rith Dirtx, a large village on the flat slope of a 
Ull, west of Hebron. Near it is the celebrated 
tomb of A'eiy Kith (Xoah). The village occu- 
(lies an important position guarding an ancient 
nsin line of communication with Philistia, 
wliich runs through it (P. F. Mem. iii. 304, 
.•JJS ; see Robinson, ii. 215). [G.] [VV.] 

ADOUAM. [Adosieam.] 

ADORATION. The acu and postores by 
vhich the Hebrews expressed adoration, bear ■ 



ladeM ltn<i«a. (WOUiiaoa.) 

^nst similarity to those still in use among 
Oriental nations. To rise np and suddenly 
l^nsttate the body, was the most simple method ; 
tint, generally speaking, the prostration was 
sotdacted in a more formal m.tnner, the person 

falling upon the knee and then griidimlly 
inclining the body, until the forehead touched 
the ground. The various expressions in Hebrew 
referring to this custom appear to have their 

specific meaning : thus ?u] (ir(irr», LXX.) 
describes the sudden full ; 17*13 (itcl^irTo, LXX.) 
bending the knee; Tip (kvhtv, LXX.) thu 
inclination of the head and body ; and lastly 
nriB' (rpoo'ict'VcTi', LXX.) complete prostration. 
The' term nJD (Is. iliv. 15, 17, 19; ilvi. 6) was 
introduced at a late period as appropriate to the 
worship paiil to idols by the Babylonians and 
utlier Eii^tcrn nations (L):in. iii. 5, 0). }>uch 

* Evra vithout this statement of Joaephos, It Is plain 
btt •Judah and Benjamin," In 1 Ch. xl. 10, Is a form 
•fesptoBloa for Ibe new ktogdom, and that none of tbe 
«nj uBwd arc n t oe s s a rlly in the Umits of Benjamin 

Adoniltuu. Uudoru EgyptUu. (L«lio.) 

prostration waa usual in the worship of Jehovah 
(Gen. ivii. 3; Ps. xcv. 6); but it was by no 
means exclusively used for that pur|x>se ; it was 
the formal mode of receiving visitors (Geu. 
xviii. 2), of doing obeisance to one of su]>eriur 
station (2 Sam. xiv. 4), and of showing respect 
to equals (1 K. ii. 19). Occasionally it was 
repeated three times (1 Sam. xx. 41), and even 
seven times (Gen. xxxiii. 3), It was accom- 
panied by such acts as a kiss (Ex. xviii. 7), 
laying hold of the knees or feet of tbe person to 
whom the adoration was paid (Matt, xxviii. 9), 
and kissing the ground on which he stood 
(Ps. Ixxii. 9 ; Mic vii. 17). Similar adoration 
waa paid to idols (1 K, xix. 18); sometimes 
however prostration was omitted, and the act 
consisted simply in kissinp: the hand to the 
object of reverence (Job xxxi. 27) in the manner 
practised by the Romans (Plin. xxviii. 5 : see Vkt. 
of Gr. and Jiom. Ant.,KTt. Adobatio), in kissing 
the statue itself (Hos. xiii. 2> The same customs 
prevailed at the time of our Saviour's ministry, 
as appears not only from the numerous occa- 
sions on which they were put in practice 
towards Himself, but also from the parable of 
the unmerciful servant (Matt, xviii. 2t>), and 
from the reverence of Cornelius to St. Peter 
(Acta X, 25), in which case the Apostle objected 
to it, as implying a higher degree of superiority 
than he waa entitled to, especially as coming 
from a Roman, to whom prostration was not 
usual. [W. L. B.] 

ADRAMME'LECH n^t^T]*; h.'ASpaiii- 
\tX, A. •<«; Adramelecit). 1.' A deity (2 K. 
xvii. 31) worshipped by the colonists brought 
into Samaria by Shalmaueser II., king of Assyria, 
from Sepharvaim (Sipnr or Sippara, now Abu- 
habbah). Both Adrammelech and Anammelech 
were worshipped with rites similar to those of 
Moloch, children being sacrificed to them. This 

Digitized by 




name, according to Schrader, is equivalent to the 
Assyrian Adarmalik, " Adar (or Ninip) is prince." 
The reading of " Adar " for " Ninip " is, how- 
ever, very doabtful ; and as the word Adara is 
found OS a bjr-name of Hea, god of the sea and 
of wisdom, it is very likely that the Assyrian 
form of the name is Adaramilk, " Adar (lord 
of) counsel." [Anammelecii.] 

2. One of the sons of Sennacherib, king of 
Assyria, who, with his brother Shareser, killed 
their father whilst he was worshipping in the 
temple of Nisrooh (2 K. xix. 37, B. -€«, A. -«x ! 
Is. x«vii. 38, K. 'AvSpa/ifX^x)- According to 
the B.-)bylonian chronicle, this happened in 
the eighth year of the reign of Sennacherib 
in Babylon (B.C. 688). . This text differs from 
the account in the Bible, in that it states that 
Sennacherib was killed by only one son, and 
that it happened in a revolt. This is probably 
to be understood in this way : that both sons 
took part in the revolt, but that only one 
actually committed the crime, entering the 
temple . where the king his father was wor- 
shipping, whilst his brother, in command of the 
rebel troops, surrounded the building to pre- 
vent the escape of the king. Adrammelech may 
probably be identified with the Aiiur-munik of 
the Assyrians, He seems to have been the eldest 
son of Sennacukrib, who built a small palace 
for him at Nineveh. [T. G. P.] 

ADRAMYTTIUM (occasionally Ateamtt- 
TiUM. Some cursive MSS. have 'Arpo^vr^vfi, 
instead of 'AS|^a^^vT^|y^ in Acts xxvii. 2), a 
.seaport in the province of Asia [Asia], situated 
in the district anciently called Aeolis, and also 
Jlysia (see Acts xvi. 7). Adramyttium gave 
and still gives its name to a deep gulf on this 
toast, opposite to the o|>ening of which is the 
island of Lesbos [Mitylene]. St. Paul was 
never at Adramyttium, except perhaps during 
his second missionary journey, on his way from 
Galatia to Tro!\s (Acts xvi.), and it has no bibli- 
cal interest, except as illustrating his voyage 
from Caesarca in a ship belonging to this place 
(Acts xxvii. 2). The reason is given in what 
follows, viz. that the centurion ami his prisoners 
would thus be brought to the coasts of Asia, 
iind therefore some distance on their way to- 
wards Rome, to places where some other ship 
bound for the west would probably be found. 
Ships of Adramyttium must have been frequent 
uu this coast, for it was a place of considerable 
traflic. It lay on the great Roman road between 
Assos, Troas, and the Hellespont on one side, 
and Pergamus, Ephesus, and Miletus on the 
other, end was connected by simiKir roads with 
the interior of the country. According to 
tradition, Adramyttium was a settlement of the 
Lydians in the time of Croesus; it was after- 
wards an Athenian colony : under the kingdom 
of Pergamus it became a seaport of some con- 
sequence; and in the time of St. Paul Pliny 
mentions it as a Roman assize-town. The 
rooderii Edremid or Adraini/ti is a jwor village, 
but there is still some trade, more especially in 
timber. It is described in the travels of Pococke, 
Turner, and Fellows. See Diet. Gr. and Horn, 
Gcog., art. " Adramyttium." [J. S. H.] [W.] 

ADEIA, more properlyA'DRIAS (i 'ASpias ; 
Adria). It is important to fix the meaning of 
this word as used in Acts xxvii. 27. The word 


seems to have been derive<l from the town of 
Adria, near the Po ; and at tint it denoted that 
part of the Gulf of Venice which is in that 
neighbourhood. Afterwards the signitication oi 
the name was extended, so as to embrace the 
whole of that gulf. Subsequently it obtain^ 
a much wider extension, and in the apostolic 
age denoted that natural division of the Uedi- 
terranean which Humboldt names the Syrtic 
basin (see .\cts xxvii. 17), and which had the 
coasts of Sicily, Italy, Greece, and Africa for iti 
boundaries. This definition is explicitly given 
by almost a contemporary of St. Paul, the g<o- 
grapher Ptolemy, who also says that Crete is 
bounded on the west by Adrias. Later writers 
state that Malta divides the Adriatic sea from 
the Tyrrhenian sea ; and the isthmus of Corinth, 
the Aegean from the Adriatic. Thus the shi|> 
in which Josephus started fur Italy about the 
time of St, Paul's voyage foundered in .Idrias 
(Life, 3), and there he was picked up by a ship 
from Cyrene and taken to Puteoli (we .^cts 
xxviii. 13), It is through ignorance of these 
facts, or through the want of attending to them, 
that writers have drawn an argument from this 
geographical term in favour of the false view 
which places the Apostle's shipwreck in the 
Gulf of Venice. [MELriA.] Cp. Smith's Voy. 
and Shipwreck of St. Paul : Diss, on the Istml 
ilclita. See Diet. Gr. and Rom. Geoij., art. 
" Adriaticum Mare." [J. S, H.] [W.] 

ADBI'EL (^etnni/, Ges.= flock of Gal: 
'A8pi^A ; ffadriet), a son of Barzillai the Meho- 
lathite, to whom Saul gave his daughter Merab, 
although he had previously promised her to 
David (1 Sam. xviii. 19 ; t;r. 17-19 are wantinj 
in B, and the name fn A. is IqX, the usual 
abbreviation for 'Iirpa^A). His five sons were 
amongst the seven descendants of Saul whom 
David surrendered to the Gibeonites (2 Sam. 
xxi. 8 ; where in B. the name appears as itpt'if 
in A. as 'EirSpO in satisfaction for the en- 
deavours of Saul to extirpate them, althoagh 
the Israelites had originally made a league with 
them (Josh. ix. 15). In 2 Sam. ixi. 8 they are 
called the sons of Michal ; but as Michal had no 
children (2 Sam. vi. 23), the A. V., in order 

to surmount the difficulty, translates m7 
" brought up " instead of " bare," in accordance 
with the opinion of the Targum and Jewish 
authorities. The margin also gives " the sister 
of Michal" for "Michal." The R. V. trans- 
lates '^ " bare," and against the name Michal 
attaches a marginal note : " In 1 Sam. xviii. 19 
Merab" the reading here of LXX.-l.uc, the 
Peshito, and certain codd. of Vulg. ; and a read- 
ing also adopted by most modern scholars. 

[a W. B.] P'.] 
ADU'EL CASou^iA, U. h^'''}S_, MV."> = the 
omaiiwnt of God, Fiirst = El it ornament, 1 Ch. 
iv. 36 : 'leMA (abs. from B., A. 'ESi^A) ; ix. '- 
('ASi^A). A Naphtaliie, .ancestor of Tobit 
(Tob. i. 1 ; K. reads Nainj). [B. F. \V.] [F.] 

ADULTiAM (D^ir. The meaning is un- 
certain. Lagarde [ Ucbersicht 6b. die im Aram., 
Arab., u. Jlebr. Sbliche Bildvnj der Xomina, p. ■>♦, 
1889] explains it plausibly as a retreat, from 

the Arab. Jjp ['adula], "to turn aside;" 
'OSoAAd^ ; Odollam, OdiUlam, AduUani), a dty of 

Digitized by 



Jadah in the lowland of the Sbefelah, Josh. xr. 
6i (cp. Geo. xxiviii. 1, "Judah went down," 
ud llicah i. 15, where it is named with Mnre- 
.>liah and Achzib) ; the seat of a Canaanite kinj; 
(Joth. xii. 15), and evidently a place of great 
latiqnity (Gen. luriiL 1, 12, 20). It was 
fortified by Behoboam (2 Ch. xi. 7), was one 
»f the towns re-occupied by the Jews after 
their return from Babylon (Neh. xi. 30), and 
WHS itill a city CO. vi\u) in the times of 
the Maccabees (2 Mace. xil. 38). Josephus (^Art. 
ri 12, § 3) girei the forms itiXis 'AhovKkinit 
and 'QtoXXifi {Ant. Tiii. 10, § 1 ), where it is 
named between Socho and Ipan. In Josh. xv. 
•j it forma with Jarmuth, Socoh, and .^zekah 
1 group apart amongst the fourteen cities 
placed in the Shefelah, and the narratires 
uf ^amnel and Chronicles imply that it was a 
y\»n of strategic importance. iterid took 
refuge in the cave of Adullam when no longer 
able to rest at Gath, and his father and brethren 
fnt dam to him there from Bethlehem (1 Sam. 
iiii. 1); thence too three of the bravest of the 
'iXborim passed through the lines of the Philis- 
tines and brought to l3aTid from Bethlehem the 
water for which he longed (2 Sam. xxiii. 13 ; 
I Ch. XL 15). Judas JUaccabaeos and his army 
lce|jt the Sabbath at Adullam after the defeat of 
irorgias (2 Mace. xii. 38). In the 0&' (p. 128, 
^tf) Jerome describes it as a vicua n»n juinm* ten 
miles E. of Eleutheropolis ; in another passage 
liusebios and Jerome, following apparently the 
reading of the LXX. in Josh, x., confound 
-Unllam with Egion : see that name. It has 
been identified by M. Clermont-Ganueau with 
the ruins of 'Aid el-Mii/eh, " feast of one hun- 
Jnd," or 'Aid el-Ma, "feast of water." This 
|>lac<, where there are two ancient wells and 
^rersl cares, is seven miles north-east of Beit 
■lihrin, and not far from S/tuvceikeh (Socoh) and 
A'A. el- t'ttrmuH (Jarmuth). A very clear state- 
ment of the arguments in favour of the above 
>it« is given in J'FQi/. Slat. 1875, pp. 160-177 ; 
«e also P. /". Mem. iii. pp. 311, 347, 361-7 ; 
Oieikie, The Land and the Bible, p. 108. Van 
'ie Velde and Stanley place it, doubtfully, at 
Oeir DMan, 5 or 6 miles from Eleutheropolia. 
Monastic tradition places the cave at Khireitun, 
St the south end of the Wady Urtda, between 
Bethlehem and the Dead Sea (Kobinson, i. 481). 
William of Tyre speaks of the inhabitants of 
7etii>i flying for refuge to the cave of Odolla in 
1.0.1138. [G.] [W.] 

ADUL'LAMITE CCH? = *• C»™«"y] 
'OiaAAa^<n-q>, E. [in v. 12] 'O0aAAa^(Ti)s, [in 
^ -0] 'OSoAAo^^ntr ; Odollatmtes). A native 
i! Adullam : applied to Hirah, the friend (or 
"•hepherd" as the Vulgate has it, reading 
inph for liTTT) of Judah (Gen. iixviii. 1, 12, 
% SeeA0tnXAM. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

Ptxtln). The parties to this crime were a 
married woman and a man who was not her 
hiuband ; the toleration of polygamy render- 
in; it nearly impossible to make criminal a 
limilar offence committed by a married man 
vith a woman not his wife. In the patriarchal 
(eriod the sanctity of marriage is noticeable 
tnm the history of .\braham, who fears, not 
that his wife will be seduced from him, but that 



he may be killed for her sake, and especially 
from the scruples ascribed to Pharaoh and 
Abimelech (Gen. xii. xx.). The woman's pun- 
ishment was, as commonly amongst intern 
nations, no doubt capital, and probably, as in 
the case of Tamar's unchastity, death by fire 
(xxxviii. 24). The Mosaic penalty was that 
both the guilty parties should be stoned, and it 
applied as well to the betrothed as to the married 
woman, provided she were free (Oeut. ixii. 
22-24). A bondwoman so offending was to be 
scourged, and the man was to make a trespass 
oflering (Lev. xix. 20-22). 

The system of inheritances, on which the 
polity of Moses was based, was threatened with 
confusion by the doubtful oA'spring caused by 
this crime, and this secured popular sympathy 
on the side of morality until a far advanced 
stage of corruption was reached. Yet from 
stoning being made the penalty we may suppose 
that the exclusion of private revenge was in- 
tended. It is probable that, when that terri- 
torial basis of ]H>lity passed away — as it did 
after the Captivity — and when, owing to Gentile 
example, the marriage tie became a looser bond 
of union, public feeling in regard to adultery 
changed, and the penalty of death was seldom 
or never inflicted. Thus in the case of the 
woman brought under our Lord's notice (John 
viii.), it is likely that no one then thought of 
stoning her in fact, but there remained the 
written law ready for the purpose of the caviller. 
It is likely also that a divorce in which the 
adulteress lost her dower and rights of main- 
tenance, &c. (Gemara Cltethvboth, cap. vii. 6), 
was the usual remedy suggested by a wish to 
avoid scandal and the excitement of commisera- 
tion for crime. The word irapaiS<i-)>/uirf(rai 
(Matt. i. 19) probably means to bring the case 
before the local Sanhedrin, which was the usual 
course, but which Joseph did not propose to 
take, preferring repudiation (Buxtorf, de Spona. 
et Dicort. iii. 1-4), because that could be man- 
aged privately (AiiSpa). 

Concerning the famous trial by the water 
of jealousy (Num. v. 11-29), it has been ques- 
tioned whether a husband was in certain cases 
bound to adopt it. The more likely view is, 
that it was meant «» a relief to the vehemence 
of implacable jealousy to which Orientals appear 
prone. The ancient strictness of that tie gave 
room for a more intense feeling than was consis- 
tent with the laxity which had set in, to a great 
extent under Gentile influences, in the period of 
the N. T. In that intensity probably arose this 
strange custom, which no doubt Moses found 
prevailing and deeply seated; and which is said 
to be paralleled by a form of ordeal called the 
"red water" in Western Africa (Kitto, Cyclop. 
s. v.). The forms of Hebrew justice all tended 
to limit the application of this test. 1. By 
prescribing certain facts presumptive of guilt, 
to be established on oath by two witnesses, or a 
preponderating but not conclusive testimony to 
the fact of the woman's adultery. 2. By tech- 
nical rules of evidence which made proof of 
those presumptive facts difficult {Sotah, vi. 2-5). 
3. By exempting certain large classes of women 
(all indeed except a pure Israelitess married to 
a pure Israelite, and some even of them) from 
the liability. 4. By providing that the trial 
could only be before the great Sanhedrin (Sotah, 

Digitized by 





i. 4). 5. By investing it nich a ceremonial at 
once humiliating and intimidating, yet wliich 
still harmonised with the spirit of the whole 
ordeal as recorded in Nnm. r. But it was 
above all discouraged by the conventional and 
even mercenary light in which the nuptial con- 
tract was latterly regarded. 

When adultery ceased to be capital, as no 
doubt it did, and divorce became a matter of 
mere convenience, it would be absurd to suppose 
that this trial was continued. And when adul- 
tery became common, as the Jews themselven 
confess, it would have been impious to eipect 
the miracle which the trial implied. If ever 
the Sanhedrin were driven by force of circum- 
stances to adopt this trial, no doubt every effort 
was used, nay was prescribed (^Sotah, i. 5, 6), to 
overawe the culprit and induce confession. Kven 
if she submitted to the trial and was really 
guilty, some Rabbis held that the cifeot on her 
might be suspended for years through the merit 
of some good deed {Sotah, iii. 4-6). Besides, 
however, the intimidation of the woman, the 
hasband was likely to feel the public exposure 
of his suspicions odious and repulsive. Divorce 
was a ready and quiet remedy ; and the only 
<|nestion was, whether the divorce should carry 
the dowry, and the property which she had 
brought; which was decided by the slight or 
grave character of the suspicions against her 
(Sotah, vi. 1 ; Gemara Chethuboth, vii. ; Ugol. 
Uxor Heb. c. vii.). If the husband were inca- 
pable through derangement, imprisonment, &c., 
of acting on his own behalf in the mutter, the 
Sanhedrin proceeded in his name as concerned 
the dowry, but not as concerned the trial by the 
water of jealousy (^Sotah, iv. 6). 

As regards the N. T. teaching on the subject 
of adultery, the chief passages are those which 
contemplate it in reference to divorce or separa- 
tion, viz. Matt. V. 31, 32 ; lix. (> foil. ; Mark x. 
11, 12; Luke xvi. 18; Rom. vii. 2, 3; 1 Cor. 
vii. 10, 11, 39, 40. These open some grave 
questions, on which great divines have ditfered 
(see Dean Alford's note and Sjieaker's Cumment, 
on the first of them), and even Augustine saw 
reason in his Retractationea to doubt whether 
he had satisfactorily solved them. The 
one is, what is intended by Kiyos nofmlea in 
Matt. V. 32, corresponding apparently to iw\ 
Topy*l^ in lix. 9? Most authorities seem to 
take it of unchastity after marriage on tlie 
part of the wife, i.e. adultery. Hereupon 
various difficult questions open to which the 
context gives no solution. The first (i.) is. 
Must we in Matt. v. 32 carry on the exception, 
"saving for the cause of fornication" (■>. of 
adultery), to the latter clause, and make the 
sense, "whoever shall marry a woman divorced 
for any other cause than adultery, committeth 
adultery." The next is (ii.), 'What would 
be the case of him who marriei a woman 
divorced for adultery? If this be judged an 
adulterous union, the reading the condition 
aforesaid into the clause is nugatory ; if a law- 
ful union, a further question arises (iii.). Does 
this then sanction the union of the paramours? 
If yes, this seems to open a wide door to collu- 
sive, as well as other, infidelity. If no, we 
arrive at a privilegium excluding one person 
only, and leaving the woman open to the same 
temptation still which led her :utray before. 

Then comes (iv.). Hay the injured husband, rid 
of the adulteress wife, m.irry anew? If Ik 
may, then the adultery of the wife has the 
same eft'ect on their union as her natural death : 
and a bar is placed in the way of forgiveness 
and reconciliation on repentance. These con- 
clusions seem opiiosed to the words of St. Paul 
in Rom. vii. 2, 3, and 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11, 39, 40. 
An interpretation which gives rise to surh 
questions may suggest dunbts of its own sound- 
ness, besidex another question as grave as any ol' 
the former, how to reconcile it with the general 
principle that God has made man and wife " one 
tlesh," and that " whom He has joined together" 
man, i.e. human law, is not to " put asunder." 
Besides, if adultery had been, in such a contest 
as Matt. v. 32, xix. 9, intended, we cannot 
doubt that ^oix'to, the special word, and not 
Topytia, the general one, would have been used. 
Assume, on the contrary, that the Aoyos rtfniat 
and iwl ropmif refer to unchastity before mar- 
riage, and that marriage once made is, save for 
that cause, indissoluble, and we harmonize the 
statements of all the passages above referred to. 
Such unchastity implies, besides incontinence, s 
fraud to which Oriental races are specially sen- 
sitive, and which may be held to vitiate that 
consent on the part of the man which is of the 
.essence of the marriage contract. Thus the true 
view would be, such a marriage, beiii; 
defective in this vital point, never existed from 
the first, bat was an union founded on fraud, 
which the innocent party is entitled to dUclnini. 
This is illustrated by the suspicious of Joseph 
in Matt. i. 19. The weight of authority seenit 
against retaining /taixe^o, as heading St. Paul's 
catalogue of the " works of the flesh " in Gal. 
V. 19. [H. H.] 

ADUM'MIM, "THE aoiNO op to" or 
"OF" (D»Q-IN n5?rD; B. rfiafiatrit "AJofi- 
tuir, A. vpoaaydfiaats 'ASoit/jit; aKensio or 
aicemus .^(fommim) = the " pass of the red;" 
one of the landmarks of the boundary of 
Benjamin, a rising ground or pass " over against 
Gilgal," and " on the south side of the 
'torrent ' " (Josh. xv. 7 ; xviii. 17), which is the 
position still occupied by the road leading up from 
Jericho and the Jordan valley to Jerusalem 
(Rob. i. p. 558'), on the south face of the gorse 
of the IVarfy Kelt. Jerome (0&' p. 127, 9, s.'n. 
Atlommin') ascribes the name to the blood 
shed there by the robbers who infested the 
pass in his day, as they still (Stanley, pp. 314. 
424 ; Martineau, p. 481 ; Stewart) continue tu 
infest it, as they did in the Middle Ages when 
the order of Knights Templars arose out of an 
association for the guarding of this road, and as 
they did in the days of our Lord, of whose 
parable of the Good Samaritan this is the scene. 
But the name is possibly of a date and signiti- 
cance far more remote, and is (lerhaps derire<l 
from some tribe of " red men " of the earliest 
inhabitants of the country (Stanley, p. 424, note). 
It is most probably TaPat ed-Dumm, " the a.<reDt 
of blood," a mediaeval fortress, surrounded by a 
rock-hewn ditch, which stands above K/iau 

» Robinson's words, "On the south side .... above." 
are the more remarkable, because the Identity of the 
place with the Msaleh-Adnmmimdoes not seem to bave 
occurred to Urn. 

Digitized by 



H^itiriruA, and commaads the road from Jericho 
to Jerusalem. There is a steady ascent from 
Jericho to this point, but the road ouwards to 
Jerusalem fiasses over undulating ground ; 
beoce the "going up to Adummim" would be 
that part of the road which lies between the 
llkor suJ TaFat ed-Dimun, a name applied more 
particalarly to the hill on which the fortress 
was built. The limestone and marl are here 
«f a ruddy coloar, like burnt brick : hence the 
name. The fortress is probably the Castetltun 
Militum mentioned in the Onomattiam as being 
on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, and the 
Tonr SoHge built by the Templars to protect 
pilgrims going down to Jericho and the Jordan 
(P. F. Mati. iu. 172, 207-9). [G.J [W.] 

ADVENT. [CoMiso.] 

ADVOCATE. Tbfc rendering (A. V. and 
fi. V.) in 1 John ii. 4 of Tt^>iK\rrTos. In other 
f^usages of the writings of St. John (e.g. Gospel, 
iir. 16, 2fi, IT. 26. xri. 7) wapdicKTiTOS is trans- 
lated '• Comforter " (R. V. inserting iu the marg. 
.idmoatc or Helper). This double rendering 
of one and the same Greek word dates from 
Wiclif, and is due to the influence of the Vulgate, 
which has adcooatut in the Epistle and paracleius 
in the Gospel. Dr. Westcott has pointed out 
that the word " can properly mean only ' one 
called to the side of another,' and that w^ith the 
secondary notion of counselling, supporting, or 
aidug him." In 1 John ii. 1 this sense of the 
word is alone applicable. The argument is that 
"Jesus Christ the righteous" as Advocate pleads 
tbe cause of the Christian who has sought His 
btip against the accu!>er. See Westcott's notes 
in Sptaker'i Commentary on Gospel according to 
Si. John (//. c.) and on 1 John ii. 1. [K.] 

AEDI'AS (B. ■AqSffat [A. -«-]; ffrfiis), 
1 Eal. ii. 27. Perh. a corruption of EuAn. [G.j 

AE'GYPT. [Egvpt.] 

AE'NEAS (Ai'War ; Aetuas), a Greek or 
Hellenistic Jew of Lydda, healed of his palsy 
by St. Peter (AcU i\. 33, 34> [G.] 

AEIfOX (tui>if\ Aermon), a place "near 
to Salim." John baptized "in Aenon (the 
<)>riDg«) near to Salim, because there were many 
waters (B^<rra»o^^i) there" (John lii. 23). This 
>< isdicated by the name, which is merely a 
Greek renion of the Chaldee \\yi3 =" springs." 
It wu eridently west of the Jordan (cp. John 
iu. ii with 26, and with i. 28), nnd apparently 
«ne day's journey from Nazareth and two from 
fethany (Stanley, S.^P.p. 311). Three different 
!<<« hare been proposed for Aenon: 1. Eusebius 
aid Jerome {OS.* pp. 134, 25; 246, 91) place 
't 8 miles south of Scythopolis, " juxta Salim et 
Jutilanem," and the latter states that the ruins 
■^ Melchizedek's palace exiiited, in his day, at 
'Uem. The» statements are so positive that 
'key cannot lightly be set a.<ide. In the Jordan 
'»lleT,abont 7 J miles from lieisdn (Scythopolis), 
'k«re is a remarkable group of seven springs, 
^1 lying within a radius of a quarter of a mile, 
wkich answers well to the description " many 
»u«rs." Close to the springs are the consider- 
^ rains of Umm el-'Amddn, and aboat three- 
iwiters of a mile to the north is Tell Ridhghah, 
*a artificial mnond, on the top of which is the 
•^b of Sheikh Salim. This is almost certainly 

AGABU3 57 

the spot indicated by Eusebius and Jerome, and 
there is nothing remarkable in the disappearance 
of the ruins when it is considered that such 
important towns as Jericho and Antipatris have 
entirely disappeared. 2. Major Conder {Tent 
Work in Pal. i. 91-3) identifies Aenon with th.> 
springs in Wudy Far'a/i, which lie between 
Salim and 'Ainua : but these two places are 
7 miles apart, and the springs themselves are 
situated in a deep valley 4 miles from Salim, 
and separated from that village by the hills of 
Xeby Belan, 2,500 feet high. Such a place 
could not possibly be described as being " near 
to Salim," and the springs are in fact quite as 
near to Nablua (Shechem), with which they arc 
connected by the Roman road to Scythopolis. 
There are no important springs at iS<!/im or 
'Ainun. 3. Dr. Barclay (City of the Great King, 
pp. 558-570) and Mr. Hepworth Dixon place 
Aenon at the springs in Wady Far'ah, one of the 
heads of W&ly Kelt, some miles from Jerusalem, 
but the only ground for this identification is 
the presence of copious springs and pools. See- 
the curious speculations of Lightfoot (Cent. 
Chorog. 1-4). [G.] [W.] 

AERA. [Chronology.] 

AETHIO'PIA. [Ethiopia.] 


AFFINITY. [Marriage.] 

AG' ABA (KKKofii, A. Vafii; Aggab), 1 Es<l. 
v. 30. [Haoab.] [G.] 

AG'ABUS CA7ei/Jot or "hfa^os; Agabus. 
3)11, " a locust ; " cp. Hagab, Ezra ii. 46. But 
the Syrinc favours the derivation from 3]^> 
" to love "). A Christian prophet mentioned in 
Acts li. 28 (notice the remarkable addition to 
the text made by D.) and xxi. 10, 11. Iu 
the first passage he is described as having 
come from Jerusalem to Antioch; in the 
second, from Judaea to Caesarea. His predic- 
tion of a great famine over all the world was 
delivered at Antioch, probably A.D. 44, during 
the twelve months which St. Paul then spent 
there. No universal famine is recorded in the 
reign of Claudius, but frequently recurring 
local famines [Claudius] justify the terms of 
the prophecy. The accuracy of his prediction 
respecting St. Paul (Acts xxi. 10) is also open to 
criticism if pedantically examined. The " whole 
world " cannot mean Judaea only, but the speedy 
fulfilment of the prediction there was what con- 
cerned the Christians most. This famine is that 
mentioned by Josephns (Ant. xx. 2 § 6, and 5 § 2), 
in which Helena of Adiabene gave generous 
assistance. It is dated by Josephns in the time 
of the Roman procurators Cuspius Fadus and 
Tiberius Alexander, i.e. after the death of Herod 
Agrippa I. An incidental notice of the same 
famine (Ant. iii. 15, § 3) shows that it prevailed 
in severity at the time of the Passover. That 
there was no famine before Agrippa's death is 
proved by the dependence of Tyre and Sidon at 
that time for food supplies on the king's country' 
(Acts xii. 20). Wieseler on these grounds fixes 
the famine in a.d. 45, with the conjecture that 
it may have gone on for some time afterwards 
(see Wieseler, CAron. Ap.Zeit, pp. 156 ff.). The 
other mention of Agabus (Acts xxi. 10, 11) 
belongs to the last journey of St. Paul to Jem- 

Digitized by 




salem (probablj A.D. 58), He prophesies St. 
Paul's arrest and delivenwce into the hands of 
the Geutiles, therein repeating more circum- 
stantially nn inspired warning already given by 
some of the brethren at Tyre (ixi. 4). The 
points to notice in Agabus are that in his case 
the gift of Christian prophecy was not limited 
to its usual function, the exposition of divine 
truth [Prophet, Pbophets op the N. T.], but 
extended to foreknowledge of events ; and, 
secondly, tliat being a Jewish prophet he not 
unnaturally used the symlwlic method of de- 
livery habitual to Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others 
(cp. Jer. liii. 1-13> [E. R. B.] 

A'GAO 03K, meaning quite uncertain , ac- 
cording to Ges., from an Arabic root " to burn ; " 
'Ayiy [in Sam. /. c] and Ttfry [in Num.] ; Agat)), 
possibly the title of the kings of Amalek, like 
Pharaoh of Egypt. The view of MIchaelis (see 
(ies. Thea, s. n. JJS() that the name Ogyges was 
identical with this name has been accepted by 
KUrst, but is rejected by the best modem authori- 
ties. One king of this name is mentioned in 
.N'um. xxiv. 7, and another in 1 Sam. xv. 8, 9, 20, 
32. The latter was the king of the Amalekites, 
whom Saul spared together with the best of the 
spoil, although it was the well-known will of 
Jehovah that the Amalekites should be extir- 
pated (Ex. xvii. 14; Dcut. XXV. 17). For this 
act of disobedience Samuel was commissioned to 
declare to Saul bis rejection, and he himself 
sent for Agag and cut him in pieces, [Samuel.] 

Haman is called the Aoaoite in Esther (Bob- 
yeuos, iii. 1, 10, viii. 3, 5). The Jews consider 
Haman a descendant of Agag, the Amalekitc, and 
hence account for the hatred with which he pur- 
sued their race (Jos. Ant. xi, 6, § 5,' See Specjter'a 
Comm. on the Apocrypha, notes on " Additions to 
Esther " xii. 6, xiii. 12> [li. W, B,] [F.] 


AG' APE. [Lord's Supper.] 

A'GAR. [Haoar.] 

AGABE'NES (uloX 'Kyof ; filU Agar), Bar. 
iii. 23. [Haoab.] 

AGATE (\2.V, thebi; nb")?, cadcid; 4x<J- 
Ti)t; achates) is mentioned four times in the 
text of the A. V. : viz. in Ex. xxviii. 19, xxxix. 
12 (similarly rendered in R. V.); Is. liv. 12; 
Kzek. xxvii. 16. In the two former passages, 
where it is represented by the Hebrew word 
shi'bo, it is spoken of as forming the second 
stone in the third row of the high-priest's 
brcnst-plate ; in each of the two latter places the 
original word is caJcdd, by which no doubt is in- 
tended a different stone (" rubies," R. V.). [RcBy.] 
In Ezek. xxvii. 16, where the text has agate, the 
margin has chrysoprase, whereas in the very 
next chapter, Ezek. xxviii. 13, ckrysoprase occurs 
in the margin instead of emerald, which is in the 
text, as the translation of an entirely different 
Hebrew word, nophec (^0) : this will show how 
much our translators were perplexed as to the 
meanings of the minerals and precious stones 
mentioned in the sacred volume;* and this 
uncertainty which belongs to the mineralogy of 

• siee " Translators' Prettrc to the Reader," wbicb, if 
found In Eyre and Spottiswoode's " Variorum " Bible, 
is uot prluttd in all editions of the EngUsb' Bible— a 
fact much to be regretted. 


the Bible, and indeed in numerous instances tu 
its botany and zoology, is by no means a matter 
of surprise when we consider how often there a 
no collateral evidence of any kind that might 
possibly help us, and that the derivations of the 
Hebrew words have generally and necess»rilr a 
very extensive signilication ; identification tben'- 
fore in many cases becomes a dillicult and un- 
certain matter. 

Various definitions of the Hebrew word AAi 
have been given by the learned, but notkiog 
definite can be deduced from any one of tbrm. 
Gesenius places the word under the root 
ahab&h^ " to take prisoner," but allows that 
nothing at all can be learned from such an 
etymology.' Fried, Delitzsch (Profejj, o'ws 
nexien Ilebr.-Aranu Wdrterbuch z. A, I', p. 8j) 
identifies it with the Assyrian precious sUmt 
called hihu. The su6tt appears to have been (Ai 
precious stone (,par excellence), and the omani(Dt 
of Istar, and evidently of singular brilliancy ; 
probably, therefore, the diamond. 

Again, we find curiously enough an interpre- 
tation which derives it from another .\rabic 
root, which has precisely the opposite meaning, 
viz. "to be dull and obscure.'" .\DOther 
derivation traces the word to the proper Dimr 
Sheba, whence precious stones were exported ("T 
the Tyrian merchants. Of these derivations it 
is difficult to see any me.ining at all in the first,' 
while a contrary one to what we should eiftci 
is given to the third, for a dull-looking stone 
is surely out of place amongst the glitterin; 
gems which adorned the sacerdotal breastplate. 
"The derivation adopted by Fried. Delitzsch is 
perhaps the most plausible, even if his identib- 
cation of it with the diamond be held in reserve. 
That ahebo, however, does stand for some variety 
of agate seems generally agreed upon by com- 
mentators, for, as Rosenmiiller has observeJ 
(Schol. in Exod. xxviii. 19), there is a wonderful 
agreement amongst interpreters,' who all under- 
stand an agate by the term. 

Our English agate, or achat, derives its n-inie 
from the Achates, the modern Dirillo, in the Val 
di Noto, in Sicily, on the banks of whiclu ac- 
cording to Theophrastus and Pliny, it was first 
found ;< but as agatea are met with in almwt 
every country, this stone was doubtless from the 
earliest times known to the Orientals. It is a 
silicious stone of the quartz family, and is met 
with generally in rounded nodules, or in veins 
in trap-rocks ; specimens are often found on the 
sea-shore, and in the beds of streams, the rocb 
in which they had been imbedded having been 

■> njlC'i eaptioum fecit, Gcsen. Theaaur, s. v. 

« Camp. Gollus, Arab. Lex. ^ ■■-■- ezartit. 

1^\ (viU. 

' 13B> ; cf. Freytag, Arab. Lci. 

conj. of jju*»), obfcura, ambigua/uit rts alicui. 

• " Sed liocc nibll factunt ad detcgendam ejus natunm." 
— Braun. tU Vfst. Sacerd. Jlcbrator. II. c. iv. $ i. 
' \2^f " «*«! achatem, sails probabile est, qunm 

mtrus In boo laplde Interpretum sit consensus." Vlti- 
Braun. V. S. 11. c. xv. i HI. 

a KoAbf 6« \idoi Kol 6 '.\;);an)t o avb nv '.Vxatv'.' 
mrafLOv tov iv 2cK<A(f kcu irtwAftrai Tt^un.— Thcopu. 
». II. 31, ed. Schneider, and Plln. xxxvU. Mj LilMn- 
graphie Sicilitnnf, Naples, 17T7, p. 16. 

Digitized by 



jMomposed by the elements, when the agates | 
lure dioppeJ out. Some of tlie principal 
nirieties are called chalcedony, from Chalcedon 
ia Asia Minor, where it is found; camelian, 
dirtjsoprtm, an apple-green variety coloured by 
uiide cf nickel ; Mocha-stoTKS, or mosa agate, 
which owe their dendritic or tree-Iilie markings 
to the imperfect crystallization o^ the colouring 
salts of manganese or iron, onyx-itones, blood- 
stones, &C. iipecimena of the art of engraving 
on cialcedony are found in the tombs of Egypt, 
Aayria, Etmria, &c* [W. H.] [H. W. T.] 

AGE, OLD. In early stages of civilization, 
when eiperience is the only aourcc of practical 
knowledge, old age has its special value, and 
consequently its special honours. The Spartans, 
the Athenians, and the Romans were particular 
in showing respect to the aged, and the Egyp- 
tians had a regulation which has its exact 
parallel in the Bible (Herod, ii. 80 ; Lev. xix. 32). 
Cnder a patriarchal form of government such a 
feeling was still more deeply implanted. A 
farther motive was superadded in the case of 
the Jew, who was taught to consider old age as 
a reward for piety, and a signal token of God's 
fsvoar (Gen. iv. 1 o). For these reasons the 
agtd occupied a prominent place in the social 
.ind political system of the Jews. In private 
life they were looked up to as the depositaries 
cf knowledge (Job xv. 10): by the law of 
Moses the young were ordered to rise up in 
their presence (Lev. lix. 32; cp. Is. iii. 5): 
they allowed them to give their opinion first 
(Job iiiii. 4) : they were taught to regard 
grey hairs as a " crown of glory " and as the 
"keautyof old men"(Prov. xvi. 31, xx. 29). 
The wke old man was the representative on 
«arth of " the ancient of days " (Dan. vii. 9, 
'-•); his company and counse\ were to be 
soaght and his example followed (Prov. xvi. 31, 
uiii. 20; Dent, xxxii. 7; 1 K. xii. 13-19; 
Ectlns. ii. 10, iii. 15, vi. 33). The attainment 
of old age was regarded as a special blessing 
(Job T. 26), not only on account of the pro- 
longed enjoyment of life to the individual, but 
ilso because it indicated peaceful and prosperous 
times (Zech. viii. 4 ; 1 Mac xiv. 9 ; la. Ixv. 20). 
la ptthlic aSsiirs age carried weight with it, 
"ipecially in the infancy of the state : it formed 
nnder Moses the main qualification of those 
wlio acted as the representatives of the people in 
^I matters of dUIiculty and deliberation. The 
•M men or Elders thus became a class, and the 
title gradually ceased to convey the notion of 
>p, and was used in an 'official sense, like 
Pttres, Senatores, and other similar terms. 
[Eu>Kl!.s.] Still it would be but natural that 
sach an office was generally held by men of 
*iTMK»l age (1 K. xii. 8). [W. L B.] 

In the American edition of this work, some 
stiits it laid upon the distinction between irpccr- 
8vn)s and wptirfiirrtpos. The former is always 
>pplied to age (cp., in the case of Zerharias, Luke 
i- 18X the latter generally to rank or office, if 
«lso office Qsaally dependent upon age (Cremer, 
BH.-Theol. WSrterb. s. v.). But the distinction 
OB hardly be pressed into the question of deter- 

' Compare «ith this Ex. xxxvlU. 23: "And with 
Us> xn Aboliab, son of Ahisamacb, of the tribe of Dan, | 
n engraver and a cunning workman ; " and cb. xxxlx. 8, 
"Aid be made U>e breastplate of cunning work." 



mining the age of St. Paul (Philemon, v. 
i>=-Tpf<r$vrris) so long as able critics (c.j. Bp. 
Lightfoot) translate ''ambassador" instead of 
" the aged " (A. V. and R. V. Uxt). In the 

0. T. the Patriarch Jacob's reBections upon life 
as he looked back upon it in his old age (Gen. 
xlvli. 9), and in the N. T. the Saviour's descrip- 
tion of what should mark the old age of St. Peter 
(John xxi. 18), have always been recognised as 
passages truthful and pathetic. The honour 
paid by Pharaoh to Jacob is illustrated by the 
Agadistic saying, " He who receives a greyhaired 
man and seeks out the aged, has at the same time 
sought out and received God " (Hambiirger, SE.- 
s. V. " Alter," who gives many Talmudical expan- 
sions of the Biblical texts referred to above); 
while the refusal of this honour intimated in 
the words of Christ is deepened ' iu pathos by 
that saying which affirms that one of the marks 
of the lost days would be found in the despising 
the authority of the elders, in the mockery of 
the greyhaired by children, and in the standing 
up of the aged before the young (see Riehm, 
B WB., s. n. " Alter "). [F.] 

A'GEE (MJK, Ges. from the Arabic, /u^t'd'cr. 
Fiirst compares the name *iyt\oi [2 Tim. i. 15] : 
B. 'A<ri ; A. 'AtocE : Ape). A Hararite, father of 
Shammah, one of David's three mightiest heroes 
(2 Sam. xxiii. 11). In the Peshito he is called 
"Ago of the king's mountain," the epithet being 
given as explaining **nn, mountaineer. Cp. 
Targ. " of the mountain." [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AGGAE'XJS ('A77«wt ; Aggaeua), 1 Esd. vi. 

1, vii. 3 ; 2 Esd. i. 40. [Haooai.] [F.] 

AGRICULTURE. This, though prominent 
in the scriptural narrative concerning Adam, 
Cain, and Noah, was little cared for by the 
Patriarchs; more so, however, by Isaac and 
Jacob than by Abraham (Gen. xxvi. 12 ; xxxvii. 
7), in whose time, probably, if we except the 
lower Jordan valley (xiii. 10), there was little 
regular culture in Canaan. Thus Gerar and 
Shechem seem to have been cities where pastoral 
wealth predominated. The herdmen strove with 
Isaac about his wells; about his crop there was no 
contention (xxvi. 14-22 ; cf. xxi. 25). In Joshua's 
time, as shown by the story of the " Kshcol " 
(Num. xiii. 23-4), Canaan was found in a much 
more advanced agricultural state than Jacob had 
led it (Deut. viii. 8), resulting probably from 
the severe experience of famines, and the exam- 
ple of Egypt, to whicli its people were thus led. 
The pastoral life was the means of keeping the 
sacred race, whilst yet a family, distinct from 
mixture and locally unattached, especially whilst 
in Egypt. When, grown into a nation, they 
conquered their future seats, agriculture sup- 
plied a similar check on the foreign intercourse 
and speedy demoralization, especially as regards 
idolatry, which commerce would have caused. 
Thus agriculture became the basis of the Mosaic 
commonwealth (Michaelis, xxxvii.-xli.). It 
tended to check also the frcebooting and nomad 
life, and made a numerous oS'spring profitable, 
as it was already honourable by natural senti- 
ment and by law. Thus, too, it indirectly dis- 
couraged slavery, or, where it existed, made the 
slave somewhat like a son, though it made the 
son also somewhat of a slave. Taken in con- 
nexion with the inalienable character of inherit- 
ances, it gave each man and each family a 

Digitized by 





stake in the soil and nurtured a hardy patriutisni. 
"The land ii Mine " (Lev. xxv. 23) wa« a dictum 
which made agriculture likewise the basis of 
the theocratic relation; so that it becomes a 
charge against the apostate people, " Ye deKled 
My land " (Jer. ii. 7). Thus every family felt 
its own life with intense keenness, and had its 
divine tenure which it was to guard from aliena- 
tion. The prohibition of culture in the sabba- 
tical year formed, under this aspect, a kind of 
rent reserved by the Divine owner ; or rather 
perhaps the soil reverted then to Him and to 
the poor as His representatives. Landmarks 
were de^;ned sacred (Deut. xix. 14), and the 
inalienability of the heritage was ensured by its 
reversion to the owner in the year of jubilee ; 
«o that onlv so many years of occupancy could 
be sold (Lev. xxv. 8-16, 23-35). The prophet 
Isaiah (v. 8) denounces the contempt of such 
restrictions by wealthy grandees who sought to 
" add field to field," erasing families and depopu- 
lating districts. 

A change in the climate of Palestine, caused 
by increase of population and the clearance of 
trees, must have taken place before the period 
of the N. T. A further change caused by the 
decrease of skilled agricultural labour, e.g. in 
irrigation and terrace-making, has since ensued. 
Not only this, but the great variety of elevation 
and local character in so small a compass of 
country necessitates a partial and guarded ap- 
plicntioo of general remarks (Robinson, i. 507, 
553, 554, iii. 595 ; Stanley, S. 4 P. 119, 124-6). 
Yet wherever industry is secure, the soil still 
asserts its old fertility. The Haardn (Peraea) 
is as fertile as Damascus, and its bread enjoys 
the highest reputation. The black and fat, but 
iight, soil about Gaza is said to hold so much 
moisture as to be very fertile with little rain. 
Here, as in the neighbourhood of Bcyrut, is a 
vast olive-ground, ami the very sand of the shore 
is said to be fertile if watered. Thus the " land 
<if corn and wine, of bread and vineyards," is its 
description (Is. xixvi. 17). The Israelites pro- 
bably found in Canaan a fair proportion of 
woodland, which their necessities, owing to the 
<liscouragement of commerce, must have led 
them to reduce (Josh. xvii. 18). But even in 
«arly times timlwr seems to have been far less 
used for building material than among Western 
nations ; such parts as beams, rafters, doors, &c. 
were, however, indis|iensably of timber (Cant. i. 
17; viii. 9). In Solomon's time the Israelites 
were not skilful hewers, and imported both the 
timber and the workmen (1 K. r. 6, 8). No 
store of wood-fuel seems to have been kept ; 
ovens were heated with such things as dung and 
liay (Ezek. iv. 12, 15; Mai. iv. 1, 3) [Dung]; 
thorns and stubble fully dry are often spoken of 
as fuel, unless, as is possible, the allusion may 
sometimes be to burning them to ashes to use as 
manure (Is. xxxiii. 1 1 ; Joel ii. 5 ; Obad. 18 ; 
Xah. i. lU) ; and in any case of sacrifice on an 
emergency, some, as we should think, unusual 
source of supply is constantly mentioned for the 
wood (1 Sam. vi. 14 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 22 ; 1 K. xix. 
21 ; comp. Gen. xxii. .3, 6, 7). All this indicates 
a non-abundance of timber. Against this may 
lie set the poetical pictures derived from nature 
in which magnificent timber-trees supply the 
imagery, as to Ezekiel (xxxi. 14), for nations 
nourishing in their pride. Such are called 

'• trees by the waters." Such a ceJar ii the 
Assyrian with " rivers rnnning round about his 
plants," meaning perhaps mountain torrents of 
the I^banon (ib. 4) ; an elevated sylvan region 
which, with Carmel, &c., furnished prophnii; 
ty|>es alike of national glory and of its decline 
(Is. XXXV. 2 ; xxxiii. 9). Again, " the trees ot 
the wood mifred by the wind " is the imsgt 
used to describe unanimous iwpular feeling (Is. 
vii. 2). The felling of timber, especially of thf 
choicer kinds, finds a leading place amidst hos- 
tile ravages (Is. vii. 24, xiv. 8, ixxvii. 24; 
Jer. xxii. 7) ; while the culture of such trees, 
assisted by special irrigation, is represented as a 
pursuit of the royal voluptuary in Eccles. ii. li. 
So " the forest and every tree " is called on lor 
acclamations of joy (Is. iliv. 23 ; Iv. \1). 
Forests on fire, perlia|)S by lightning or spon- 
taneous combustion in excessive drought, are 
also spoken of (Is. ix. 18; Jer. xxi. 14; fizA. 
xix. 14, xx. 47 ; Joel i. 18-20). More especially 
the olive-groves were liable to such accidentt 
(Jer. xi. 16 ; cf. the well-known pa.ssage, Virg. 
Georg. ii. 303 foil.). It seems likely also that 
the prevalence of idolatry may have given en- 
couragement to the planting and cherishing ol 
timber, especially the nobler sorts, both as s 
material for the idol, when felled, and a canocf. 
for the altar while standing (Is. xliv. 14, pv 
xl. 20; Jer. x. 3). Vet on the whole the allu- 
sions suggest that trees were scarce and deemeil 
a valuable property, and even catalogued as 
such : see Is. x. 19, and compare the mention of 
the " trees " in Abraham's purchase (Gen. xiiii. 
17). The spontaneous outburst of the choicest 
regetatioQ in the desert, and the displacement of 
its rude and stunted growths by that means, is 
a vivid image of spiritual revival (Is. xli. 19: 
Iv. 13). The contrary process, viz. the laml 
once tilled left to "briers and thorns" (Is. vii. 
2.3-25), or reverting to pasturage of cattle (21, 
22), marks the result of hostile ravages. To 
such a thorny state the soil speedily relapscil 
when neglected (Jer. iv. 3 ; Hos. x. 4) or left 
fallow. Thus " thorns " imply by their presencr 
slovenly husbandry, or total failure of ho|ieful 
produce (Jer. xii. 13). The word which mostly 
occurs in such contrasts is V^. The thorn 
used for fences is D*|V or il^^DD (Job r. 5 ; 
Prov. XV. 19; Mic. vii. 4); and' this, or the 
occasional arming of a rude harrow, seenis 
(besides fuel, Eccles. vii. 6) the only use for 
them [Thorns and Thiotles]. The three 
grades of Is. xxxii. 15, the wilderness, the fruit- 
ful field, and the forest, rising from sparse t" 
thick vegetation, are noteworthy ; also the 
gradual return to culture after desolation by 
the enemy in xxivii. 30. The image of exube- 
rant fertility from barrenness (Is. ixxv. 1), "the 
desert, . .shall blossom as the rose," is certainly 
a mistranslation, though what plant the woril 
n>^3n (like its Assyrian equivalent hcii(a)sil- 
latn [cp. Fried. Delitzsch, JPrdegg. einet iKW» 
ffebr.-Amm. WSrierbitchs z. A. T., p. 81, &c.]) 
actually represents seems at present uncertain. 
Cp. R. V. marg. in Is. xxxv. 1 ; Cant. iL 1, 
aiUitmn crocus. 

Productiveness seems nearly measured by 
abundance of moisture, the exuberance of which 
as streams in the desert is a lively image of 
prophecy, whereas that of destrnctire flo<ds is 

Digitized by 



c(nn|nn)tir«lT rare. The prccariousness «f tlio 
sorfwe brooks from mountain snow is noticed 
(Job ri. 15-18). Marshes and swamps were 
howerer linown in the land of Uz, drier probably 
than Palestine (Job riii. 11: cf. Is. xixr. 7; 
E«k. ilrii. 1 1). " Sowing by the brooks " occurs 
both as characteristic of tgypt (Is. xix. 7) and 
(CtDenllj, and is perhaps alluded to in the figura- 
tjn exhortation, "Cast thy bread upon the 
waters "(Eccles. xi. 1). Its plenty of water from 
natnnl sources made Canaan a contrast to rain- 
less Egypt (Deut. viii. 7 ; xi. 10-1'J). Xor was 
the peculiar Egyptian method alludinl to in 
Ueut. xi. 10 nnknown. though less preraluut in 
I'alutine. That peculiarity seems to have con- 
.'^sted in making in the fields square shallow beds, 
like our salt-pans, surrounded by a raised border 
of earth to keep in the water, which was then 
tomed from one square to another by pushing 
aside the mad to open one and close the next 
with the foot. A very similar method is appa- 
rently described by Robinson as used, especially 
for garden regetables, in Palestine. Trees,_ 
especially fruit trees, planted by the water-side, 
bnt also willows (grown perhaps to protect the 
stream itself by their shade, as well as for other 
uses), are a common image. Irrigation (in- 
cluding under the term all appliances for making 
the water available) was as essential as drainage 
ia this land ; and for this the large extent of 
rocky surface, easily excavated for cisterns and 
•Incts, was most useful. The spring-water 
jopply varies greatly in different districts. In 
Mme it abounds. Thus the Beisan (Bashan) 
[ilain has over thirty good springs, and the 
rtjion of Kablou* (Samaria) about seventy. The 
■N'egeb extends round Beerahebo, and both in its 
•-itent and in the meaning of the term ("dry 
land") is nearly equivalent to the district of 
l>aroma. Its " upper and nether springs " 
(Jodg. i. lo) arise from the hnrd limestone for- 
mation in the N.W. comer of the region ; 
throaghout the rest of the Negeb area the water 
it from cisterns. The number of these in the 
•Irier regions of Palestine shows the dependence 
tiien as now to have been on storing the rainfall, 
while the geological structure forbids the sup- 
position that springs once existing are now dried 
up (Surrey of Western Palestine, S[>ecial Papers, 
p. 198). Even the plain of Jericho is watered, 
Dot by canals from the Jordan, since the river 
lies below the land, but by rills converging from 
the mountains. In these features of the country 
lay its expansive resources to meet the wants 
of a multiplying population. The lightness of 
ngricnltural labour in the plains set free an 
abaiid.ince of hands for the t-nsk of terracing and 
watering; and the result gave the highest 
ttimolus to industry. The ruins of the great 
Uak at Ziza still remain to illustrate the whole 
•ystem of irrigation (cp. Tristram, Land of 
ifoA, p. 185). Dew is also to be set to the 
»oioHat of water-supply [Dew]. It is some- 
times a figure for bright young foliaijc, c.i/. 
"Thy dew is as the dew of herbs " (Is. xxvi. 19). 
The cereal crops of constant mention are 
*heat and barley, and more rarely spelt and 
I'llet. " Rye " appears to be an error of the 
.*. V. [Rye and Fitches]. Of wheat and barley 
■antion is made in the Book of Job, together 
oith the vine, olive, and fig. the use of ii-rigation, 
"» plough and the harrow (xv. 33 ; xxiv, 6 ; 


xxix. 6 ; xxxi. 40 ; xxxix. 10). The " fitches " of 
Is. xxviii. 25, 27, appejirs to be the black poppy ; 
that of Ezek. iv. 9 to be spelt. This poppy, with 
cummin and such {lodded plants as beans and 
lentiles, may be named among the staple pro- 
duce. To these, later writers add a great variety 
of garden plants, e.g. kidney-beans, peas, lettuce, 
endive, leek, garlic, onion, melon, cucumber, 
cabbage, iic. (Mishna, Celaim. 1, 2). The term 
"garden of herbs," lit. of verdure (Deut. xL 
10, &c., and so " dinner of herbs," Prov. xv. 
17), probably means a kitchen garden [Garden]. 
The word for herbs regularly domesticated for 
man's use is 3^{^ (Ps. civ. 14). Wild esculents 
analogous to them are rather niN (2 K. iv. 39 ; 
Is. xxvi. 19). But the former stands for " herbs 
of the mountains " in Prov. xivii. 25. For the 
" bitter herbs " eaten with the Paschal Lamb, see 
Passover, ii. 3 (c). All such growths depended 
on a ready and copious water-supply (Deut. xi. 
10; Is. Iviii. 11). The produce which formed 
Jacob's present was of such kinds ns would keep, 
and had kept during the famine (Gen. xliii. 11). 

The Jewish calendar, as fixed by the three 
great festivals, turned on the seasons of green, 
ripe, and fully-gathered produce. Thus we see 
traces of a natural calendar in Is. xviii. S, 
" Afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect and 
the sour grape is ripening in the flower ; " the 
processes of growth marking the seasons which 
develop them. Hence, if the season waa back- 
ward, or, owing to the imperfections of a non- 
astronomical reckoning, seemed to be so, a month 
was intercalated. This rude system was fondly 
retained long after mental progress and foreign 
intercourse placed a correct calendar within their 
power; to that notice of a Ve-<idar, i.e. second 
or intercalated Adar, on account of the Iambs 
being not yet of paschal size, and the barley not 
forward enough for the Abib (green sheaf), was 
sent to the Jews of Babylon and Egypt (Ugol. 
de Re Jtust. v. 22) early in the season [Year]. 

The year, ordinarily consisting of twelve 
months, was divided into six agricultural |)eriad» 
as follows (7'os(i/)Ata Taanith, ch. 1): — 

I. Sowixc Tiuc. 

ibcginnfng about \ 
Tlsrl, latter hair ^ autumnal I 

I equinox JEarly rain due. 

Morchesvan I 

Ka«leu, former half ' 

II. Ukbipe Time. 
Ka»len, latter half. 


Sliebatb, former half. 

III. CtoU) Season. 
Sbebatb, latter half \ 

^,'!".", lutter rain due. 

[\ e-adar] f 

Klsan, former lialf j 

IV. Harvest Tiiik. 

f Beginning alMut 

N-lsan. latter half l vernal equinox. 

j Barley green. 

I Passover. 
SIvan. former half (Wheat ripe. 

t Pentecost. 

V. SncvEit. 
Slran, latter half. 

Ab, former half. 

Digitized by 




VI. ScLTUT Season. 
All, Utter b»lf. 
Tisri, former half Ingitberlng of fraita. 

Thus the six months from mid Tisri to mid 
Nisan were mainly occupied with the process of 
cultivation, nnd the rest with the gathering of 
the fruits. Rain was commonly expected soon 
after the autumnnl equinox or mid Tisri ; and if 
by the first of Kasleu none had fallen, a fast 
was proclaimed (Mishnn, Taanith, ch. 1). The 
common scriptural expressions of the " early ** 
and the "latter rain" (Deut. xi. 14 ; Jer. v. 24; 
Hos. vi. 3 ; Zech. x. 1 ; James v. 7) arc scarcely 
confirmed by modem experience, the season of 
rains being unbroken (Robinson, i. 41, 429 ; 
iii. 96), nor did the Jews probably regard these 
as separate rainy seasons. From the Mishna 
(ybi sup.) the seasons at the d.ite of its being 
compiled (about 200 A.D.) seem to have not per- 
ceptibly differed from their course at the pre- 
sent time ; when " rain, in an ordinarily good 
year, falls first at the autumiuil equinox, 
during November frequent thunderstorms occur, 
and about Christmas the weather is generally 
stormy. In January the heaviest rains fall, and 
in February sometimes none at all, but the 
weather is never settled until after the vernal 
equinox, and the early April showers are past. 
From May to September no rain falls except 
generally one heavy shower in June or July" 
(Survey of Western Palestine, Special Papers, 
p. 196). ".\s a rule the seasons occur in a 
cvcle, becoming yearly wetter and wetter for a 
certain period, then growing drier and drier till 
a year of drought arrives" (ib. p. 197). The 
average rainfall may now be put at " about 
2.5 in. a year " (ib.). The consternation caused 
by the failure of the former rain is depicted 
in Joel i. ii. ; and that Prophet seems to 
promise that and the latter rain together " in 
the first month," i.e. Nisan (ii. 23). Thus the 
failure of rain "when there were yet three 
months to the harvest " (Amos iv. 7) would be 
equivalent to destroying the hopes of the crop. 
The same Prophet, echoing Lev. xxvi. 5, says 
(ix. 13), "The plowman shall overtake the 
reaper, and the treader of grajies him that soweth 
seed." The lost clause suggests that extremes 
shall meet, but the LXX. has the first clause 
otherwise,* yet not so as to reconcile it with the 
second. Exuberant produce leaving a balance 
over on the year is probably intended ; cp. " Ye 
shall eat old store and bring forth the old 
because of the new" (Lev. xxvi. 10). The 
ancient Hebrews had little notion of green or 
root-crops grown for fodder, nor was the long 
summer drought suitable for them. Barley 
supplied food both to man and beast, although 
less esteemed for the former [Barlky] ; and the 
plant, called in Ezek. iv. 9 " millet," }rn, Holcua 
Jochna, Linn. (Gesenius), but by some identified 
with the Sorgfnim vxUgare, modem dourrha 
[Millet], was grazed white green, and its ripe 
grain made into bread. lo the later period of 

• KaroAiii^rrat o OMnrbt Ti>v 7fniyrir6v. koa WfpKwti 
i) irro^Ai) Iv Tiji ffiripu, Is the LXX. (T.') here. '• The 
• luster shall turn purple In the ■owlnK-time'* is the 
otrict sense of the lost clause; which approximately 
accords with the above, hut yet suggests a variation In 
the Hebrew from which it came. 


more advanced irrigation the ]TUT\, "Fmu- 
greek," occurs, also the T\1J^', a clover, nppa- 
rently, given cut (Peak, v. 5). Mowing (tS. 
Amos vii. 1 ; Ps. Ixxii. 6) and gatherini; har 
[Hay] were familiar processes, but the i.itter 
had no express word, unless CTC'n ("chaiT"io 
A. V.) bo such ; TV", rendered " hay " in A. V. 
(e.g. Is. XV. 6), being properly grass (R. V.). 
The absence of any haymaking process is a 
token of a hot climate, where the grass m.iy 
become hay as it stands. 

The produce of the land, besides fruit from 
trees, was technically distinguished as DKISn, 
including apparently all cereal plants, nVJCp 
((juicqnid in sitiqtiis nascitur, Buxt. Lex.), nearly 
equivalent to the Latin Icgutnen, and D'JUTIt or 
rU'3 '31inT, semtna horlensia (since the former 
word alone was used also generically (or all 
seed, including all else which was liable to tithe, 
for which purpose the distinction seems to 
have existed). The plough was probably lite 
the EgyptLin (see fig. 2), and the process of 
ploughing mostly very light, like that called 
ac'iriricatio by the Romans (" Syria tenui snlco 
arat," Plin. xviii. 47), one yoke of oxen mostly 
sufficing to draw it. Such is still used in Asia 
Minor, nnd its parts are shown in the accom- 
panying drawing : a is the pole to which the 


Ttg. 1.— Platuh, Ae., u aUn nwd In AiU nnor. (Prom F«QoWi 
Jila Xiaor.) 

cross beam with yokes (6) is attached ; c, the 
share; d, the handle; e represents three modes 
of arming the share, and / is a gond with a 
scraper at the other end, probably for cleansing 
the share. The following terms denote the tools 
of Hebrew husbandry :— Plough-share, riK; the 
verb to plough is ^hn,^ but there is no word for 
the entire plough ; yoke, DTO. H^piO and ^ 
[Yoke]; mattock,' I^SO. ntpTO n??inDi 
the last two akin to the above verb, and one, 
perhaps, meaning " plough-share," or more pro- 
bably the metallic beak which armed it, of 
which three forms arc given (fig. 1, «) above : — 

sickle, ViyVf in Deut., and 7jD in Jer. and 

■> Also 2}\ but rare, found only tn lis pattldple 

D'5JV. ploughmen (a K. xxv. 12 j Jer. 111. 16). 

« In 2 Chron. xxxiv, 6, Joxlah Is said to have destroyed 
all false altars, kc., in various places, '* with their mat- 
tocks round about." The Hebrew text is doubtfoL 
The Kerl is Dn'n3"in3i which may possibly denote 
some sharp instmments akin to y\n, sword, or, if 

otherwise pointed (Dcrtbeau, Kel), R. V.). •■ In their 
ruins ; *' but the LXX. has ef roit r6mit aifriiv levKXtf, 
following poesibly a different original fVom our Hebrew, 
but alio possibly rendering the same looeely. 

Digitized by 



.Icfl; go»d, J^l'l;* three-pronged fork, CvC' 
p!;7(3*j axe, DTIj?; threshing sledge, 3110, as 
aboTe; also f^m (Is. ili. 15), which is properly 
;ui epithet of ynO (Gescn.), and appears as 
pn (2 Sam. lii. 31 ; 1 Ch. xi. 3 ; " harrow," 
X v., Amo« i. 3) as a cruel instrument of 
eiecation. To harrow' is TJ^, but no cor- 
responding noun occurs ; for vine-dressers the 
l>nuiing hook, n*1tpT9 > for the shovel and fan, 
see fig. 15 and paragraph above it. Mountains 
.ind steep places were worked with the mattock 
<Is. Tii. 2j ; Maimon. ad J/tsAn. vi. 2 ; Robinson, 
lii. 595, 602-3). The breaking np of new land 
was performed, a< with the Romans, tere novo. 
Such new ground and fallows, the use of which 
Utter was familiar to the Jews (Jer. iv. 3; 



Hos. X. 12), were cleared of stones and of thorns 
(Is. V. 2 ; Gemara Jfierosol. ad loc.) early in the 
year, sowing or gathering from " among thorns" 
being a proverb for slovenly husbandry (Job v. 
5 ; Prov. xxiv. 30, 31 ; Robinson, ii. 127). 
Virgin land was ploughed a second time. The 
proper words are "Vi. 11135, aperire, proscindcre, 
and n^E', offringcre, i.e. iterare vt frangantur 
glebae (by cross ploughing, used also of harrow- 
ing), Varr. dc Ji. Ii. i. 32 ; both the latter are 
distinctively used Is. xxviii. 24. We find in 
1 K. xix. 19, twelve ploughs, apparently going 
on the same ground, some of which may have 
repeated the process of others and reduced the 
ground to a fiuer' tilth, aresult especially needed 
where the agency of frost in pulverizing the 
soil cannot, by reason of climate, be relied upon. 
The importance of the operation, on which all 

fiff. t.— EfTpttanploacUiif ■Bdmrias. (WtOdvmm, Tombt tif Iku Kingt~-Thebm.) 

sDbseqnent onei depend, called for the presence | li. 5). Land already tilled was plonghed before 
nt' the master. Thus Elisha is actually present the rains, that the moisture might the better 

" «ith the twelfth " plough, and so Saul comes 
from the field after the plough-cattle (1 Sam. 

penetrate (Maimon. ap. ITgoI. de He Rust. v. 11). 
Rain, however, or irrigation (Is. xxxii. 20), prc- 

Vt-t BiiHliiwllin tott«pmfai.wli«aiownlntb«mM, »n«rlh»w«Urhmnb«ld«d. (WDklsKn, Toala, seu- the Frnmldi.) 
Tht Ucravlrpbic void «bora, ai or akat. il^flM " tillage." and U followed bj the demotutrative ilsii, a plough. 

pwed the soil for the sowing (Ps. Ixv. 10, 11), 
.!< may be inferred from the prohibition to 
'iTigate till the gleaning was over, lest the poor 
>l)oald suffer {Peah, v. 3) ; and sncb sowing 

* Also TfrfyQ, Jadgea Ul. 31, the weapon of Shamgar. 

T ; - 

^.V« may ooi\Jecture this to have been longer as having 
•fwtte Amctkm in goldlng(^D^) the cattle (cf. Wisd. 


Mrrlil. 2S), and therefore analogous to a spear. But 
*^TI Is the more common word (1 Sam. xUl. 21 ; Eccles. 
itt'll plnr. -.ep. Acta Ix. 5, xxvt. U). 

• The text here is suspicious. 

'In Hoa. I. 11 is a flguratlre passage, "I will put 
F-T^ifauB in the wain, Judah shall plough, Jacob shall 
'«™« fcr himself," where A. V. his wrongly, " I will 
'!'«i« Epbrahs to ride" [B. V. "I wUl set a rider on 
Ej*r»tii "]. The reference Is clearly to a beast fastened 

often took place without previous ploughing, the 
seed, as in the parable of the sower, being 
scattered broadcast, and ploughed in afterwards, 
the roots of the late crop being so far decayed 
as to serve for manure (Fellows, Asia Minor, 
p. 72). The regulation declaring " any sowing 
seed which is to be sown" clean, althongh a 
carcase came in contact with it, refers to the 
dryness of seed kept for that purpose; as is 
plain from the context, declaring seed which has 
been wetted to l>e, under the same circumstances, 
" unclean " (Lev. xi. 37, 38). There may be a 
reference here to the fact that wheat was sown 
in wetted furrows (Jahn, Archaeol. i. p. 361 ; 
cf. Ps. Ixv. 10). The soil was then brushed 
over with a light harrow, often of thorn bushes. 
In highly irrigated spots the seed was trampled 
in by cattle (Is. xxxii. 20), as ih Egypt by 
goats (see fig. 3). Sometimes, however, th* 

Digitized by 




sowing was hj patches only in well-manured 
spots, a field so treated being called ISJD, der. 
103, pardiu, from its spotted appearance, as 
shown in the accompanjing drawing by Suren- 

TiS' 4.— Com-gTOwliig la iMtchai. 


hnsius to illustrate the )Iishna. Where the soil 
was heavier, the ploughing was best done dry 
("dum sicca tellure licet," Virg. Oeorg. i. 214) ; 
and there, though not generally, the sarritio 
(nni?, der. Tiy, to cleanse), and even the 
liratio of Roman husbandry, performed with 
tabulae affixed to the sides of the share, might 
be useful. But the more formal routine of 
heavy Western soils must not be made the 
standard of such a naturally fine tilth as that of 
Palestine generally. "Sunt enim regionuni 
propria munera, sicut Aegypti ct Africae, in 
<|uibus agricola post sementem ante messem 
segetem non attingit ... in iis autem locis ubi 
ilesideratur sarritio," &c. (Columella, ii. 2.) The 
phrases " furrows of her plantation . , . furrows 
where it grew " (Ezek. ivii. 7, 10) are mislead- 
ing. nVlTl?, rendered here by A. V. " furrows," 
means either " raised beds," or, more probably 
(Gesen. a. v.), " espaliers." During the rains, 
if not too heavy, <or between their showers, 
would be the best time for these operations; 
thus seventy days before the Passover was the 
time prescribed for sowing for the " wave-sheaf," 
and probably, therefore, for that of barley gene- 
rally. The oxen were urged on by a goad like a 
spear (see above, fig. 1 /, and note '). The 
custom of watching ri|>ening crops and tbresh- 
ing-fioors against theft or damage (Robinson, i. 
490; ii. 18, 83, 99) is certainly ancient (Job 
xxvii. 18; Is. i. 8) [Cuccmbers]. Thus the 
besieging host are compared to the " keepers of 
a field . . . round about " the citv to watch it 
(Jer. iv. 17). The " cottage," the "" removal " of 
which is a type of rajjid eflacement in Is. xxiv. 
20, is probably a field-bed or hammock for such 
a keeper (Delitzsch, in loco). Thus Boaz slept 
in the floor "at the end of the heap of corn," 
riD]1V, made by depositing thereon the sheaves 
or shocks from the harvest field (Ruth iii. 4, 7). 
Barley ripened a week or two before wheat, and 
as fine harvest weather was certain (Prov. 
xxvi. 1; 1 Sam. xii. 17; Amos iv. 7), the crop 
rhicfly varied with the quantity of timely rain. 
The period of harvest must always have differed 
according to elevation, aspect, &c. (Robinson, i. 
4.10, 551). The proportion of harvest gathered 
to seed sown was often vast : a hundred-fold is 
mentioned, but in such a way as to signify that 
it was a limit rarely attained (Gen. xxvi. 12; 
JIatt. xiii. 8). These natural tendencic! were 
counteracted by seasons of drought which utterly 
prostrated for a while the energies of the jwople 
[Famine]. These, with their results, are often 
described in pathetic passages by the prophets 
(Jer. xiv. 2M3, et al.). A withering effect is also 
ascribed to the wind from the desert, or east 


wind (Gen. .\li. 6; Is. xxi. 1; Ezek. xii. 12; 
Hos. xiii. 15). A variety of insect plagues, 
some threatened in Dent, xxviii. 38, 39, ud 
fully realised in the descriptions of subsequcDt 
pra)ihets, caused at times such fearful ravages 
OS to paralyse agriculture fur a time [Cati:b- 
PILLAR ; LoCDST ; Palmgbworu]. Amos iv. 9 
briefly touches this, but the locta classictis is 
Joel i. ii. The fig-tree white and bare of bark, 
the field wasted, the land mourning, the beasts 
groaning, the thick cloud of insect swanu.-. 
ilarkcning the sky, are some of his details. 
Besides these, some more occult agency rots tlie 
seed in tlic barns, withers the corn, and sears 
the pastures with flame, thus completing tiie 
picture of destruction from the Almighty, and 
of human misery in consequence. 

The rotation of crops, familiar to the Egyptians, 
can hardly have been unknown to the Hebrew;. 
Sowing a field with divers seeds was forbidden 
(Dent. xxii. 9), and minute directions are given 
by the Rabbis for arranging a seeded surface with 

Fl(. 7.— Sowinf. (Snnnliiitfai.) 

great variety, yet avoiding juxtaposition of 
heterogenea. Such arrangements are shown ia 
the annexed drawings. Three furrows* interval 
was the prescribed margin (Celaim, ii. 6). The 
blank spaces in fig. 5, a and i, represent such 
margins, tapering to save ground. In a vine- 

Digitized by 



jnrd wiJc spaces wore often left between the 
vinM, for whose roots a radius of four cubits 
irsi allowed, and the rest of the space cropped : 
to herb-gardens stood in the midst of Tine/ards 



llf. 9.~Bamiat. (SBnttbMlDf.) 

(ftuA, T. 5> Fig. 9 shows a corn-field with olires 
ihoot and amidst it. Such an arrangenient was 
probably that of the Philistine field, into which 
Simjon sent his " foies," which " burnt up both 


yif. 9.--Cafii4Wld with OUtM. (Snrobiulaa.) 

tbe shocks and also the standmg com with the 
Tintjsrds and oliTea " (Judg. it. 5).« 

The wheat, &c., was reaped by the sickle, 
or the ean merely were gathered by hand (so 

(WlOdaaoo, TattrnfOit Ki»it—ru^.) 

^rtapeth the ears with his arm," Is. irii. 5) 
in the " Picenian " method (Job ixiv. 24 ; Varr. 
''' Se Suit. i. 50) ; or the stalk was cut in our 

^' H— ?tiXB7 QpUiB dooTA by Uie roou. {WUklDson, ii( *ii;'r>( 

' neairariion " as a torch of fire in a sheaf (Zcch. 
^' <) is perbaps an allusion to this, as an Image of 
^MaOe hsToc; we Esod. x>U. e, where damages 
•Wat mch migchief are decreed. 
*ttU5 DKT. — VOL. I. 

method, or the plant was pulled from the roots 
(Peah, T. 10). Unless the first method was 
followed, it was bound in sheaves — a process 
prominent in Scripture, and described bv 
peculiar words, D}>H and ipp, the sheaf itself 
being TO^S (I's. cxxvi. 6) or I^V (Lev. ixiii. 
10), and a shock or pile of such t5'n| (Job v. 26), 


I \*,-'' 




Fi;;. 12.— Ik'spinp. (Sareiilmaioji.) 

whereas the sUnding com is TVf\> (Ei. iiii. 5) 
— or heaped, nW31p7, in the form of a helmet, 

or niKDD137 of a turban (of which, how- 
ever, see another explanation, Buxt. Zex. s. v. 

niDDia), or n-nrh of a cake. Thus the 
"heap" of "harvest" is a familiar image 
(Is. xvii. 11). But the "heaps in the furrows 
of the field" to which "altars" are compared 
(Hos. lii. 11) are wholly different, being heaps 
o( atones, and the point of the comparison their 
frequency — they stand as thick about the 
country as the stone-heaps, when stones are 
gathered from the furrows. The sheaves or 
heaps were carted (Amos ii. 13) to the floor a 

f%. IS. — Ibmfaliirtfoor. Tbe gam diiTVD nmnd i 
ooutnrj to Uw anal ooMam. (WUklnMn. 3V6«.) 

circular spot of hard ground, probably, as now, 
from 50 to 80 or 100 feet in diameter. Such 
floors were probably permanent, and became 
well-known spots (Gen. 1. 10, 11 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 
16, 18). On these the oxen, &c., forbidden to 
be muzzled (Deut. xxv. 4), trampled out the 
grain, as we find represented in the Egyptian 
monuments. Lighter grains were threshed'* 
with a flail or switch (Is. xxviii. 27), and ao 
Gideon treated his wheat, being unable to resort 
to the floor as usual for fear of hostile violence 
(Judg. vi. 11); and so Ruth treated her barley 
(Ruth ii. 17). At a later time, perhaps in the 
agricultural progress under king Uzziah, who 
loved husbandry (2 Ch. xxvi. 10), the Jews used 
a threshing sledge called Morag (Is. xli. 15; 
2 Sam. xxiv. 22 ; 1 Ch. xxi. 23), probably re- 

<> The same word, D^Di l> o"ed for knocking frolt 
off a tree (Dent. xxiv. 20 ; Is. xxvll. 12). 

Digitized by 




sembling the nireg, still employed in Kgyjit 
(Wilkinson, i. 408, ii. +21, 423>— a stage with 

pig. l4._Tbrc«Iilng InitTument. (From Fellowm'i .Uia .Ifmii .) 

three rollers ridged with iron, which, aided by 
the driver's weight, crushed out, often injuring, 

rijr. 16.— The Korcff, a machine uspd by the mMcra Efc'yj.tirtrM 
for Ibrftthiag Cora. 

the grain, as well as cut or tore the straw, 
which thus became fit for fodder. It appears to 
have been similar to the Roman tribuhiu aui\ the 


plosteUum Poenicum (Varr. dc R. P. i. 52). Tlie 
])assage Is. iiviii. 24 fj. is worth noting. Tlie 
Propliet's parable is couched in imagery so precise 
as to instruct us in the facts. Intciligence work- 
ing with a purpose, following a method andaroiil- 
ing excess, is tlic lesson taught, and ascribeil to 
a divine source. Tims sowiu<; is the end ol 
ploughing, which opens the soil and l>realis its 
clods. The .surface is levelled, and each seed 
conies in order, the finer first, the heavier after, 
wheat in rows, barley in tlie apjwinteil spot, 
spelt in the border.' In tlireshiug a like dis- 
cretion prevails. The heavy-armed sledge iml 
waggon wheel' ami horses would crush the 
lighter grains, and, if applied too long, would be 
fatal to corn also. Tliis is the only instance of 
the scriptural mention of •' horses "(■' horse- 
men," A. v.; " horses," 1;. V.) in a purely agri- 
cultural process. The wheeled carriage as used 
for thresliing supplies an image in I'rciv. ss.'io, 
" He brin<;eth the wheel over tliem." Barley was 
sometimes soaked and then parched before tread- 
ing out, which got rid of the pellicle of the graia 
(see further the Antiijuitah-s Triturni; Ugolini, 
vol. 29). The culture of fla.v for linen garments, 
&c., was already familiar to the Israelites ifi 
Egypt before the lixodn.s, and was a staple "! 
Palestine at the time of their invading it. The 
working the yarn, &c., was a jHiint of house- 
wifery (K.K. i.v! .'.1 ; .los. ii. IJ ; I'rov. SJii. 13)- 

The use of animal manure is proved frequent 
by such recurring expressions as *'dung on 
face of the earth, fielil," &c. (Ps. LvixiiL W; 
2 K. ix. :)7; .ler. viii. 2, kc). [Dt'SG.] -^ 
rabbi limits the quantity to three heaps of ten 
iiall-cors, or about :180 gallons to each nXO 
of grain (= J of ephah, Oesen.), and wishes tii« 
quantity in each heap, rather tli:in their nam- 

Fig. 10.— TreaJliig oat tbo gnia bj oxen, aod irlDnowlofr. I. Baklssr ap the «uk to the oentrtr 
Hitli ivoodeo bhoreli. (WUUiuon, IV6m.) 

2. The ilrivw. 3. Wiimowuii: 

ber, to be increased if the field be large 
(Scheriothy cap. iii. 2). We learn also t'roni 
Is. XXV. 10, H, the existence of a miilden with 
a tanic tor liquid manure. Nor was tlie great 
usel'utness of sheep to the soil unrecognised 
{Sdur. ill. 4), though, owing to the general di.«- 
tinctness of the pastoral life, there was less 
scope for it. Vegetable ashes, burnt stubble, &c. 
were also used ; and the regulation for com- 
pensation in case of tire destroying a neighbour's 
produce (Ex. xiii. B) probably has in view the 
tiring a surface, to bum thorns and similar 

The "shovel" ami "fan" (HriT and rT^TO, 
Is. xii. 24, the dilTcrence between which is pre- 

I For the obscure words miC'- '""e ippUed to » licit, 


and JOD3 'o barley, see Gesen. «. re. The latter cmwoI 

gramnutlcall)r he «n epithet. Some have taken it f ■! 
"millet"; but it Is perhaps l»st taken in mtverliil 
apposition, " as apiwtnte*!," with reference to the spw 
alhtttPd. See Cheyne, I. c. 

•^ The pnjper word for a chariot wheel, as in Exod. xiv 
25, is u-se'fl licre In c. '27 ; in r. 2S the more generi 
word, used also for water-wbeels, &c. 

Digitized by 



iemi to the present day) indicate the process of 
riimowin; — a conspicuons part of ancient hns- 
btodrjr (Ps. xxxr. 5; Job xii. 18; Is. xrii. 13), 
and important owing to the slovenly threshing. 
Ereaing was the favourite time (Rath iii. 2) 
irhen there was mostly a breeze. The " wind 
I'reni the wilderness," i.e. dry, was favourable 
to the same purpose ' (Jer. iv. 11). The Hltp 
(rn|, to scatter) = nrvoy (Matt. iii. 12 ; Horn. 
Iliad, iriiL 588), was the rai^rA or fork with 
lii prongs; while the nni (akin to ITII?) was 
the shore] which threw the grain up against the 
■rind (see Wetzstein in Delitzsch,yesaui,' p. 707 S. 
Cpiluiwerer on Om Uelitzsch,J«».*p.337,m>te). 
The heap of produce rendered in rent was some- 
times csstomariiy so large as to cover the Dri^ 
{Bata Jfebii, ix. 2). So the irriov was a 
oin-measore in Cyprus, and the Sirrvov = i 
i IttSilwot (Liddell and Scott, Lex. s. v. 
tTMr) The last process was the shaking in a 
eiere, i^^S, cribrum, to separate dirt and 
nfnse (b. xix. 28 ; Amos ix. 9 ; cf. Luke 
iJiL 31). 

The wordf rendered "bam," "storehouse," 
" gamer " in A. V., sometimes denote structures 
raised on the surface (Luke xii. 18), but very 
oiW subterranean repositories excavated in the 
rock, &c This gives great profundity to the 
image of Ps. xxxiii. 7, " He layeth up the depth 
in storehouses." Such is probably the expla- 
ostion of Jer. ilL 8, where Ishmael's prisoners 
vtn, " We have treasures in the field, of wheat, 
<x." The same word occurs in Job iii. 21, 
"who dig for it more than for hid treasures." 
They were so hidden that without guidance 
no stranger coold find them ; in short, a cac/ie 
a ialended. Hence the prisoners virtually offer 
to show them, and thus to ransom themselves. 
In the Speaier'i Conuaentart/, "0 my moun- 
tain in the field " is supposed to refer to 
JerusaJeoi. Thus it is said of Babylon, " Open 
lier storehouses, cast her up aa heaps," the 
"heaps" of com (Hag. ii. 16) flung forth 
'if snch receptacles supplying the image (Jer. 1. 
26) Such were made in abundance by Hezekiah 
('- Ch. ixxiL 28). Seed corn was so stored ; 
cp. " Is the seed yet in the bam ? " (Hag. iL 
U'Xtt unsown. In Joel I. 17, "The barns 
we broken down," probably in the husband- 
lEsn's d«pair at the complete havoc descrilied. 
fiekfe and floors were not commonly enclosed ; 
riteyards mostly were, with a tower and other 
WHings(Num. ixii. 24; Ps. Ixxx. 12; Is. v. 5; 
M»tt ni. .33; comp. Judg. vi. 11). Banks of 
^ti from ditches were also used. 

Fnit gardens, fruit trees, and orchards are 
"^1 mentioned, but few kinds of fruits 
«• named. Besides the fig, olive, and vine, 
'tere occur apple-trees (so called, but see 
Kma), pomegranates, palms (i.e. date palms ; 
tt Bethany, " House of dates "), mulberries 
(J Sam. V. 23, 24 ; 1 Mac. vi. 34), pistachio- 
aot, wah>nt (Gen. iliii. 11; Cant. vi. 11), and 
slaond; also melons in Egypt (Num. xi. 5), 
aii rarions kinds of spices (Cant. iv. 13, 14). 
"Gardens and orchards " are mentioned specially 



' Tbv the residuum of empty husks and ctiafT be- 
°«« u image of vacant desolation ; and " tanners 
vtidi sluU (m " are threatened against Babylon (Jer. 

among royal delights (Eecles. ii. 51. We have 
also summer fruits spoken of (Is. xvi. 9; 
Amos viii. 2; Mic. vii. 1); but the precise 
kinds intended by this general term are uh- 
certain [Garden], In Is. xvii. 10 " plantations 
of delights" (A. V. "plea-wnt plants;" R. V. 
marg. " plantings of Adonis ") seem to corre- 
spond to old English " pleasaunces," and pro- 
pagation by slips seems intended by the con- 
text. There is no mention of grafting in the 
0. T., and the reference to it in Rom. xi. 17 aq. 
is perhaps due to later influences. 

With regard to occupancy, a tenant might pay 
a fixed moneyed rent (Cant. viii. 11), in which 
case he was called 10^, and was compellable to 
keep the ground in good order ; or a stipulated 
share of the fruits (2 Sam. ix. 10 ; Matt. ixi. 34), 
often a half or a third : Joseph in Egypt ap- 
pointed a fifth (Gen. ilvii. 24, 26) : but local cus- 
tom was the only rule : in this case he was called 
73pD, and was more protected, the owner 
sharing the loss of a short or spoilt crop ; so, in 
case of locusts, blight, &c., the year's rent w4s 
to be abated; or he might receive such share 
as a salary — an inferior position — when the 
term which described him was 13in. It was 
forbidden to sow flax during a short occupancy 
(hence leases for terms of years would seem to 
have been common), lest the soil should be un- 
duly exhausted (comp. Virg. Georg. i. 77). A 
passer-by might eat any quantity of corn or 
grapes, but not reap or carry oft' fruit (Dent, 
xxiii. 24, 25 ; Matt. xii. 1). The " burdens of 
wheat," taken from the poor (Amos v. 11), 
should be rendered " the tax of wheat." Tyre 
was a large customer of Judah for wheat (Ezek. 
xxvii. 17 ; Acts xii. 20) [Misnith]. There was 
a com market of course in Jerusalem, and most 
important cities, jic. (Amos viii, 5), and its 
traidesmen's misdeeds are denounced ; see also 
Meh. xiii. 15. 

The rights of th« comer to be left, and of 
gleaning [Corner; GLBAmNo], formed the 
poor man's claim on the soil for support. For 
his benefit, too, a sheaf forgotten in carrying to 
the floor was to be left; so also with regard 
to the vineyard and the olive-grove (Lev. 
xix. 9, 10; Deut. xxiv. 19). Besides, there 
seems a probability that every third year a 
second tithe, besides the priests', was paid for 
the poor (Deut. xiv. 28, xxvi. 12; Amos iv. 4; 
Tob. i. 7 ; Jo-ieph. Ant. iv. 8). On this doubtful 
point of the poor man's tithe (^yo "tiflKi) see a 
teamed note by Surenhusius, ad Pcah, viii. 2. 
These rights, in case two poor men were 
partners in occupancy, might be conveyed by 
each to the other for half the field, and thus be 
retained between them (Maimon. ad I'eali, v. 5). 
Sometimes a charitable owner declared his 
ground common, when its fruits, as those of 
the sabbatical year, went to the poor [Sabbath]. 
For three years the fruit of newly-planted trees 
was deemed uncircumcised and forbidden ; in 
the fourth it was holy, as first-fruits; in the 
fifth it might be ordinarily eaten (Mishua, Arlah, 
passim). Probably three years would mostly be 
needed for the maturation of the tree to the 
fruit-bearing point. The planter of a vineyard 
would thus, accordmg to Deut. xx. 6, be for four 
yean exempt from military service [VlNE- 
yabd]. For the various classical analogies, 
see Diet, of Or. and Horn. Antiq. s. v. [H. H.] 

F 2 

Digitized by 




AGBIPPA. [Hehod.] 

A'GUR (IWK, UV."=(!ollector; LXX. om. ; 
Congregant). The son of Jakeh, an unknown 
Hebrew sage, who uttered or collected the 
sayings of wisdom recorded in Prov. xxx. Ewald 
attributes to him the authorship of Pror. xxx. 
1-xxxi. 9, in consequence of the similarity of 
style exhibited in the three sections therein con- 
tained ; and assigns as hia date a period not 
earlier than the end of the 7th or beginning of the 
6th cent. B.C. Delitzsch assigns Pror. xix., xixi. 
to the same person who made the great Hezekian 
collection. The Rabbis, according to Gashi, and 
Jerome after them, interpreted the name sym- 
bolically of Solomon, who " collected understand- 
ing " (from "MVi, agar, he gathered), and is else- 
where called " Koheleth." Others render Pror. 
xxx. 1 as follows : — " The words of Agur, the son 
of Jakeh, of (the coantry of) Massa " (Delitzsch 
= Mesh8,see Gen. x. 30). Hence Bunsen (Bibet- 
tceri, i. p. clxxviii.) contended that Agur was 
an inhabitant of Massa, and probably a descend- 
ant of one of the 500 Simeonites, who, in the 
reign of Hezekiah, drove out the Amalekites 
from Mount Seir. Hitzig goes further, and 
makes him the son of the queen of Massa (which 
he places in N. Arabia, Miihlau in the Hauran) 
and brother of Lemuel {Die SprUche Sal. p. 311, 
«d. 1858). The names -\gur and Jakeh do not 
occur elsewhere, and some have thought them 
pseudonyms. In Castellus's Lex. Heptag. we find 

the Syriac word ||Q..^, dgurd, defined as 

signifying "one who applies himself to the 
studies of wisdom," which may be better ren- 
dered " the hireling of wisdom " (Payne Smith, 
TA«s. Syr. col. 35), from the Syriac sense of 

J^l, " a reward." Hence may have been de- 
rived a traditional interpretation of the proper 
Dame Agur. Much discussion on the questions 
connected with this verse and section of the 
Proverbs will be found in Miihlau, l)e prom. 
Aguri et Lem. origine (1869); Delitzsch, art. 
" Spriicbe Salomos," in Herzog, RE.', and Cheyne, 
Job and S(Jomon, pp. 149, 170. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

A'HAB (3NnK, MV.» = /atAer's brother, 
comparison being made with a similar juxta- 
position in Syriac names, e.j. OIQO|> pxl, 
which Bar-Hebr. explains as due to great like- 
ness to his father ; cp. Nestle, Die IsraelHiichen 
Mgennamm, p. 187, n. 1 : 'KxtuiP; Achab), son 
of Omri, seventh king of the separate kingdom 
of Israel, and second of his dynasty. The great 
lesson which we learn from his life is the depth of 
wickedness into which a weak man may fall, even 
though not devoid of good feelings and amiable 
impulses, when he abandons himself to the 
guidance of another person, resolute, unscru- 
pulous, and depraved. The cause of bis ruin 
was his marriage with Jezebel, daughter of 
Ethbaal, or Ithobaal, king of Tyre, who had 
been priest of Astarte, but had usurped the 
throne of his brother Phalles (compare Joseph. 
Ant. viii. 13, 2, with c. Apion. i. 18). If she 
resembles the Lady Macbeth of our great 
dramatist, Ahab has hardly Macbeth's energy 
and determination, though he was prolwbly by 
nature a better man. We have a comparatively 


full account of Ahab's reign, because it was dis- 
tinguished by the ministry of the great prophet 
Elijah, who was brought into direct collision 
with Jezebel, when she ventured to introdas 
into Israel the impure worship of Baal and hei 
father's goddess Astarte. In obedience to bei 
wishes, Ahab caused temples to be built to £ul 
and " the Asherah " in Samaria itself (1 K. irl 
32, 33, R. v.). With a fixed determinstica 
to extirpate the true religion, Jezebel huattd 
down and put to death God's prophets, sont 
of whom were concealed in caves by Obadiai, 
the governor of Ahab's house ; while the Pho^ 
nician rites were carried on with such spleadoiir, 
that we read of 450 prophets of Baal and 400 ol 
Asherah (see 1 K. iviii. 19, where the A. V. 
follows the LXX. in erroneously snbstitntiiij 
" the groves " for the proper name " the Ashe- 
rah " [R. v.], as again in 2 K. xii. 7, iiiii. i\ 
where R. V. has in both places Ashenh). 
[Asherah.] How the worship of God tru 
restored, and the idolatrous priests tlsin, ii 
consequence of " a sore famine in Samaria," <nli 
be more properly related under the articl< 
Elijah. But heathenism and j>ersecution wen 
not the only crimes into which Jezebel led hn 
yielding husband. One of his chief tastes «i> 
for splendid architecture, which he showed t< 
building an ii-ory house and several cities, saJ 
also by ordering the restoration and fortilicatJM 
of Jericho, which seems to have belonged u 
Israel, and not to Judah, as it is said to hare 
been rebuilt in the days of A?tab, rather than a 
those of the contemporary king of Judah, 
Jehoshaphat (1 K. xvi. 34). But the plact la 
which he chiefiy indulged this passion was the 
beautiful city of Jezreel (now Zerin), in the j 
plain of Esdraelon, which he adorned with a ; 
palace and park for his own residence, tliongh i 
Samaria remained the capital of his kingdom, 
Jezreel standing in the same relation to it as th< , 
Versailles of the old French monarchy to Paris i 
(Stanley, S. ^ P. p. 244). Desiring to add to hb i 
pleasure-grounds there the vineyard of hii 
neighbour Naboth, he proposed to buy it or gin 
land in exchange for it; and when this wh 
refused by Naboth, in accordance with the 
Mosaic law, on the ground that the vineTaid, 
was "the inheritance of his fathers "(Lev. W- 
23), a false accusation of blasphemy was bronght 
against him, and not only was he himself stoned 
to death, but his sons also, as we learn from 
2 K. ix. 26. Elijah, already the great vindicator 
of religion, now appeared as the assertor ot 
morality, and declared that the entire eitirpi- 
tion of Ahab's house was the penalty appointed 
for his long course of wickedness, now crowned 
by this atrocious crime. The execution, howenr, 
of this sentence was delayed in consequence <a 
Ahab's deep repentance. The remaining part of 
the First Book of Kings is occupied by an account 
of the Syrian wars, which some think was origin- 
ally contained in the last two chapters. U ii 
thought more natural to place the 20th chapter 
after the 21st, and so bring the whole bLslorr ot 
these wars together, than to interrupt the cam- 
tive by interposing the story of Naboth betweea 
the 20th and 22nd, especially as the beginning »( 
the 22nd seems to follow naturally from the end 
of the 20th. And this arrangement is found it 
the LXX. [B.; A. follows the order of the Heb.] 
and is confirmed by the narrative of Josephos. 

Digitized by 



We read of three campaigns whicli Ahab un- 
dertgok against Bcnhadad II., king of Damascos, 
two deletuire and one ofiensiTe. In the firat, 
BoluiUd laid siege to Samaria, and Ahab, 
ucosnged bjr the patriotic counsels of God's 
prophets, who, next to the trae religion, valued 
oBost deeply the independence of His chosen 
people, made a sadden attack on him whilst 
in the plenitade of arrogant confidence he was 
laaqneting in his tent with his thirty-two 
rasul kings. The Syrians were totally routed, 
and lied to Damascus. Kext year Benhadad, 
beUeriog that his failure was owing to some 
peculiar power which the God of Israel exer- 
ci«d srer the hills, inraded Israel by way of 
Aphek, oD the £. of Jordan (Stanley, 3. ^ P. 
App. § 6. See Aphek, 5). Ahab's fresh victory 
«u 10 complete that Benhadad himself fell into 
liis bsndi ; but was released (contrary to the 
trill of God as annonnced by a prophet) on 
condition of restoring all the cities of Israel 
which he held, and making " streets " for Ahab 
in DsmascDs (confirmed by the inscriptions ; see 
Scfander, £i7.' p. 199} ; that is, admitting into 
Us capital permanent Hebrew commissioners, in 
so independent position, with special dwellings 
for themseWes and their retinues, to watch over 
the commercial and political interests of Ahab 
sad his snbjects. This was apparently in retalia- 
tion for a similar privilege exacted by fienhadad's 
predecessor from Omri in respect to Samaria 
(I K. XX. 34). After this great sncceis Ahab 
enjoyed peace for thre« years, and it is difficult 
to scconnt exactly for the third outbreak of 
hostilities, which in Kings is briefly attributed 
to u attack made by Ahab on Ramoth in Gilead 
01 the east of Jordan, in conjunction with Jeho- 
^hat king of Jodah, which town he claimed 
a belonging to Israel. But if Kamoth was 
one of the cities which Benhadad agreed to 
ratoie, why did Ahab wait for three years to 
enforce the fulBlment of the treaty? From 
this difficolty, and the extreme bitterness shown 
ly Benhadad against Ahab personally (1 K. 
uii. 31), it seems probable that this was not 
the ose (or at all events that the Syrians did 
Cot so understand the treaty), bnt that Ahab, 
•ow strengthened by Jehoshaphjit, who must 
lure feit keenly the paramount importance of 
erippUng the power of Syria, originated the war 
^J sssanltittg Ramoth withont any immediate 
pnrocation. In any case, God's blessing did 
•ot rest on the expedition, and Ahab was told 
^J the prophet Micaiah that it would fail, and 
^ the prophets who advised it were hurrying 
^ to his ruin. For giving this warning 
Hicaiab was imprisoned ; but Ahab was so far 
naaed by it as to take the precaution of dis- 
S<istag himself, so as not to ofler a conspicuous 
<wk to the archers of Benhadad. But he was 
•toi by » " certain man who drew a bow at a 
tWnre;" and, though stayed up in his chariot 
w s time, he died towards evening, and his 
uny dispersed. When he was brought to bt 
wried in Samaria, the dogs licked np his blood 
•• s serraat was washing his chariot (1 K. ixii. 
3'. 38 : Me R. T.) ; a partial fulfilment of Elijah's 
?«d>ction (I K. ixi. 19% which was more 
IteisDy accomplished in the case of his son 
V' K. ii. 26). Josephus, however, substitutes 
Jontl for Samaria in the former passage {Ant. 
'"a. U, 6). The date of Ahab's accession is, 



according to the old chronology. 919 B.c. ; of 
his death, &c. 897. Schrader, Wellhausen, and 
others, correcting the dates by the Assyrian 
monuments, place his reign between B.C. 874-854. 
These monuments supplement the Biblical nar- 
rative by recording one very important event. 
From an inscription engraved by Shalmaneser 
(II.) on the rocks of Armenia, it would seem that 
in the campaign of the sixth year (B.C. 854) of 
this Assyrian monarch, a battle was fought at 
Karkar against twelre (? eleven) allied kings. 
Amongst the allies were Ahab of Israel and 
Madadezer (Benhadad) of Damascus. Such an 
alliance was a natural result of the covenant 
between Syria and krael, followed by the three 
years' peace (IK. ii. 34, xxii. 1). The inscription 
records a complete defeat of the allies ; and, if the 
numbers can be trusted, Benhadad's loss in men 
and material was greater than Ahab's. Perhaps 
this may not have been without its influence in 
inducing Ahab to put an end to the alliance 
and "entice " (2 Ch. xviii. 2 ; R. V. "move") 
Jehoshaphat to join farces with him and make 
an united attack on Ramoth-gilead. See Schrader, 
KA T.' pp. 193-200 ; Zeit3c/ir. f. KeiUchri/ten, ii. 
365-384 ; Sayce, Fresh Light from the Ancient 
Monuments, p. 101, Ac; Seoordi of the Past, 
iii. 99; Tiele, Bab.-Assyr. Qeschichte, p. 200; 
Homrael, Gexh. Bab.-Assyr. p. 608; Hebraica, 
iii. 2014. Klostermann (in Strack u. ZSckler's 
Kgf. Komm. — 'Chronologic d. Kfinigsbiicher,' 
p. 496) appears to be alone in denying that the 
'Ahabbu mentioned in the Inscriptions as de- 
feated at Karkar is the Ahab of Israel, and 
places his reign in B.C. 910-889. 

Some critics allow but little merit to some of 
the Biblical records of Ahab's life, and by no 
means accept the usual estimate of his character 
or of Elijah's work (cp. Bleek-Wellhansen, 
Einteitmg* in d. A. T. pp. 245, &c. ; Wellhausen, 
Oeschichte Israels, I. pp. 302-6 ; Stade, Gesch. 
d. Volkes Israel, i. p. 522, &c.). Thus, the 
sections dealing with Elijah and Xaboth (chaps. 
xvii.-xix. xxi.) are considered to be largely 
affected by legends circulating about the prophet, 
to he marked by strong partisanship against Ahab, 
and to be reputed nnhistorical on account of the 
miracles which they record. Further, the sections 
dealing with Ahab and Benhadad (ch. xx.), and 
with Ahab's death (ch. xxii.), are said to be 
marked by interpolations ; though these are not 
of a character to discredit the general trust- 
worthiness of the narrative. Many of these 
criticisms are met by Eilersheim, History of 
Judah and Israel, v. 176, vi. 1-58. 

The Rabbinical conceptions of Ahab, often 
very curious, will be found summed up in Ham- 
burger, SE.' a n. 

2. 'K and SPM ; 'Ax(c(6; Achab. The son of 
Kolaiah, and a lying prophet, who deceived the 
Israelites in Babylon, and was burnt to death by 
NebuchadnexzBr(Jer. xxix. 21). [G. E. L. C] [F.] 

AH'ARAH (nnntj!, Ges. suggests n«nnK. 

post fratrem ; MV.'* an abbreviation of Ahar- 
HEL ; etym. is uncertain : A. 'AopcC, B. 'lo^o^X : 
Ahara). The third son of Benjamin (1 Ch. viii. 
1). See Aher, Ahirah. [W. A W.] [F.] 

AHAB'HEL (^n"in«, Ges. = behind a for- 
tress-vall [cp. Olshausen, Lehrb. p. 164]; i8eX^6s 
'P<)X<I0; AAarehel). A name occurring in an 

Digitized by 




obscure fragment of the genealogies of Jndah 
(1 Ch. iv. 8). " The families of Aharhel " ap- 
parently traced their descent through Coz to 
Ashur, the posthumous son of Hezron. The 
Targum of R. Joseph on Chronicles (/. c.) identic 
Hes him with "Uur the iir&tbom of Miriam." 
The LXX. (iSfX^ov 'Prixitfi) appear to have read 
3m «nK, '• brother of Rechab." [\V. A. W.] [P.] 

AHASA'I (nn«, MV.» an abbreviation for 
nnriK ; om. in Lkx., «.• 'ACaxiis ; AImzi). A 
priest, ancestor of Amashai (Neh. xi. 13), called 
Jahzebah in 1 Ch. ii. 12. [W. A. W.j [F.] 

AHAS'BAI CaOriK, of uncertain etym.; 
MV." = contr. froiii"a»a n^H^, I u^l take 
refuge in Jah: B. i 'Aff/Sffriit, A. i Kirou4x 
Aadaf), the father of Eliphelet, one of David's 
thirty-seven captains (2 Sam. zxiii. 34). The 
name is suspicious, perhaps corrupt ; cp. Driver, 
Jfotes on Samuel in loco ; and cp. the very different 
names in 1 Ch. li. 35. The LXX. regarded the 
name Ahasbai as denoting not the father but 
the family of Eliphelet. [\V. A. W.] [F.] 

AHASHVE'BOSH, mentioned in the margin 
of Ezra iv. 6 (A. V. and K. V.) as the Hebrew 
form of Ahasuerus. [F.] 

AHASUE'EUS (B^ni^HK; 'Aamivpot, 
LXX., but 'Aerinpos, Tob. xiv. 15, A. V. ; A»' 
suerua, Vulg,), the name of one Median and two 
Persian kings mentioned in the Old Testament. 
It may be desirable to prefix to this article a 
chronological table of the Medo-Persian liings 
from Cyaxares to Artaxerxes Longimanus, 
according to their ordinary classical names. 
The Scriptural names conjectured to correspond 
to them and Abtaxebxes are in some cases 
added in italics. 

1. Cyaxares, king of Media, son of Phrsortes, 
grandson of Deioces and conqueror of Nineveh, 
began to reign B.C. 634. A/iasuema. 

2. Astyages his son, last king of Media, 
B.C. 594. 

3. Cyrus, son of his daughter Mandane and 
Cambyses, a Persian noble, first king of Persia, 
■559. Cyrus. 

4. Cambyses his son, 529. Ahasuerut. 

5. A Magian usurper, who personates Smer- 
ilis, the younger son of Cyrus, 521. Artaxerxes. 

6. Darius Uystaspis, raised to the throne on 
the overthrow of the Hagi, 521. Darim, 

7. Xerxes, his son, 485. Ahanierut. 

8. Artaxerxes Longimanus (Macrocheir), his 
son, 465-495. Artaxerxe$. 

The name Ahasuerus or Achashverosfa is, ac- 
cording to Schrader {KAT.' p. 375), written on 
the Persian inscriptions Khiajirid,—^ name, 
according to MV.", compounded from ithaja= 
kingdom and arsAa=eye (Bumouf). Schrader 
and MV." take A to be the Hebrew form of 
the name Xerxes. It is written in Aramaic 
V\tV'ttT\ (without M prosthetic, Schrader, 
KAT.* p. 615), on the beautiful stele of Sak- 
karah from Egypt, in his 4th year (see Fac- 
simile$ of M3S. and Imcriptunu, PI. Ixiii. Palico- 
graphical Soc., Oriental Series X Herod. ( vi. 
98) explains Xerxes to mean ipifiot, a significa- 
tion sufficiently near that of king. 

1. In Dan. ix. 1, Ahasuerus is said to be the 
father of Darius the Mede. With many Cyax- 
ares is a form of Ahasuerus, grecised into 


Axares with the prefix Cy- or Kai-, common t« 
the Kaianian dynasty of kings (Haloobn'i 
Pcriia, ch. iii.), with which may be oompiKd 
Kai Khosroo, the Persian name of Cyms. The 
son of this Cyaxares was Astyages, and it hiu 
been conjectured that Darius the Mede «u 
Astyages, set over Babylon as viceroy by liis 
grandson Cyrus, and allowed to live there ii 
royal state (see Kawlinson's Herodatut, vol. i 
Essay iii. § 11). [Dabiiw.] On this supposi- 
tion Ahasuerus is Cyaxares, the conqueror of 
Mineveh. .\nd in accordance with this view, 
we read in Tobit, xiv. 15, that Nineveh wu 
taken by Nabuchodonosor (t.r. as crows-phiKe; 
see Speaker's Commentary on Tob. xir. 4) ui 
Assuerus, t.«. Cyaxares. This ideatification of 
Ahasnerus is not, however, universally admitted 
either in the passage of Dan. or of Tobit (tte 
Schrader in Riehm's HWB. and Schnlti ii 
Herzog's RE.^ s. n.), and in the opinion of maaf 
it is wisest to wait for further discovery or 

S. In Ezra iv. 6, the enemios of the Jews, 
after the death of Cyrus, desirous to frnitrste 
the building of Jerusalem, send accntatioat 
against them to Ahasuerus, king of Penis. 
Ewald thought that this king was Cambyies, 
argaing from v. 5 that the opposition to IIk 
Jews continued from the time of Cyrus to thit 
of Darins, and that the Ahasuerus and Arts- 
xerxes mentioned in vc. 6, 7 were names of 
Cambyses and the Pseudo-Smerdis, who reigw<l 
between them. This ideatification is alto gene- 
rally surrendered. Further, it is not necesssrr 
to consider the section Ezra iv. 6-23 episodical, 
or to preserve historical continuity by reaiiiii; 
r. 24 immediately after c. 5 (see Sayce, I*trv 
duction to Ezra, &c., p. 22> The existio; 
arrangement may very well stand, if re. 6-£i 
b« considered a summary statement of the prii- 
cipal relations between the enemies of the Jevs 
and the Persian kings during the period exteid- 
ing beyond the days of Darius Uystaspis (cp. 
Bertheau-Ryssel,' £sra, Nehemia, u. Ester, f. 
62 ; Oettli in Strack n. ZSckler's Kgf. Komm.<» 
Esra, p. 161). Ahasuerus is then identified with 
Xerxes (No. 7. Cp. Schrader and Schultz,U. c). 
and with the Ahasnerus next to be considered. , 

8. The third is the Ahasuerus of the Boeli of ■ 
Esther. It is needless to give more than tlie i 
heads of the well-known story. Having divorced i 
his queen Vashti for refusing to appear in poblic , 
at a banquet, he married four years afterwards . 
the Jewess Esther, cousin and ward of Mordecsl 
Five years after this, Haman, one of his eeoo- 
sellers, having been slighted by Mordecai, pre- 
vailed upon the king to order the destruction ot' 
all the Jews in the empire. But before the dsr 
appointed for the massacre, Esther and Mordecsi 
overthrew the influence which Haman had exer- 
cised, and so completely changed the king's feel- 
ings in the matter, that they induced him to pot 
Haman to death, and to give the Jews the right 
of self-defence. This they used so vigorously 
that they killed several thousands of their oppo- 
nents. Now from the extent assigned to the 
Persian empire (Esth. i, I), '* from India even 
unto Ethiopia," it is proved that Darins Hystss- 
pis is the earliest possible king to whom thii 
history can apply, and it is hai^ly worth while 
to consider the claims of any after Artaxerxes 
Longimanus, But Ahasuerus cannot be identical 

Digitized by 



will Dtriu, wkoM wires were th« daughters 

tlCjns and Otanes, and who alike in name 

iml diaracter differs from that foolish tyrant. 

NeiUier can he be Artaxerxes Longimanus, 

altlKngii,as Artajerxes is a compoand of Xerxes, 

tbtre 19 less diflicnlty here as to the name. But 

is the fint place the character of Artaxerxes, 

u firen by Plutarch and by Diodoros (xi. 71), 

is iso Tery nnlike that of Ahasuerus, Besides 

tiiis, ia Ezra rii. 1-7, 11-26, Artaxerxes, in the 

f^znti year of his reign, issue* a decree very 

fsmoreble to the Jews, ami it ia therefore 

nnlikely that in the tirel/th (Ksth. iii. 7) Uaman 

onkl ipeak to him of them as if he knew 

notliiiig about them, and persuade him to sen- 

teoee them to an indiscriminate massacre. We 

art tlieiefore led to the belief^ now generally 

sntpted, that Abasnems is Xerxes (the names 

being, as we hare seen, identical) : and . this 

ugclnsian is fortified by the resemblance of 

thsrscter (cp. Herod, vii. 3.5, 37, ix. 107 ; Justin, 

ii. 12 ; Spiegel, Eranitchc Alterthurmkunck, ii. 

^77, &c,), and by certain chronological indicn- 

tioas. it Xerxes scourged the sea, and put to 

death the engineers of his bridge, because their 

Tork was injured by a storm, so Ahasuerns 

Ttpodiated his qneeu Vashti because she would 

not Tiolate the decorum of her sex, and ordered 

the masucre of the whole Jewish people to 

gntiiy the malice of Haman. In the third year 

«f the reign of Xerxes was held an assembly to 

smage the Greeiaa war (Herod, vii. 7 ff.) ; in 

the turd year of Ahasuema was held a great 

fast and assembly in Shnshan the palace (£sth. 

i. 3). In the serenth year of his reign Xerxes 

retomed defeated from Greece, and consoled 

Wawlf by the pleasures of the harem (Herod. 

ii. 108); in the serenth year of bis reign " fair 

jvaz Tirgins were sought" for Ahasnerus, 

Slid he replaced Vashti by marrying Esther. 

The tribute he " laid upon the land and upon 

the isles of the sea " (Esth. x. 1) may well have 

been the result of the expenditure and ruin of 

tbe Grecian expedition. Throughout the Book 

cf Esther in the LXX. 'A(>Ta(^p{>)t is written for 

Ahasnerus, bnt on this no argument of weight 

ta be founded. [G. E. L. C] [K.] 

ABAVA (KinK : in Exra [2 Esd.] viu. 15, B. 
£M(/^ A zitl ; in tizra viii. 21, A. 'Aov^, B. eov4; 
i» Ewa viu. 31, B. 'Aqyi, AB.*"* Bov* : Ahavd), a 
pUce (£ir» viii, 15), or a river ("iru, viii. 25), on 
the hanks of which Ezra collected the second ex- 
(olrtion which returned with him from Babylon to 
JeraJilem. Various have been the conjectures as 
t< its locality : «.</. Adiaba (Ledero and Mannert); 
AWh or Aveh (Havemick, see Winer); the 
'mt Zab (Rosenmaller, £ib. Geogr.). But the 
"iest researches are in favour of its being the 
»Jeni m, on the Euphrates, due east of 
^^'nasms, the name of which is known to have 
^*<^ in the poat-biblical times ]hi, or Ibi da- 
kiMCTalm. HTpi KTI'), "the spring of bitu- 
Qm." See Rawlinson's Ilerodotia, i. 316, note. 

h the apocryphal Esdras (1 Esd. viii. 41, 61) 
tlie name ij given 9*pi.t [B. omits in v. 41]; 
n«. Josephus (^Ant. xi. 5, § 2) merely says 
'viiriftrtavtiK^piTOV. [G.] [W.] 

A'HAZ (THK, postessor ; perhaps an abridge- 
"ot or alteration of Jehoahaz, the Jaubazi of the 
woiptiona [Schrader, KA T* p. 263] :'B. 'Axif 
«*l"Ax<U, A. -Axif"!"* 'Axorff ; Joseph. "Ax^ftt : 



Achat\ eleventh king of Judah and son of Jo- 
tham, ascended the throne in the twentieth year 
of his age, according to 2 K. xvi. 2. Bnt 'this 
must be a transcriber's error for the twenty-fifth, 
which number is found in one Hebrew MS., the 
LXX. [Lucian ; BA. have 20], the Peshito, and 
Arabic Version of 2 Ch. xiviii. 1 ; for otherwise 
his son Hezekiah was bom when he was eleven 
years old (so Clinton, Faati Hell., vol. i. p. 318). 
At the time of his accession, Rezin, king of 
Damascus, and Peknh, king of Israel, had recently 
formed a league against Judah, and they pro- 
ceeded to lay siege to Jerusalem, intending to 
place on the throne Ben Tabeal, who was not a 
prince of the royal family of Judah, but probably 
a Syrian soldier of low origin (Gesenius). Upon 
this the great prophet Isaiah, full of zeal for 
God and patriotic loyalty to the house of David, 
hastened to give advice and encouragement to 
Ahaz, and it was probably owing to the spirit of 
energy and religious devotion which he poured 
into his counsels that the allies failed in their 
attack on Jerusalem. Thus much, together with 
anticipations of danger from the Assyrians, and 
a general picture of weakness and unfaithfuluesa 
both in the king and the people, we find in tbe 
famous prophecies of the 7th, 8th, and 9th 
chapters of Isniah, in which he seeks to animate 
and support them by the promise of the Messiah, 
From 2 Ch, xxviii. we learn that tbe allies took 
a vast number of captives, who, however, were 
restored in virtue of the remonstrances of the 
prophet Oded; and from 2 K. xvi. that they 
also inflicted a most severe injury on Judah by 
the capture of Elath, a flourishing port on the 
Bed Sea, in which, after expelling tbe Jews, they 
re-established the Edomitca (according to Keri 
of 2 K. xvi, 6, Onp^TK ['Woi./uuo. and Vulg.], 
Further Ewald, Thenins, Stade, Edersheim, &c, 
conjecture 0*1^^ for D^K?), who attacked and 

wasted the east part of Judah, while the 
Philistines invaded the west and south. The 
weak-minded and helpless Ahaz sought deliver- 
ance from these numerous troubles by appealing 
to Tiglath-pileser, king of Assyria, who freed 
him from his most formidable enemies by in- 
vading Syria, taking Damascus, killing Rezin, 
and depriving Israel of its Northern and Trans- 
joitlanic districts, Bnt Ahaz had to pur- 
chase this help at a costly price : he became 
tributary to Tiglath-pileser (so the Inscriptions, 
in which Ahaz =Jahunazi; see Schroder, KAT.* 
p, 263), sent him all the treasures of the Temple 
and of his own palace, and even appeared before 
him in Damascus as a vassal. He also ventured 
to seek for safety in heathen ceremonies (2 K. 
xvi. 3, 4); making his son pnss through the 
fire to Molocb, consulting wizards and necro- 
mancers (Is, viii. 19), sacrificing to the Syrian 
gods, introducing a foreign altar from Damascus, 
and probably the worship of the heavenly bodies 
from Assyria and Babylon, as he would seem to 
have set up the horses of the sun mentioned in 
2 K. xziii. II (cf. T«c. Ann. xii. 13); and "the 
altars on the top (or roof) of the upper chamber 
of Ahaz "(2 K. xxiii. 12) were connected with 
the Assyrian adoration of the stars. We see 
another and blameless resnlt of this intercourse 
with an astronomical people in the "sundial of 
Ahaz," Is, xxxviii, 8, He died after a reign of 
sixteen yean, lasting according to some B,0< 

Digitized by 




735-715, according to others B.C. 735 or 4-728. 
See CuROSOiiOor ; Drirer, Itaiah, his Life and 
Times, pp. 13, 14 ; Herzog, £E.' Zeitrechnung, 
p. 477. [G. E.L.C.] [F.] 

8. A (on of Micah, the grandson of Jonathan 
through Heribbaal or Mephibosheth (1 €h. riii. 
35, 36 [B. ZiK, A. XaiQ, ii. 42 [B. 'AxiC 
A.X«<t6- [W.A.W.] [K.] 

AHAZI'AH (n^'trWi- injtriK, whom Jeho- 
vah susUiina ; B. 'dxoittat, A. -i- ; Ochotiai). 
1. Son of Ahab and Jezebel, and eighth king ot' 
Israel. After the battle of Kanioth in Gilead 
[Ahab] the Syrians had the command of the 
country along the east of Jordan, and they cut 
off all commnnication between the Israelites and 
Hoabites, so that Mesiia, the vassal king of 
Jloab, refused his yearly tribute of 100,000 
lambs and 100,000 rams with their wool (2 K. 
iii. 4, 5 ; cp. Is. xri. 1), and " rebelled agninat 
the king of Israel." [On the war between Israel 
and Moab, and the supplement to the Biblical 
account furnished by " the Moabite stone," see 
Sayce, Fresh Light from the ATtcicnt Monwitcnts, 
p. 76, &c.] Before Ahaziah could take measures 
for enforcing his claim, he was seriously injured 
by a Ml through a lattice in his palace at 
Samaria. In his health he had worshipped his 
mother's gods, and now he sent to inquire of the 
oracle of Baalzebub in the Philistine city of 
Ekron whether he should recover his health. 
But Klijah, who now for the last time exercised 
the prophetic office, rebuked him for this im- 
piety, and announced to him his approaching 
death. He reigned two years ; the date being 
dependent upon that adopted for the death of 
Ahab. The only other recorded transaction of 
his reign, his endeavour to join the king of 
Judah in trading to Ophir, is more fitly related 
under jEHoeuAPBAT (1 K. ixii. 50 IT. ; 2 K. i. ; 
2 Ch. IX. 35 ff.). 

8. Fifth king of Judah, son of Jchoram and 
Atbaliah, daughter of Ahab, and therefore 
nephew of the preceding Ahaziah. He is called 
Azariah (2 Ch. xxii. 6), probably by a copyist's 
error, and Jehoahaz (2Ch. xxi. 17), which is the 
same name as Ahaziah, the two words of which 
they are compounded being reversed. Ewald 
{Qeschiohte des V^olhes Israel, iii. p. 525) thinks 
that his name was changed to Ahaziah on his 
accession, but the LXX. read 'OxoC><u for Je- 
hoahaz, and with this agree the Peshito, Chald., 
and Arabic So, too, while in 2 K. viii. 26 we 
read that he was 22 years old at his accession, 
we find in 2 Ob. xxii. 2 that his age at that 
time was 42. The former number is certainly 
right, as in 2 Ch. xxi. 5, 20, we see that his 
father Jehoram was 40 when he died, which 
would make him younger than his own son. The 
LXX. of 2 Ch. xxii. 2 reads 20. Ahaziah was an 
idolater, " walking in all the ways of the house of 
Ahab," and he allied himself with his uncle Jeho- 
ram, king of Israel, brother and successor of 
the preceding Ahaziah, against Hazael, the new 
king of Syria. The two kings were successful at 
Ramoth (cp. 2 K. ix. 14), though Jehoram was so 
severely wounded that he retired to his mother's 
palace at Jezreel to be healed. The union be- 
tween the uncle and nephew was so close that 
there was great danger lest heathenism should 
entirely overspread both the Hebrew kingdoms, 
but this was prevented by the great revolution 


carried out in Israel by Jehu under the gaidance 
of Elisha, which involved the house of David io 
calamities only less severe than those which 
exterminated the house of Omri. It broke ont 
while Ahaziah was visiting his uncle at Jezrtel. 
As Jehu approached the town, Jehoram aad 
Ahaziah went out to meet him, either from sot 
suspecting his designs, or to prevent them. 
Jehn's arrow pierced the heart of the former. 
Ahaziah was pursued as far as the pass of Gnr, 
near the city of Ibleam, and there mortally 
wounded. He died when he reached Megiddo. 
But in 2 Ch. xxii. 9 it is said that he was found 
hidden in Samaria after the death of Jehoram, 
brought to Jehu, and killed by his orders. At- 
tempts to reconcile these accounts may be fouinl 
in Pole's Synopsis; in Lightfoot's Harm. <f Oli 
Test, (in loc); in Davidson's Text of the Old 
Test., part ii. book ii. ch. xiv. ; in Edersheim, 
Hist, of Jtidah and Israel, vi. 201, and itt the 
American edition of this work, where Dr. Hacl[ett 
considers the two accounts to be at once (ng- 
mentary and supplementary. Ahaziah reignri 
one year, B.C. 884 (Klostermann, 875 ; Hommel, 
842), called the 12th of Jehoram, king of Isntl, 
2 K. viii. 25 ; the lltb, 2 K. ix. 29. His father, 
therefore, must have died before the 11th year 
of Jehoram was concluded (Clinton, Fasti BtU., 
i. p. 324). [Q. E. L. C] [F.] 

AH'BAN (pnK, meaning uncertain [Nestle, 
Israelii. Eigetmanien, p. 187, n. 1], Ges.=broOitr 
of the prudent ; B. 'Axa$ip, A. 'Oii ; AhoUm). 
Sun of Abishur, by his wife Abihail (1 Ch. ii 29). 
He was of the tribe of Judah. [ W. A. W.] [f .] 

A'llEB (nOK, anoVicr; B. 'A«>, A. 'Aip; 
Aher). Ancestor of Hushim, or rather "the 
Hushim," as the plural form seems to indicate a 
family rather than an individual. The niuiu 
occurs in an obscure passage in the genealogr 
of Benjamin (1 Ch. vii. 12). Some transistor* 
consider it as not a proper name at all, toi 
render it literally " another," because, as Rasbi 
says, Ezra, who compiled the genealogy, was 
uncertain whether the families belonged to th« j 
tribe of Benjamin or not. It is not improbable J 
that Ahtr and Ahiram (Num. xxvi. 38) are the , 
same ; unless the former belonged to the tribe 
of Dan, whose genealogy is omitted in 1 Ch. vil : 
Hushim being a Danite as jvell as a Benjamite 
name. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHT OWi hrotlier; Ges. and Olshausen 
\_Lehrb. p. 615] contracted from iVVHt [cp. Re- 
nan, DesXomstheophores apocope in 'Revue des 
Etudes Juives,' v, 169]). 1. .\ Gadite, chief 
of a family who lived in Gilead in Basban (I Ch. 
V. 15), in the days of Jotbam, king of Judah. 
Some texts of the Greek Version and the Volgatc 
did not consider the word a proper name. Heace 
the reading iSt\^v, T.', fratres. A. takes the 
last name of r. 14 (T)3) and the first name of 
c. 15 (*nK) of the Heb. text, and makes the 
name 'Ax'^o^C ^7 reversing the Heb. order. The 
reading of B. Zafiottxilt >' not so readily ex- 
plained. 8. B. 'Axiovii, A. 'Ax<«vp<' ; •^**- * 
descendant of Shamer, of the tribe of Asher (1 Ch. 
vii. 34). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHI'AH. [AuuAH.] 

AHI'AM (DK^riK, meaning obscor*, OU- 

Digitized by 



ItDsen, Lehrh. p. 620 ; Gesenina (2^«.) takes it 
is i Sam. u a vrong rending for 3t^*nM, father') 
bnHer : 'Afirir in 2 Sam. ; B. 'Axflfi, A. 'Axickft 
ia 1 Ch. : AUam), <on of Sharer the Hararite (or 
of Sacar, I Ch. xi. 35), one of DaTid's thirtv 
mighty men (2 Sam. xiiii. 33). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHI'AN (pntt, Gei. = brotierly, comparing 

Syr. !»• v^ ; B. 'laatlfi, A.'Aefy; Ahiti), a 
Maaassite of the family of Shemida (1 Ch. 
vii.19). [W.A. W.] [F.] 

AHI'EZEB (1W«nK, brother of help, or my 
hnther is kelp ; 'Kx'iC*f > Ahkzer). 1. Son of 
.^mmishaddai, hereditary chieftain of the tribe 
of Dan under the administration of Moses (Num. 
1.12; ii. 25; rii. 66, 71; x. 25). 2. The Ben- 
jamite chief of a body of archers at the time of 
DaTid(lCh.xii.3). [R.W.B.] [F.] 

AHI'HUD (y^TVtyA^brother of majesty, or 
my brother is majesty ; B. 'Axuip, A. 'Ax«ij3 ; 
JJUAwl). 1. The son of Shelomi, and prince 
of the tribe of Asber, selected to a.ssist Joshua 
and Eleazar in the division of the Promised Land 
(Sum. Miir. 27). 8. in'riK, probably an 
error for "Bn'nit, cp. Olshausen, Lehrb. p. 615, 
MV." t n. ; B. 'loxetX'^A, A. 'loxiX<" ; Ahiud), 
a chief of the tribe of Benjamin (1 Ch. viii. 
7). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

AHl'JAH, or AHI'AH (njriK and injntjt, 
hnther of Jah [Ges.] or my brother is Jah [Ols- 
bagseo, MV.^J. Cp. the Phoenician parallels in 
N'estle, Israel. Eigennamen, p. 186; Schroeder, 
PhoeMC. Gram. p. 87: 'Ax««; AcAiiis). 1. Son 
of Ahitub, Ichabod'a brother, the son of Phi- 
nehas, the son '>f Eli (1 Sam. xir. 3, 18). He 
ns the Lord's priest in Sbiloh : the ark of God 
was under his care, and he inquired of the Lord 
by meant of it and the ephod (cp. 1 Ch. xlii. 3). 
Thert is, however, great difHcalty in reconciling 
the statement (1 Saui. xiv. 18) that the ark was 
tK«i for inquiring by .\hijah at Saul's bidding, 
and the statement that men inquired not at the 
ark in the days of Saul, if the latter expression be 
taken strictly. This difficulty is removed by the 
reading of LXX. B. rb i^o{iS, in 1 Sam. xiv. 18, 
instead of " the ark " ; aud most modern critics 
(qL Speaker's Comm. 1. c.) accept this reading in 
pR&rence to that of the Hebretr. Josephus also 
notes that Saul bade the priest take (not the ark 
Hat) " the garments of his priesthood " and pro- 
phesy (Antiq. ri. 6, § 3). Others, however, still 
prefer to meet the difficulty by applying the 
eipreaaon ** the days of Sanl " only to all the 
litter years of the reign of Saul, when the 
priestly establishment was at Nob, and not at 
iorjatb-jearim or Baale of Judah, where the ark 
ni. On this supposition the narrative in 1 Sam. 
UT. may be taken as favourable to the men- 
tion of the ark. For it appears that Saul 
ns at the time in Gibeah of Benjamin, and 
Gibeah of Benjamin seems to have been the 
pUc< where the house of Abinadab was situated 
(2 Sam. ri. 3), being probably the Benjamite 
qurter of Kirjath-jearim, which lay on the 
nry borders of Judah and Benjamin (see 
Josh. iriiL 14, 28). Whether it was the en- 
'Xochmenta of the Philistines, or an incipient 
Khitm between the tribes of Benjamin and 
Jidah, or any other cause, which led to the dis- 



use of the ark during the later years of Saul's 
reign, is difficult to say. But probably the last 
time that Ahijah inquired of the Lord before 
the ark was on the occasion related 1 Sam. xiv. 
36, when Saul marred bis victory over the 
Philistines by his rash oath, which nearly cost 
Jonathan his life. For we there read that when 
Saul proposed a nigbt-pursuit of the Philistines, 
the priest, Ahijah, said, " Let us draw near 
hither unto God ; " for the purpose, namely, of 
asking counsel of God. But God returned no 
answer, in consequence, as it seems, of Saul's 
rash curse. If, as is commonly thought, and as 
seems most likely, Ahijah is the same person as 
Ahimelech the son of .^hitub, this failure to 
obtain an answer from the priest, followed as it 
was by a rising of the jieople to save Jonathan 
out of Saul's hands, may have led to an 
estrangement between the king and the high- 
priest, and predisposed him to suspect Ahime- 
lech's loyalty, and to take that terrible revenge 
upon him for his favour to David. Such changes 
of name as Ahi-melech and .\hi-jah are not un- 
common (see Genealogies, &c., pp. 115-118); or 
it is not impossible that, as Gesenius supposes, 
Ahimelech may have been brother to Ahijah. 

a. B. 'Axe'a, A. 'Axfo ; Achia. Son of Bela 
(1 Cb. viii. 7); thought to be the same as 
Ahoab (1 Cb. viii. 4, B. 'Axti, A. omits). 

a Son of Jerobmeel (I Ch. ii. 25; LXX. 
iifK^s ttirrov ; Achid). 

4. Ahia. One of David's mighty men, a 
PeloniU (1 Ch. xi. 36). 

6. LXX. iSt\^\ avTuy; Ahias. A Levite iu 
David's reign who was over the treasures of the 
house of God, and over the treasures of the 
dedicated things (1 Ch. xxvi. 20). 

6. Ahia. One of Solomon's princes, brother 
of Elihoreph, and son of Shisha (1 K. iv. 3). 

7. ^Aidj. A Prophet of Shiloh (1 K. xiv. 2), 
hence called the Shilonite (xi. 29), in the days 
of Solomon and of Jeroboam king of Israel, of 
whom we have two remarkable prophecies 
extant: the one in 1 K. xi. 31-39, addressed to 
Jeroboam, announcing the rending of the ten 
tribes from Solomon, in punishment of his 
idolatries, and the transfer of the kingdom to 
Jeroboam : a prophecy which, though delivered 
privately, became known to Solomon, and ex- 
cited his wrath against Jeroboam, who fled for 
his life into Egypt, to Shishak, and remained 
there till Solomon's death. The other prophecy, 
in 1 K. xiv. 6-16, was delivered in the Prophet's 
extreme old age to Jeroboam's wife, in which he 
foretold the death of Abijah, the king's son, 
who was sick, and to inquire concerning whom 
the queen had come in disguise. He then went 
on to denounce the destruction of Jeroboam's 
house on account of the images which he bad 
set up, and to foretell the Captivity of Israel 
" beyond the river " Euphrates. These prophe- 
cies give us a high idea of the faithfulness and 
boldness of Ahijah, and of the eminent rank 
which be attained as a Prophet. Jeroboam's 
speech concerning him (1 K. xiv. 2, 3) shows 
the estimation In which he held him for his 
truthfulness and prophetic (wwers. In 2 Ch. 
ix. 29 reference is made to a record of the events 
of Solomon's reign contained in the " prophecy 
of Ahijah the Shilonite," If there were a larger 
work of Ahijah's, the passage in 1 K. xL may 
be based upon it. 

Digitized by 




8. Ahia$. Father of Baashx, king of Israel, 
the contemporarj of Asa. king of Jmlah. He 
wai of the tribe of Issachar (1 K, xT. 27, 33, 
«i. 22; 2K. is. 9). [A. C. H.l 

9. HA. 'Ala, B. 'Afm; Echaia. One of the 
heads of the people who sealed the covenant with 
Nehemiah (Neh. X. 26). [W. A. W.] [K.] 

AHITKAM (D|Tn«, MV." = my brother up- 
lifts himself, or rises up ; cp. Olshausen, Lc/irb. p. 
620 : 'Ax'xin, B. -ci- ; Ahicim), a son of Shaphan 
the scribe, an influential officer at the conrt of 
Josiab (2 K. xxii. 12) and of Jehoiakim his son 
(Jcr. xxvi. 24). When Shaphan brought the book 
of the Law to Josiah, which Hilkiah the high- 
priest had found in the Temple, Ahikam was sent 
hj the king, together with four other delegates, 
to consult Uulilah the prophetess on the subject. 
In the reign of Jehoiakim, when the priests and 
prophets arraigned Jeremiah before the princes 
of judah on account of his bold denunciations 
of the national sins, Ahikam successfully used 
his influence to protect the Prophet. His son 
Gedaliah was m.ide goTemor of Judah by Nebu- 
chadnezzar, the Chaldean king, and to his charge 
Jeremiah was entrusted when released from 
prison (Jer. xxxii. 14, xl. 5). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

AHI'LUD O'^*"*?. meaning doubtful ; ac- 
cording to Gesen. [ Thes.'] = brother of the bom. 
The readings of the Greek texts are very varied. 
In 2 Sam. viii. 16, B. 'Axt'i, A. 'Ax</»*^*Xi '" 
2 Sam. IX. 24, "AxiCB -«i->oM ; in 1 K. iv. 3, 
B. 'AxciAiiiS, A. 'Ax>j»<(; in 1 Ch. xviii. 15, 
B. 'Ax<«^ A. 'Ax'Aoiit : Ahilud). 1. Father of 
Jehoshaphat, the recorder or chronicler of the 
kingdom in the reigns of David and Salomon. 

2. B. 'Axu/Ux, A. 'EKovS. The father of 
Baana, one of Solomon's twelve commissariat 
officers (1 K. iv. 12). It is uncertain whether 
he is the same as No. 1. [W. A. W.] [P.] 

AHIIIAAZ OTO'riK, Ges., from the Arabic, 
=brother of anger; A. 'Axitiia, B. 'Ax«>^t ; 
Achimaas). 1. Father of Saul's wife, Ahinoam 
(I Sam. xiv. 50). 

2. B. 'Ax'ifflas, A. 'Ax<M<^'> Achimaas. 
Son of Zadok, the priest in David's reign. 
When David fled from Jerusalem on account 
of Absalom's rebellion, Zadok and Abiathar, 
accompanied by their sons, Ahimaaz and Jona- 
than, and the Levites, carried the ark of God 
forth, intending to accompany the king. But 
at his bidding they returned to the city, as did 
likewise Hushai the Archite (2 Sam. xv. 24, &c.). 
It was then arranged that Hushai should feis^ 
himself to be a friend of Absalom, and should 
tell Zadok and Abiathar whatever intelligence 
he could obtain in the palace. They, on their 
parts, were to forward the intelligence through 
Ahimaaz and Jonathan. Accordingly Jonathan 
and Ahimaaz stayed outside the walls of the 
city at £n-rogel, on the road towards the plain 
(2 Sam. xvii. 17). A message soon came to them 
from Zadok and Abiathar through the maid- 
servant, to say that Ahithophel had counselled 
an immediate attack against David and his 
followers, and that, consequently, the king 
must cross the Jordan without the least delay. 
They started at once on their errand, but not 
without being suspected, for a lad seeing the 
maid speak to them, and seeing them immedi- 
ately run off quickly — and Ahimnaz, we know. 


was a practised mnner — went and told Abulom, 
who ordered a hot pursuit. In the meantime, 
however, they had ffot as far as Bahurim, the 
very place where Shimei cursed David ('2 Soni. 
xvi. 5), to the house of a steadfast partisan ot' 
David. Here the woman of the house effec- 
tually hid them in a well in the courtyard, and 
covered the well's mouth with ground or 
bruised corn. Absalom's servants coming up 
searched for them in vain ; and as soon as they 
had gone and returned on the road to Jem- 
salem, Ahimaaz and Jonathan hasted on ti> 
David, and told him Abithophel's oonnsel, aid 
David with his whole company crossed the Jor- 
dan that very night. Ahithophel was so morti- 
fied at seeing the failure of his scheme, threugh 
the unwise delay in executing it, that he west 
home and hanged himself. This signal service 
rendered to David, at the hazard of his lift, by 
Ahimaaz, must have tended to ingratiate him 
with the king. We have a proof how higlily 
he was esteemed by him, as well as an honour- 
able testimony to his character, in the sayine of 
David recorded in 2 Sam. xviii. 27. For wmd 
the watchman announced the approach of t 
messenger, and added, that his running was lib 
the running of Ahimaaz, the son of- Zadok, the 
king said, " He is a good man, and cometh with 
good tidings." 

The same transaction gives us a very curioui 
specimen of the manners of the times, and > 
singular instance of Oriental or Jewish craft in 
Ahimaaz. For we learn, first, that Ahimaai 
was n professed runner — and a very swift one 
too — which one would hardly have expected in 
the son of the high-priest. It belongs, how- 
ever, to a simple state of society that bodilr 
powers of any kind should be highly valued, 
and exercised by the possessor of them in the 
most natural way. Ahimaaz was probably 
naturally swift, and so became famous for his 
running (2 Sam. xviii. 27). So we are told of 
Asahel, Joab's brother, that " he was as light of 
foot as a wild roe" (2 Sam. ii. 18). And that 
quick running was not deemed inconsistent with 
the utmost dignity and gravity of character 
appears from what we read of Llijah the Tish- 
bite, that " he girded up his loins and ran before 
Ahab (who was in his chariot) to the entrance 
of Jezreel " (1 K. xviii. 46). The kings of 
Israel had running footmen to precede them 
when they went in their chariots (2 Sara. xv. 1 ; 
1 K. i. 5), and their guards were called 0"^ 

"runners." It appears by 2 Ch. xxx. 6, 10, thst 
in Hezekiah's reign there was an establishment 
of running messengers, who were also called 
D^y^. The same name is given to the Persian 
posts in Esth. iii. 13, 15; viii. 14: though it 
appears from the latter passage that in the time 
of Xerxes the service was performed with mules 
and camels. The Greek name, borrowed from 
the Persian, was ir/yofOi. As regards Ahimaaz's 
craftiness we read that, when Absalom was 
killed by Joab and his armour-bearers, Ahimaaz 
was very urgent with Joab to be employed as 
the messenger to run and carry the tidings to 
David. The politic Joab, well knowing the 
king's fond partiality for Absalom, and that the 
news of bis death would be anything but good 
news to him, and apparently having a friendly 
feeling towai-ds Ahimaaz, would not allow him 

Digitized \yj 



to be tJw bearer of saeh tidings, bat employed 
Ciulii ioitead. But after Ciuhi iud started, 
AliiDtai was so urgent with Joab to be allowed 
to ron too that at length he extorted his con- 
aent Taking a shorter or an easier way by the 
plain, he managed to outmn Coshi before he got 
in tight of the watch-tower, and, arriving first, 
he reported to the king the good news of the 
rictory, soppressing his knowledge of Abaalom's 
death, and leaving to Coshi the task of an- 
Donncing it He had thus the merit of bring- 
ing good tidings without the alloy of the disaster 
of the death of the king's sen. This is the last 
we hear of Ahimaaz, for the Ahimaaz of 1 K. 
ir. 1&, who was Solomon's captain in Naphtali, 
w« certainly n different person (3). There is no 
eridoice, beyond the assertion oi' Josephos, that 
Ahimaaz ever filled the olGce of high-priest ; 
and Josephos may have concluded that he did, 
merely because, in the genealogy of the high* 
priests (1 Ch. vi. 8, 9), he intervenes between 
Ztdok and Azariah. Judging only from 1 K. 
ir. 2, compared with 1 Cb. vi. 10, we should 
conclnde that Ahimaaz died before his father 
Zadok, and that Zadok was succeeded by his 
grtndson Atariah. Josephus's statement that 
Zadoh was the first high-priest of Solomon's 
Temple, seeing the Temple was not finished till 
the eleventh year of his reign, is a highly im- 
protaUe one in itself. The statement of the 
Seder 01am, which makes Ahimaaz high-priest 
in Rehoboam's reign, is still more so. It is 
safer, therefore, to follow the indications of the 
Script&re narrative, though somewhat obscured 
by the apparently corrupted passages, 1 K. iv. 
4 and 1 Ch. vi. 9, 10, and conclude that Ahi- 
maaz died before he attained the high-priesthood, 
leaving as his heir his son Azariah. 

8. B. 'AxetC-^. -i-)ftd«. Solomon's officer in 
Naphtali, charged with providing victuals for 
the king and his honsehold for one month in the 
year. Probably of the tribe of Naphtali, he 
was the king's son-in-law, having married his 
daaghter Basmath (1 K. iv. 7, 15). [A. C. H.] 

AmilAN (IP^nK, of doubtful meaning; 
perhaps [if Han be the name of a divinity] = 
bntJur of Man: in Num. F. 'Kxiitir, B. "Ax*"- 
/kU, a. "Axuid/i ; in Judg. B. 'Kxumi», B"-«. 
'Ax<M<^, A. 'AxMUi^: Achiman). 1. One of 
the three giant Anakim who inhabited Mount 
Hebron (Num. ziii. 22, 23), seen by Caleb and 
the spies. The whole race were cut off by 
Joshua (Josh. xL 21), and the three brothers 
were slain by the tribe of Judah (Jodg. i. 10). 
[R. W. B.] [F.] 

8. B. AifUii, A. Ai^utr; Ahimam. One of the 
porters or gate-keepers, who had charge of the 
king's gate for the " camps " of the sons of Levi 
(1 Ch. iz. 17). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHIICELECH Ol^'rWt, brother of the 
itsj; A. 'AxiM^AeK, B. 'A^d/ii^Aex ; Achimekch). 
X. Son of Ahitub (1 Sam. xxii. 12), and high- 
wiest at Nob in the days of Saul. He gave 
band the shewbread and the sword of Goliath ; 
•ad for so doing was, upon the accusation of Doeg 
the Edomite, put to death with his whole house 
by Sasl's order. Eighty-five priests wearing 
•> ephod were thus cmelly slaughtered ; Abia- 
thar alone escaped [Abiatuab]. The LXX. 
teadi tkrte hundred and five taen, thus affording 
Bother instance of the frequent clerical errors 



in transcribing numbers of which Ezra ii. com- 
pared with Meh. vii. is a remarkable example. 
The interchange of D^jb^, or nUbK*, with 

0>\i;/ff and &7V, is very common. For the 
question of Ahimelech's identity with Ahijah, 
see Ahijah. For the confusion between Ahime- 
lech and Abiathar in the First Book of Chronicles 
(xziv. 3, 6, 31), see Abiathar. 

3. One of David's companions while he was 
persecuted by Saul, a Hittite ; called in the 
ii. of 1 Sam. xxri. 6, 'A/3ci/u<Xcx> and A. 'A/3i- 
(but B*. 'Ax<i-) ; which is perhaps the right 
reading, after the analogy of Abimelech, king of 

Gerar. In the title of Ps. xxxiv. IJ/^^^K seems 
to be an error for l^3H, due possibly to a lapse 
of memory [S. R. D.]. 'See 1 Sam. xxi. 13 (r. 12 
in A. V. ; and Abihilech). [A. C. H.] 

AHI'MOTH (nto'riN, brotlier of death; 
B. 'AXu/M, A. 'OxiM^; Achimoth), a Levite 
of the house of the Korhites, of the fumily of 
the Kohathites, apparently in the time of David 
(1 Ch. vi. 25 [LXX. r. 10]). In ver. 35, for 
Ahimoth we find Mahath (DHD), B. H4e, A. 
Mcuitf (as in Luke iii. 26). For a correction of 
these genealogies, see Ocnealogiee of our Lord, 
p. 214, note. [A. C. H.] 

AHI'NADAB (a"J3»n«, Ge8.=noW<! brother, 
MV." = my brother is noble ; B. 'Axewoct/S, 
A. Ahatifi ; AhituMb), son of Iddo, one of 
Solomon's twelve commissaries who supplied 
provisions for the royal household. The district 
entrusted to Ahioadab wns that of Mahanaim, 
sitnated on the east of the Jordan (IK. iv- 
U). [K. W. B.] [F.] 

AHI'NOAM (D»3*nK, Gti.=brother of grace, 
MV." = my brother it grace; B. 'Kxmoiix, A. 
'Ax«>w^M; Aehinoam). 1. Daughter of Ahi 
maaz and wife of Saul (1 Sam, xiv. 50). 

2. B. 'Ax*iyd€u>(l Sam. xxv. 43X -o/i (1 Sam. 
xxvii. 3; 1 Ch. iii. 1), -ytfo/t (1 Sam. xxx. 5; 
2 Sara. iii. 2), 'Ax'vdo^ (2 Sam. ii. 2) ; A. usually 
'AximtoM (in 2 Sam. ii. 2, same as B.) : Aehi- 
noam. A woman of Jezreel. If the masculine 
sense given to tho name (see Ges. above) be re- 
tained, a similar use is found in Abigail, father 
of joy. Ahinoam was married to David during 
his wandering life (1 Sam. xxv. 43), lived with 
him and his other wife Abigail at the court of 
Achish (xxvii. 3), was taken prisoner with her 
by the Amalekites when they plundered Ziklag 
(xxx. 5), but was rescued by David (18). She 
is again mentioned as living with him when 
king of Judah in Hebron (2 Sam. ii. 2), and 
as the mother of his eldest son Amnon (iii. 2 ; 
lCh.iii. 1). [G. E.L.C.] [F.] 

AHI'O (^'riK; oj iSfXipol cunov: Ahio, 
2 Sam. vi. 3, 4; f rater ejus, 1 Ch. xiii. 7). 1. 
One of the two'sons of Abinadab who accom- 
panied the ark when it was brought out of their 
father's house at Gibeah. 

a. ^^HK; B. iite\(phs ainoS, A. ol iStXipol 
oirav; Ahio. A Benjamite, one of the sons of 
Berioh, w'ho drove out the inhabitants of Oath 
(1 Ch. viii. 14). 

3. A Benjamite, son of Jehiel, father or 
foonder of Gibeon (1 Ch. viii. 31, ix. 37). In 

Digitized by 




both places B. has UtfK^is, and A. (supported in 
the second by K) iSt\<t>oL [W. A. W.] [K.] 

AHI'BA (Vy'n«,Ges.=brotherof evil, MV.'» 
= my brother is evil ; AF. [nsually] 'Ax'p^, 
B. -«-; ^Aira), chief of the tribe of Naphtali 
when Moses toolc the census in the year after 
the Exodus (Num. i. 15; ii. 29; vii. 78, 83; 
X.27). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

AHI'EAM (DTHK ; MV.» = my brother is 
exalted [cp. Olshausen, Zehri. p. 620] ; B. 
'lax'ip^, A. -1-, F. 'Ax«'»'; Ahiram), son of 
Benjamin (Num. xxri. 38 [LXX. v. 42]X called 
£hi in Gen. xlvi. 21, Abarah in 1 Cb. viii. 1, 
perhaps the same as AllCB. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

'lax'tpcwtl, F. 'Axumti, A. 'Axifw; Ahira- 
mitae). One of the branches of the tribe of 
Benjamin, descendants of Ahiram (Num. xxvi. 
38, LXX. V. i2). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHI'SAMACH (lOD'nK, MV.»=my bro- 
ther tupporta ; 'Axurojiulx « Achiaamech). A 
Danite, father of Aboliab, one of the architects 
of the tabernacle (Ex. xxxi. 6 ; xxxv. .34 [AF. -ox. 
B. -o«]; xxxviil. 23 [LXX. xxxvii. 21, AF. -ax, 
B.-«]). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHI'SHAHAB (y;lf>m,Gn. = brother of 
the dawn, MV." and Olshausen = my brother is 
the damn ; B. 'Axc«rii}ap, A. 'Axifiap i Ahiaa- 
her). One of the sons of Bilhan, the grandson 
ofBenjamin(lCh. vn. 10). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHI'TOPHEL (^^h'rW, of uncertain mean- 
ing, apparently = brother of folly [Gea.] ; A. 
'Ax'T^fX, B. -CI-, Joseph. 'Ax<T<f^<Ao> ; Achit- 
ophel), a native of Giloh, in the hill-country of 
Judah (Josh. xv. 51), and privy councillor of 
David, whose wisdom was so highly esteemed 
that his advice had the authority of a divine 
oracle, though his name (according to Geseuius) 
had an exactly opposite signification (2 Sam. 
xvi. 23). He was the grandfather of Bath- 
sheba (comp. 2 Sam. xi. 3 with xxiii. 34), and 
it was her fall which influenced him to join 
in the rebellion of Absalom. She is called 

daughter of Ammiel in 1 Ch. iii. 5 ; but 7{{*I3V 

is probably only the anagram of DIT?^ (see 
Klostermann, Kgf. Komm. in 'i Sam. xi. 3). 
Absalom as soon as he had revolted sent for him, 
and, when David heard that Ahitophel had joined 
the conspiracy, he prayed Jehovah to turn his 
counsel to foolishness (xv. 31), alluding possibly 
to the signification of his name. David's grief 
at the treachery of his confidential friend found 
expression in the Messianic prophecies (Ps. xli. 
2 ; Iv. 12-14). 

In order to show to the people that the breach 
between Absalom and bis father was irreparable, 
Ahitophel persuaded him to take possession of 
the royal harem (2 Sam. xvi. ,21). David, in 
order to counteract his counsel, sent Hushai to 
Absalom. Ahitophel had recommended an imme- 
diate pursuit of David ; but Hushai advised 
delay, his object being to send intelligence to 
David, and to give him time to collect his forces 
for a decisive engagement. When Ahitophel 
saw that Hushai's advice prevailed, he despaired 
of success, and returning to bis own home " put 
his honsehold in order and hung himself" (xyii. 


1-23). This is the only case of suicide men- 
tioned in the Old Testament (except in war), as 
that of Judas is the only case in the New Testa- 
ment. The Talmud ranks him and Balsam 
together as instances of men whose " wisdom " 
not being "the gift of heaven" led them to 
destruction. (Hambiirger, RE., s. n.; Joseph. 
Ant. vii. 9, § 8; Niemeyer, Charakt. iv. 454; 
Ewald, Qetchich. ii. 652.) [R. W. B.] [F.] 

AHI'TUB (31tD»rW, brother of goodnen; B. 
'Ax<iT<iA A. -«- ; ^eAito6). 1. Father of Ahi- 
melecb, or Ahijah, son of Phinebas, and elder 
brother of Ichabod (1 Sam. xiv. 3 ; xxii. 9, 11), and 
therefore of the house of Eli and the family of 
Ithamar. There is no record of his high-priat- 
hood, which, if he ever was high-priest, must 
have coincided with the eai'ly days of Samuel's 

2. B. 'Ax«T(a)3, A. -1-. Son of Amariah, and 
father of Zadok the high-priest (1 Ch. vi. 7, 8; 
2 Siim. viii. 17), of the house of Cleazar. From 
1 Ch. ix. 11, where the genealogy of Azariali. 
the head of one of the priestly families that 
returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel, is 
traced, through Zadok, to "Ahitub, the mlet 
of the house of God," it appears tolerably certain 
that Ahitub was high-priest. And so the LXX. 
Version (B.) unequivocally renders it uiov 'Ax«i- 
Ti>0 iiyoviityou oficov roi; 0<av. The expression 

D»r6sn-n»3 TM is applied to Azariah the 
high-priest in Hezekiah's reign, in 2 Ch. iixi. 
13. The passage is repeated in Neh. xi. II 
[where the name has in the Greek texts several 
variant forms :— T.' AhiiS, BK. 'Air»/Wx, 
A. AirwJS], but the LXX. have spoilt the sense 
by rendering "IJJ ixiyayrt, as if it were IJJ; 
If the line is correctly given in these two 
passages, Ahitub was not the father, but the 
grandfather of Zadok, his father being Meraiotb. 
But in 1 Ch. vi. 8, and in Ezra vii. 2, Ahitub 
is represented as Zadok's father. This uncer- 
tainty makes it diificult to determine the 
exact time of Ahitub's high-priesthood. If he 
was father to Zadok, he must have been high- 
priest with Ahimelech. But if he was grand- 
father, his age would have coincided exactly 
with the other Ahitub, the son of Phinehss. 
Certainly a singular coincidence. 

8. The genealogy of the high-priests in 1 Ch. 
vi. 11, 12, introduces another Ahitub, son of 
another Amariah, and father of another Zadok. 
At p. 287 of the Genealajiea, &c., will be found 
reasons for believing that the second Ahitub and 
Zadok are spurious. [A. C. H.] 

AHliAB (a^nK = fat, fertile place ; AaXi^ ; 
Ach<J<A), a city ot Asher from which the Canaan- 
ites were not driven out (Judg. i. 31). Its 
omission from the list of the towns of Asher, 
in Josh, xix., has led to the suggestion (Ber- 
theau on Judg.) that the name is but a cor- 
ruption of Achshaph; but this appears extrava- 
gant. It is more probable that Ahlab re- 
appears in later history as Gush Chaleb, CHS 

zhn, or Giscala (Reland, 813, 817), a place 
lately identified by Robinson under the abbre- 
viated name of el-Jiah,' near Safed, in the hilly 

• iSWisk, bowever, lies within the territory asalgned 

Digitized bv 



country to the N.W. of the Sea of Galilee (Rob. 
E 446 ; iii. 73). Guh Chaleb was in Rabbini- 
cal times famoos for ita oil (see the citations in 
Relanil, 817), and the old olire-trees still remain 
is the neighbourhood (Rob. iii. 72). From it 
came the famous John, son of I^vi, the leader in 
the siege of Jerusalem (Jos. Vit. § 10 ; B. J. ii. 
21, § 1), and it had a legendary celebrity as the 
birthplace of the parents of no less a person 
than the apostle Paul (Jerome, quoted by 
Reland,813). [G.] [W.] 

AH'LAI ( vriK, of nncertain meaning ; Ges. 
aid Obhansen, Lehrb. p. 610, preserve for it 
the sense «<tiuun / it has in Ps, cxiz. 5 ; B. 
'Axal> A. 'AoSof ; Ohotai), danghter of Sheshan, 
whom he gave in marriage to his ^yptian 
slare Jarha (1 Ch. ii. 31, 35). In consequence 
of the Ciilare to Sheshan of male issue, Ahlai 
became the fonndress of an important branch of 
the family of the Jerahmeelites, and from her 
were descended Zabad, one of David's mighty 
men (1 Ch. xi. 41, B. 'Ax«i, A. 'OKI, K "Axei; 
OAo/i), and Azariah, one of the captains of hun- 
dreds in the reign of Joash (2 Ch. xiiii. 1 ; cp. 
lCh.ii.38). [W. A.W.] [F.] 

AHO'AH (n^DK, in 1 Ch. riii. 7 the name 
is read rPHK, Ahij^ ; 'Axi^ [A. omits] ; Ahoe), 
ton of Bela, the son of Benjamin (1 Ch. riii. 4). 
The patronymic Ahohite (*nnt(, AKMUs) is 
feond in 2 Sam. xxiii. 9 [T.' woT/iaS/A^u], 28 [B. 
'AiM(Ti|f,A.'EA««initJ; 1 Ch. xi. 12 [B. 'Kpxtf 
»ri, M "AxwmI, a. 'Ax*xQ. 29 [K' B. "Ax""'. 
«• 'hmxttni, A. 'hxif]; xivii. 4 [T.' B. U- 
X^A.'A«ef]. [Ehi.] [W. A.W.] [F.] 

AHCyHITE. [Ahoah.] 

A'HOLAH (f^nK, tent; T.' 'OoKi, B. 
'OeAAi, A. 'O\}j!\bolla; R. V. Ohclah), a 
harlot, osed by Ezekiel as the symbol of Samaria 
(Eiek. xxiii. 4, 5, 36, 44). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHOLI'AB (3K*^nK, MV.««=te.<or/anitfy 
<4 the Father; 'tJudfil '(Miab ; K. V. Oholiah), 
a Danite of great skill as a weaver and em- 
broiderer, whom Hoses appointed with Bezaleel 
t« erect the tabernacle (Ex. xiii. 6, xxxv. 30- 
35,iiivi.l,2, ixxviU.22,23). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHOLI'BAH (n3»^nK,MV.»=»A« m whom 
it My tent, for ^3*; Fiint compares rl3*^VBI7' 
SejAxSah : T.' '6oKi0i, A. 'OKtfii ; B. some- 
times 'OX-, sometimes 'OoX- : OoISm ; B. V. Oho- 
AnA), a harlot, used by Ezekiel as the symbol 
of Jerusalem (Ezek. xxiii. 4, 11, 22, 36, 44> 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

AH0LI-BA'MAH(nD3»^rW, MV.» = tent 
of the high place; Ootibama; fi.'v. OholibaTna), 
«ie (probably the second) of the three wives 
of £uu. She was the daughter of Anah, a 
descendant of Seir the Horite ( Gen. xxxvi. 2, 
A. 'OAi^/ut, E. 'OAij3<u/i4iv; v. 25, £. '0\</3<C). 
It is donbtless through this connexion of 
£saa with the original inhabitants of Mount 
Seir that we are to trace the subsequent occu- 
pation of that territory by him and his de- 
scendants, and it is remarkable that each of 
his three sons by this wife is himself the head of 
a tribe, whilst all the tribes of the Edomites 
STirang &om his other two wives are founded by 



his grandsons (Gen. xxxvi. 15-19 [v. 18, A. 
'OKihiiuu and 'EXi-, D. 'O\i0imua and 'EAi- 
fidfutt, G. [second time] 'OXiPtnaJ). In the earlier 
narrative (Gen. ixvi. 34) Aholibamah is called 
Jddith, daughter of Beeri, the Hittite. The 
explanation of the change in the name of the 
"roman seems to be that her proper personal 
_ame was Judith, and that Aholibamah was the 
name which she received as the wife of Esan 
and foundress of three tribes of his descendants ; 
she is therefore in the narrative called by the 
first name, whilst in the genealogical table of the 
Edomites she appears under the second (see 
Delitzsch, Geneaii, p. 429 [1887]). This ex- 
planation is confirmed by the recurrence of the 
name Aholibamah in the concluding list of the 
genealogical table (Gen. xxxvi. 40-43 [«. 41, 
A. 'EAi^(/tai, /A" 'EXfi/So^Ss]), which, with 
Hengstenberg (Die Authentic a. Pent. ii. 279 ; 
Eng. trans, ii. 228), Tuch {Komm. Ob. d. Oen. 
493), Knobel (Genea. p. 258), Dillmann and 
Delitzsch, we must regard as a list of names of 
places and not of persons, as indeed is expressly 
said at the close of it : " These are the chiefs 
(heads of tribes) of Esau, according to their 
settlements in the land of their possession." 
The district which received the name of Esau's 
wife, or perhaps rather from which she received 
her married name, was no doubt (as the name 
itself indicates) situated in the heights of the 
mountains of Edom, probably therefore in the 
neighbourhood of Mount Hor and Petra, though 
Knobel places it south of Petra, having been 
misled by Burckhardt's name Htsma, which 
however, according to Robinson (ii. 155), is " a 
sandy tract with mountains around it . . . but 
not itself a mountain, as reported by Burck- 
hardt." It seems not unlikely that the three 
tribes descended from Aholibamah, or at least 
two of them, possessed this district, since there 
are enumerated only eleven districts, whereas 
the number of tribes is thirteen, exclusive of 
that of Korah, whose name occurs twice, and 
which we may further conjecture emigrated (in 
part at least) from the district of Aholibamah, 
and became associated with the tribes descended 
from Eliphaz, Esau's first-bom son. 

It is to be observed that each of the wives of 
Esan is mentioned by a name in the genealogical 
table different from that which occurs in the 
history. See Basuemath. With respect to the 
name and race of the father of Aholibamah, see 
AUAH and Beeri. [F. W. G.] [F.] 

AHU'MAI CIMrW ; B. 'Ax««/*«', A. 'AxW ; 
Ahumat), son of Jahath, a descendant of Judah, 
and head of one of the families of Zorathites 
(1 Ch. iv. 2). [W. A. W.] 

AHDZ'ZATH (J\Vr», poatession, but (?) a 

Philistine name ; A. 'OxoC<'^i ^- -Cox C'" ^'^ 
zxri. 26] ; Ochozath), one of the friends of the 
Philistine king Abimelech who accompanied 
him at his interview with Isaac (Gen. xxri. 
26). In the LXX. the epithet trWiO (R. V. 
" his friend ") is rendered 6 mfi^eefttyhs ainoS 
=pr<mulma, or bridesman (cp. Jud. xiv. 20, LXX. 
A.), and his name is inserted in xxi. 22, 32. 
St. Jerome {Qwust. in Gen.) and the Targum 
render 'D 'N by " a company of friends," a sense 
which 'K does not possess. For the termination 
" -ath " to Philistine masc. names, cp. Goliath 

Digitized by 




•ath (the old fern.) is eommoa in Canaaniti>h, 
Aramaic, and Arabic names, even of men: cp. 
Genubath (1 K. xi. 20. See Driver, Hebr. Tmaes,' 
p. 281 ; Eating, A*i6<rf. Inachriflen, pp. 73, 9(>- 
92 ; e^. nmn = Aretas). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

A'l CV = heap of ruitu, Ges.). 1. (always 
with the def. article, ^VTI [see Gen. xii. 8, in 
A. V.]; 'Ayyat [Gen. a'nd Is. i. 28], Ted [in 
Josh.], 'Ala [in Ezra], T.' 'A(, KB. 'AA«(o [Neh. 
vii. 32], K» 'A(» [Neh. xi. 31]; Jos. Ant. v. 1, 2, 
'AiKo [Dind. 'Avya] : Hai), a royal city (cp. 
Josh. riii. 23, 29 ; x. 1 ; xii. 9) of Canaan, already 
existing in the time of Abraham (Gen. xii. 8) 
[Uai]. It was east of and " beside " Bethel 
(Gen. xii. 8 ; Josh. vii. 2, xii. 9) ; on the south 
side of a valley (Josh. viii. 11) ; " beside " Bet haven 
(Josh. vii. 2); a valley or place where 5,000 men 
could be concealed lay between it .and Bethel 
(Josh. viii. 9, 12), and it was apparently more 
closely connected with Bethel than with Mich- 
mash (Ezra ii. 28 ; Neh. vii. 32.) It was the 
second city taken by Israel after their passage 
of the Jordan, and was " utterly destroyed " 
(Josh. vii. 3-5; viii. 1-3, 10-12, 14, 16- 
18, 20, 21, 23-26, 28, 29; ix. 3; .x. 1, 2; 
xii. 9: see Stanley, & ^ P. p. 202). However, 
if Aiath be Ai — and from its mention with 
Migron and Michmash, it is at least probable 
that it was so — the name was still attached to 
the locality at the time of Sennacherib's march 
on Jerusalem (Is. x. 28). [Aiath.] At any 
rate, the " men of Bethel and Ai," to the number 
of two hundred and twenty-three, returned from 
the Captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii, 28 ; 
Neh. vii. 32, " one hundred and twenty-three " 
only); and when the Benjamites again took 
possession of their towns, " Michmash, Aija, 
and Bethel, with their ' daughters,' " are among 
the places named (Neh. xi. 31). [Aija.] 

Eusebius remarks {OS.* p. 233, 59, AyjwO 
that though Bethel remained, Ai was a Toir&f 
tfntpMS, airrh fi6i'ot' ScttcvvTW : but even that can- 
not now be said, and no attempt has yet succeeded 
in definitely fixing the site of the city which 
Joshua doomed to be a "heap and a desolation for 
ever." It is now probably et- Tell, a conspicuous 
mound, covered with heaps of stones and ruins, 
13 miles E.S.E. of Bethel, on the south side of 
W. Mahciain, " the valley of the fortifications." 
Compare Josh. viii. 28, where the Hebrew has 

73, " Tell," for heap, an unusual word which 
only occurs in four other passages of the Bible. 
Between Bcitin (Bethel) and et-Tell the ruins 
of a church on the brow of a hill, whence there 
is a commanding view of the Jordan valley 
north of the Dead Sea, possibly mark the site 
of the altar built by Abram (Gen. xii. 8. See 
PFQy. Stat. 1869, pp. 123-6, and 1874, pp.62-t). 
H. Ganneau and Major Conder identify Ai with 
Kh. Ilaii/dn, near Veir Diicdn, 2| miles S.E. of 
Bethel, but the position and topographical 
features are not so closely in accordance with 
the Bible narrative as those of et- Tell; see, 
however. Major Conder in Tent Work in Pales- 
tine, ii. 108-9. Ai has also been identified by 
KraSl and Capt. Kitchener with KA. el-IIaiych, 
" ruin of the snake," south-cast of MUkhmis 
(Michmash), but this position is too remote from 
Bethel ; and the some remark applies to Kh. Dir 
Haiyeh to the south of W. Snvmut. An Ai 


occurs in the Geographical Lists of the Tempk 
of Kamak in Upper Egypt, bnt this would appmi 
to have been in Northern Palestine. It is the 
opinion of some that the words Avim (0M9) io 
Josh, xviii. 23, and Gaza (ilW) in 1 Ch. vii. 28, 
are corruptions of \\. [A vim ; Azzah.] 

a. »»; T.' rol, «A. Kai, B. omits; Hci. A 
city of the Ammonites, apparently attached to 
Heshbon(Jer.ilix.3,LXX.ixi.3). [G.] [W.] 

AI'AH (njK, vulture; B. 'A/*, A. Aid; 
Aia). 1. Son of Zibeon, a descendant of Seir, 
and ancestor of one of the wives of Essa 
(1 Ch. i. 40), called in Gen. xxxvi. 24 AlAR 
[A. 'Alt, E. Na<(]. He probably died before his 
father, as the succession fell to his brother .\SAH. 

2. Father of Kizpah, the concubine of Saul 
(2 Sam. iii. 7 ; xxi. 8, 10, 11). In 2 Sam. iiL 7 
B. gives the name as 'IcU (B*. 'lai), A. as 'lik; 
in 2 Sam. xxi. 8, B. reads 'Ad. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

.AI'ATH (n»r, fem. of »», Ai; tls tV »<iAir 
'Afyci; Aiath), a place named by Isaiah (i. 28) 
with Migron and Michmash. Probably the same 
as Ai. [Ai ; AUA.] [G.] [W.] 

AI'JA (KW; om. «A., K"A(a>; nax),\\le 
Aiath, probably a variation of the name AL 
The name is mentioned with Michmash and 
Bethel (Neh. xi. 31). [Al.] [G.] [W.] 

AI'JALON C\h^, "place of deer' or 
gazelles," MV." si a., Stanley, p. 208, note; 
Ajalon). 1. A city of the Kohathites (Josh, 
xxi. 24, B. AlKiiv, A. 'laKiy ; 1 Ch. vi. 69, 
B. 'S.yKiii, A. 'HAcii': Helon), originally allotted 
to the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 42, B. 'Aiiiuit, 
A. 'laoAtf r ; A. V. " Ajalon "), which tribe, how- 
ever, was unable to dispossess the Amorites ot 
the place (Judg. i. ^5 [LXX. paraphrases]). 
Aijalon was one of the towns fortified by Reho- 
boam (2 Ch. xi. 10, B. 'AXiiiv, A. AioX^r) 
during his conflicts with the new kingdom ot 
Ephraim (1 K. xiv. 30), and the last we hear 
of it is as being in the hands of the Philistines 
(2 Ch. xxviii. 18, B. AiA<4, A. AlXJm, A. V. 
" Ajalon "). 

Being on the very frontier of the two king- 
doms, we can understand how .\ijalon should be 
spoken of sometimes (1 Ch. vi. 69, comp. with 
t. 66) as in Ephraim.** and sometimes (2 Ch. xi. 
10 ; 1 Sam. xiv. 31 [LXX. omits]) as in Jodah 
and Benjamin. 

The name is most familiar to us from its 
mention in the celebrated speech of Joshua 
during his pursuit of the Canaanites (Josh. 
X. 12, AiK<iv, " valley (pQVf) of Aijalon ; " s«e 
Stanley, p. 210). There is no doubt that the 
town has been discovered by Dr. Robinson in 
the modem Yalo,' a little to the N. of the 
Jaffa road, about 14 miles out of Jertisalem. 
It stands on the side of a long hill which forms 

* The part of tiie country in wtalch AUalon was sits- 
ated— ttie western elopes of the main central tableland 
leading down to the plain of Sharon— must, if the de- 
rivation of the names of ita towns Is to be trusted, have 
abounded in animals. Besides Aijalon (deer), here lay 
.Shaalbim (foxes or Jackals), and not far off the valley ol 
Zeboim (hyaenas). See Stanley, p. 163, note. 

>• Ferhqia this may suggest an explanation of the 
allusion to the ■■ house of Joseph" in tlia dUScolt 
passage, Judg. 1. 34. 35. 

° 'loAu, In Eplphanlns ; see Reland, p. 563. 

Digitized by 



iht (outhern boundary of a fine valley of com- 
itiis, ThiehraUey now bears the nnme of the 
May /An 'Amir, but which there aeema no 
nu«n for doubting was the valley of Aijalon 
vhich witnessed the defeat of the Canaanites 
(FEob. ii. 253, iu. 145). 
8. AtX^it ; A. KlXtlft. A place in Zebnlnn, 

m«Dtioned as the burial-place of Elon (p7*((),' 
uneof (he Judges (Judg. xii. 12). It may also 
hare been his birthplace and originally called 
ifter him. [Eu>N, 3.] It may possibly be Kh. 
Min,E.o(.Kcn. [G.] [W.] 

AIJELETH SHAHAB, or rather Ayydeth 
Jliuahachar (Aurora*), stands in the Hebrew 
text as part of the first, i.e. introductory, verse 
«f Fs. uii. These two words being nowhere 
dst found together in the Bible, are somewhat 
(lifScalt to explain, both as regards their mean- 
ing and their application. Whilst some of the 
tnnslators are agreed as to the literal meaning 
of these words, scarcely two commentators 
ngrce as to their literary application. Rashi^ 
i«aves us the choice between Ayyeleth Haa- 
liadar being either the name of a musical 
io^mneot, or the allegorical name of the 
OoniTTegation of Israel.* This latter application 
ij taken from the Uidrash,' and is accepted by 
Vimchi.' Ibo 'Ezra,' while justly rejecting this 
meaning, takes Ayyeleth Jlaukaehar aa the com- 
mennment of a poem, which, together with its 
tone (though now l<»t), was so well known 
(lefore and during the existence of the Temple), 
that these mere two words were a sufBcient 
indication to the leader of the music-band how 
K> execute the whole Psalm. It is bnt just to 
•»y that to this explanation Ibn '£zTa adheres 
»lmi»t consistently throughout tlie whole 
I'lalter, whenever the superscriptions thereof 
are coocemed [Gittith]. This view of Ibn 
'Ezra has been received with great favour by 
most of the modern translators and commenta- 
tors. It would, indeed, bn very acceptable 
were it not lacking in one point — truth. More- 
over, it is not only not true, but cannot be true, 
as it rests on a gross anachronism. That such 
is the case can be proved both negatively and 
positively. In the first place, there is not the 



< It «m be obM>Tved that the two words ]^^>t( and 
p7{( <UlI'er only in llwlr vowel-polnts. 

* iQmker Tob (i.e. Midrssh TihUtin, or TWim), xxll. ; 
MkiTMh (.'kaiiOia (on Cant, v). 10); Talmud Yem- 
•Ulsal BenMutk, i. 1 ; rainm, til. 2. 

^This greatest of mediaeval Rabbis flourished at 
Tntfcs, OMmpagne, tnm 1040 to 1105. 8ee ScUller- 
*l»e>»y, an. " Rashi," Sncifclopaedia Britannica, 

' Batid'i sutement tbat the Habbis applied this Psalm 
to Eitbcr Is given bf him without any further reoiark. 
It is evident by bis silence tliat be docs not quite see the 
agocr of this application. 

* SIncktT Ib6, in loco. 

* TTiis prince at anomentators was bom after 1155, 
04 iBnl about 123S at Narbonne. See Schiller-Sitneasy, 
nl " Klinhi," £ncj/clopaedut Britannica, vol. xiv. 

' Abraham Ibn 'Kxra was bom at Toledo after 1090. 
•ol died It Rome (?) after ties. He was veived In all 
Ivuches of literature and science known in his time. 
He wrote moat learnedly on phlloeophy and theology, 
sad It ms)' nfely be said of him, mkO, tetigit quod non 
wiwni; but be believed, alas! also In sstrvlogy, on 
«hiti «e have several books by him. 

slightest evidence that such a custom of giving 
the first word or two for a whole poem and its 
melody ever obtained in early Christian, not to 
say in pre-Christian, times.' We know, more- 
over, for a fact where this custom originated, 
and approximately when. Singularly enough, 
the man who has furnishe<I us with this piece of 
information is Ibn 'Kzra himself. On Ps. vii. 1 
(superscription) he tells us : " Set to Dibere 
Khush. As the writers of Sepharcul (the Iberian 
peninsula) at the top of the poems note down a 
poem, the melody of which is (well) known" 

(una' ptavsn mao »2ni3 panur ids 
orD p- DTW] uoo even -iio n^nna rhmh 

VWy Now, Ibn 'txra does not tell us whether 
he means by " the writers of Sepharad " 
simply Jewish poets, or Jewish liturgical 
authors, or Christian or Mohammedan poets, 
or, finally, mere copyists. We will give him, 
hon'ever, the benefit of the doubt, and assume 
that he meant either Jewish poets who had 
learnt versilication from the Arabs of Spain, 
or those Arabs themselves. The former sup- 
position is the more probable one. Ibn 'Ezra 
lived into the second half of the 12th cen- 
tury ; and although born in .\rabic-speaking 
Spain, had travelled much abroad, and seen 
" the lands of many lords " (Italy, France, 
Provence, England, &c.), where Christians, lay- 
men as well as ecclesiastics, were in the habit 
of writing poetry " set to " popular tunes. Had 
he not, therefore, by " the writers of 
Sepharad," either the Jews who had learnt from 
the Arabs, or those Arabs themselves, he would 
scarcely have used that peculiar expression. 
Now, the earliest Arabs of Spain who wrote 
metrically lived at the very least full a 
thousand years later than the time when the 
latest Psalm received its superscription. Again, 
when we look into the practice obtaining among' 
later Jews of having a poem " set to " a well- 
known melody, we find that neither the 
Sephamdira nor the Ashkenazim employ for 

that practice the word 'Al (?V). The former 

use the terms Leno'ain (Dl?137) or Lec/teit (jn?), 

whilst the latter employ the word Beniggun 
(J1333). Ibn 'Ezra's theory, that 'Al Ayyeleth 
Hasshachar signified " Set to the tune of a poem 
beginning Ayyeleth llasthachar," must there- 
fore be absolutely rejected as an anachronism. 

But how came so keen-witted a scholar as 
Ibn 'Ezra unquestionably was, to fall into such 
a gross mistake ? This may be easily explained. 
It has been clearly shown by Ewald,'' and by 

s It Is true that some writers (Qesentus, FQrst, &c.) 
have even gone so far as to maintain tbat a somewhat 
similar instance is to bo found Iu the liible itself, and 
that the word qathctk (DJ^p) In 2 Sam. I. 19 refers 
to tbe word qaJtetk (nt^p), which Is to be found 
In V. 22. With the same reason, and a much better 
one, as the word qahetk (nt^p) there stands at tbe 
beginning of a verse, we might say that It refers to 
1 Sam. U. 4. But this, surely, wonld be a grots 
absurdity. As regards the "proof" which Oesenius 
brings fhim the Qoran, we can only say that it is worse 
than a mere anachronism. 

>• Die poetitchen BScher da Alten Bundet (QUUtngen, 
1839, 8V0, 1, p. 175). 

Digitized by 




others both before ' and after ' him, though not 
with sufficient consistency, that no word or 
words signifying an instrument or instruments 
can be preceded by 'Al, as the Hebrews did not 
spealc of playing " upon " (,'Al), but " with " or 
" by means of" \=Bc or = £i). Ewald and his 
predecessor, however, were by no means the first 
to find out this fact: it must hare been well 
known to Ibn 'Ezra, who no doubt rejected, on 
account of that fact, the "instrument-of-music " 
theory, though he only did so silently. The 
theory, that a word or words succeeding 'Al 
in superscriptions signified a "music-band," 
applied practically by Rab Se'adyah Gaon to 
Ps. viii. 1, was not only not rejected by Ibn 'Ezra, 
but even received with some favour. He, no 
doubt, would have consistently adhered to this 
rational theory, had not the superscriptions of 
Pss. liii. 1, Ixi. 1, and Uxxriii. 1 presented, as 
it appeared to htm, an insuperable dilliculty. He 
gives us an insight into his thoughts concerning 
this matter in his commentary on Pss. \xi. 1 and 
Ixxxviii. 1 (and silently also on Ps. liii. 1). He 
tells us that the Pattach under the last 
syllable of Neginath (ny;3) and Machalath 

<np!JD) (being common nouns, as he believed) 
pointed to a construct state (itatia coiiitructtu) ; 
but since the genitive of this construction was 
missing, this omission, in its turn, could only 
point to one thing, viz. that this was the first 
word of s poem, the tune of which was well 
known at the time while the Temple stood. 
Now, in reality, Ibn 'Ezra argues here in a circle 
{circutus citiosus), as Uachatath need not be a 
common, but may l)e a proper, noun ; in the 
latter case it is found with a Pattach, without a 
genitive following (cf. Gen. xxviii. 9 ; 2 Ch. xi. 
18). If we may appeal to analogy, such is also 
the case with Neginath, when a proper noun. 

To resume : (1) The " instrument-of-music " 
theory must be abandoned. That part of it 
which identifies Atjyeleth JJaashachar with a 
'" morning-flute " is so gross an absurdity that 
it needs no further refutation. (2) The *' com- 
menoement-of-a-poem " theory must also be 
rejected, as resting not merely on an anachron- 
ism, but also as originating in an argument 
which moves in a circle. 

What, then, is the meaning of Ayycleth Has- 
shachar ? It is the name of a music-band, as the 
learned Cnlmet,' in his commentary on this 
Psalm (which with him, as with the Septuagint, 
is Ps. xxi.), already suggests, although he was 
not aware of all the reasons why it was so called. 
Now, there can be littli; doubt that this band 
had its seat in Agi/aloa (Aijalon or Ajalon), and 
that it was its duty I/>vitically to assist in the 
morning sacrifice and service. Hence Ayyeleth 
HoMhachar. This theory fits in well with the 
Targumic phrase "the perpetual morning 
aacrifice" (KriS'TpT KTin P"l1p), which 
expresses in part an old tradition. [S.-S.] 

> The tete I. H. Kobn, Hebrew MssUr at the Imperial 
Royal Normal School of Old Boda, whoae pnpU the 
writer of this article wis In 1830-33. 

» H. P. Rie, Fartchungen ilbtr die rAtnchriften itr 
Pialwun (Leipzig, 1M6, sm. 8to, p. 3, n. 2tttqq.). 
This UtUe book, If used wttli cantlon. will prove valu- 
able In many respects. 

■ Calmet was a French Benedictine of great distinction. 
He Honriibed from 16T2 to 1767. 


AIX Q\V), an eye, and also, in the simple bnt 
vivid imagery of the East, a spring or natanl 
burst of living water, always distinguishtd 
from the well or tank of artificial formation, 
which is designated by the words Bier (1^) 
and Bor (*1{<3 and 1^3). Ain still retains iu 

ancient and double meaning in Arabic, ujiS; 
Such living springs abound in Palestine even 
more than in other mountainous districts, and, 
apart from their natural value in a hot climate, 
form one of the most remarkable festnrts 
of the country. Stanley (& and P. 147, 509) 
has called attention to the accurate and per- 
sistent osc of the word in the original text of 
the Bible, and has well expressed the incon- 
venience arising from the confusion in the A-V. 
of words and things so radically distinct as Ain 
and Beer. "The importance of distinguithin; 
between the two is illustrated by Ex. xv. 27, is 
which the word 'Ainoth (A. V. 'wells,' B. V. 
' springs ') is used for the springs of (nak 
water at Elim, although the rocky soil of that 
place excludes the supposition of dug welk" 


Ain ofltenest occurs in combination with other 
words, forming the names of definite localitiei: 
these will be found under En, as £n-gedi, En- 
gannim, &c. It occurs alone in two cases : — 

1. With the def. article, {^rn. One of the 
landmarks on the eastern boundary of Palestia* 
as described by Moses (Num. xxxiv. 11), and ap- 
parently mentioned, if the rendering of the A. V. 
and R. V. be accurate, to define the position of 
Riblah, viz. "on the *Bst side of ' the sprini;'" 
(LXX. M miyis). By Jerome, in the Vulgste, 
it is rendered oontra foniem Daphnini, meaniDj 
the apring which rose in the celebrated grove of 
Daphne, dedicated to Apollo and Diana at An- 
tioch.* But Riblah having been lately, with 
much probability, identified (Rob. iii. 543-6; 
Porter, ii. 333) with a place of the same name on 
the east bank of the Orontes between Ba'albek 
.ind Horns, " the spring " of the text must ii 
the present state of our knowledge be taken to 
be 'Ain el-'Asy, the main source of the Orontes; 
a spring remarkable, even among the springs of 
Palestine, for its force and magnitude. The ob- 
jections to this identification are the distance 
from Sibleh — about 9 miles ; and the direction 
— ^nearer N.E. than E. (see Rob. iii. 534 ; Porter, 
ii. 335-6, 358). Not far from 'Ain el-'Asy i« 
the remarkable monument of KamU'a el-IIermil, 
perhaps the most conspicuous landmark in Syria, 
und some distance to the south is the modem 
village of e>/-'.ilin. [Riblah; Hamate.] 

2. One of the southernmost cities of Judsh 
(Josh. XV. 32, Aen), afterwards allotted to Simeon 
(Josh. xix. 7, Ain; 1 Ch. iv. 32,» B. omits, A. 

• That this, and not the spring Identified at DifnA, 
near the source of the Jordan at Ml et-Xad) (Rob. lit 
393; Bitter, Jorifan, 215), is the Daphne referred to Id 
the Vulgste, Is clear from the quotations tram Jenxu 
given In Reland {Pal., cap. xxv. p. ISO). In the T«r- 
gums of Jerusalem and Ps.-Jonathan Riblah la rendcRd 
by Daphne, and Ain by 'Invstha (XPIU'V)- Schwsn 
(29) wonld place Ain >t '■ Kin-»1-Malcha " : to be con- 
sistent with which, he U driven to assume that the 
Daphne near Fanias bad also Ibe name of Riblah. 

» Afler enumerating the " cliles " (D'"iy) of Simeon, 
the text p^oceed^ " and 'their village* (DnnSp) ««« 

Digitized by 



Hr, A(h) and given to tlie priests (Josh. xxi. 
16, & 'A<ra. A. 'A/r; Ain). In the litt of 
prasU' cities in 1 Ch. vi. 59 ([Heb. r. 44], B. 
'Atir, A. 'Arriii'; ilsan) Ashan {\t^V) takes the 
place of Ain; ther were, however, different 
|ilue$. ai they are mentioned together in Josh. 
III. 7 and 1 'Ch. iv. 32. [ASHAJi.] The name 
nurposibly be retained in the W. el-' Ain, which 
riles in the heart of Jebd Magrdh at the southern 
citremitT of Palestine. 

In Xe'h. xi. 29 (T.' and Vulg. omit, H.* ir 
P<fi^) Ain is joined to the name which in 
the other passages usually follows it, and ap- 
pears as En-rimmon. So the LXX. B. in Josh. 
IT. 32 gives the name as 'ZfuijM (A. Vtmuir ; 
in), and in Josh. xix. 7 as 'Eptufuiv (A. 'A(i> 
mi P.; Ain). [Ek-RihmON.] (See Rob. ii. 
•>M.) [G.] [W.] 

AIR (Hf). In Eph. ii. 2 Satan is called 
"the prince of the power of the air," "the 
spirit that worketh in the sons of disobedience " 
(R. V.X Whether or not " air " be taken, with 
Mme critics, as equivalent to darkness, the sen- 
tence expresses the popular belief of Jew and 
■ientile that the air was peopled with spiritual 
beings, and the lower strata especially or those 
nearest to earth with spirits of evil. It was 
the teaching of Pythagoras, of Plutarch, and of 
-Xenocrates that the air bene.ith the ether and 
the heaven was full of gods and demons ; it was 
3 similar belief wliich made the Jew^s " all their 
lifetime through fear of death subject to 
bondage" (Heb. ii. IJ). Jewish theology (to 
refer only to that) massed together these noxious 
spirits nnder the head of Mataikin (Pp'fD). 
Their leader was and is Satan, — restless, cruel, 
and independent. As the "spirit of delusion" 
ne first tempts and deceives man ; next as 
" accuser " he brings charges .igainst him, and 
then as the *' angel of death " he seeks to slay 
him. In this conception, probably that current 
in the time of St. Paul, there is an advance 
apon the more reserved statements of the 
I'anonical Scripture of the Old Testament. The 
prologae to Job and Zechariah (ch. iii.) represents 
the Satan as able to work ill only by God's 
pi^rmission; and if the later writer of 1 Ch. 
ui. 1 represents this prince-spirit as acting in 
> more independent fashion, his conception falls 
Jet very far short of the ifX"* T^t ilovalas 
T» iifos. See Demokoloot, and consult on the 
«hole subject Hamburger, RE. i. a. " Geister," 
Ml Speaker's Comm. on Tobit, pp. 176, &c. [K.] 

AITIUS ("Wpoj; An). One of the "ser- 
vants of the Temple," or Netbinim, whose de- 
asndanU returned with Zorobabel (1 Esd. v. 31). 
Perhaps the same as Reaiah. [W. A. W.] 

A'JAH(n«!<; A. 'A«/, E. Noi^; Aia; R. V. 
^»^4). Son of Zibeon (Gen. xxxvi. 24; called 
'a 1 Ch. L 40 AiAH [B. "AW, A. 'A.'a; Aia\). 
tAUH ; ASAH.] [F.] 

A'JALOX (R. V. .Ujalon, Josh. i. 12, xix. 
♦2 ; 2 Ch. ixviii. 18). The same place as AlJALON 

^"^ Ala flTe dues" (D'TT). Keil and 

^«'»nJoln Dnnxni to ». 31. Xbe difference he- 
>»«B the nnmbers fire and four (Josb. all. t, J, to 
*^ the passage In 1 Ch. refers) is snIBdently ei- 
PWned ty Ixllnuim on Josh, t.c [S. B. D.] 

eiBlE DlCr. — YOL. 1. 



(1), which see. The Hebrew being the same in 
both, there is no reason for the inconsistency in 
the spelling of the name in the A. V. [G.] [W.] 

AKA'K QpO. ; A. 'laivmi^, D. 'IttavKafi ; Acan), 
a descendant of Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 27), called 
Jakan in 1 Ch. i. 42 (B. omits, A. 'lacutiy; 
Jacan). [Bene-Jaakan.] [VV. A. W.] [F.] 

AKEL'DAMA. [Aceldama.] 

AKKU'B (31p», Ges. = cunning, cp. ipv^ ; 
A. 'Akk»v3, B. 'loKoir ; Acmb). 1. A descend- 
ant of Zerubbabel, and one of the seven sons of 
Elioenai (1 Ch. iii. 24). 

S. Accub. One at the porters or doorkeepers 
at the east gate of the Temple. His descend- 
ants succeeded to his office, and appear among 
those who returned from Babylon (1 Ch. ix. 17 
[B. "AkoiJm; a. "AKoiijS]; Ezra ii. 42 [AB. 
'Akov^]; Neh. vii. 45 [J<AB(?). 'KKoiji], xi. 
19 [T.' 'KKoiff], Iii. 25 [T.' omits, K.« "Aitoi;/}]). 
Also called Dacodi (1 Esd. v. 28). 

8. B. 'A«a/3<^0, A. 'KKoifi. One of the 
Nethinim, whose family returned with Zerub- 
babel (Ezra ii. 45). tlie name is omitted in 
Keh. vii., but occurs in the form ACDB 
(B. 'Akov^, a. 'A«aii^) in 1 Esd. v. 31 ; though 
some prefer to consider ACUB as answering to 
Bakbuk in Ezra ii. 51 (Boic/Sovk, B. BaxxovK), 
and find in Acua iu 1 Esd. v. 30 (*AkovS) the 
name of this member of the Netbinim. 

4. Omitted in LXX. A I.evite who assisted 
Ezra in expounding the Law (Neh. viii. 7). 
Cilled Jaclbl'S in 1 Esd. ix. 48 (A. 'I^ovjSos, 
B. 'loo-oiJ/Soot; .ilccuitM). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AEBAB'BIM, "the ascent of," and "the 
aoiNO UP TO ; " also " Maaleii-acbabbim " 
(D'3'li?U njyp = " the ascent of scorpions ; " 
BA. usually, avifiaais 'AKpa$tiy, A. f in Josh. 
'AKpaPBtt/iL ; Axcnsu* scorpionum). A pass 
between the sonth end of the Dead Sea and 
Zin, forming one of the landmarks on the south 
boundary at once of Judah (Josh. iv. 3) and 
of the Holy Land (Num. xxxiv. 4). Also the 
north (?) boundary of the Amorites (Judg. 
i. 36). 

Judas Maccabaeus g-iined here a great victory 
over the Edomites (1 Mncc. v. 3 * [AN.' 'Axpa- 
/5oTTt|K^, K.' -arravi) ; Acrc^thwte'}, " Arabat- 
tine," which see ; Jos. Ant. xii. 8, § 1). 

De Saulcy (i. 77) would identify it with the 
long and steep pass of the Wady es-Zuteeirah. 
Scorpions he certainly found there in plenty, 
but this wady is too much to the north to have 
been Akrabbim, as the boundary went from 
thence to Zin and Kadesh-Barnea, which wher- 
ever situated were certainly many miles further 
south. Robinson's conjecture is, that it is the 
line of cliffs which cross the Ghor at right angles, 
1 1 miles south of the Dead Sea, and form the 
ascent of separation between the Ghor and the 
Arabah (ii. 120). Akrabbim is possibly the 

* The Alex. MS. In this place reads 'lovSai^ for 
'Itovfuu'f , and Ewald {Oetch. Iv. 91, 35») endeavours to 
show therefrom that the Acrabattlne there mentioned 
was that hetweeo Samaria and Judaea, In support of his 
opinion that a large part of Southern Palcstioc was then 
In possession of the Edomites. Bnt this reading does 
not agree with the context, and It Is at least ceruin that 
Josephus had the text as It now stands. See .<^a<:er's 
OmvutUarj), note on 1 Mace, v, 3. 


Digitized by 




steep pass es-SHfafi, by which the final step is 
mode from the desert to the level of the actual 
land of Palestine, or perhaps the ascent leading 
up to Nagb Ibn Mar, a position more in accord- 
ance with that usually assigned to Zin, the next 
}ioint mentioned on the boundary. As to the 
name, scorpions abound in the whole of this 

This place must not be confoundccl with 
Akrabatene, 'A)t()afloT7|i^, or Akrnbatta, 'Kxpa- 
fivrri, one of the eleven Toparchies into which 
Judaea was divided, and named next to Gophna. 
This place lay between Neapolis and Jericho, 
and its name survives in the modern village 
'Akraheh. [Arbattm.] [G.] [W.] 

ALiVBASTEB {iXiPturrpos ; alabaatrum) 
occnrs in the N. T. only, in the notice of the 
alttliastcr-box of ointment which a woman brought 
to our Lord when He sat at meat in the house 
of Simon the leper at Bethany, the contents of 
which she poured on the head of the Saviour. 
(See Matt. xxvi. 7 ; Mark xiv. 3 ; Luke vii. 37.) 
By the English word alabaster is to be understood 
both that kind which is also known by the name 
o( gypsum, and the Oriental alabaster which is so 
much valued on account of its translucency, 
and for its variety of coloured streakings, red, 
yellow, gray, &e., which it owes for the most 
part to the admixture of oxides of iron. The 
latter is a fibrous carbonate of lime, of which 
there arc many varieties, satin spar being one of 
the most common. The former is a hydrous 
sulphate of lime, and forms when calcined and 
ground the well-known substance called plaster 
of Paris. Both these kinds of alabaster, but 
especially the latter, are and have been long 
used for various ornamental purposes, such as 
the fabrication of vases, boxes, &c. The ancients 
considered alabaster (carbonate of lime) to be 
the best material in which to preserve their 
ointments (Pliny, II. jV. xiif. 3). Herodotus 
(iii. 20) mentions an alabaster vessel of oint- 
ment which Cambyses scut, amongst other thingsj 
as a present to the Aethiopians. Hammond 
(Annotat. ad Matt. xxvi. 7) quotes Plutarch, 
Julius Pollux, and Athcnaeus, to show that ala- 
baster was the material in which ointments 
were wont to be kept. 

In 2 K. xxi. 13, " I will wipe Jerusalem as a 

man wijreth a dish" (rin?V), the Vat. and Alex. 
versions of the LXX. use alabastron in the 
rendering of the Hebrew words.* The reading 
of the LXX. in this passage is thus literally 
translated by Harmer (^Olaervations, iv. 473): 
"I will unanoint Jerusalem as an. alabaster un- 
anointed box is unanointed, and is turned down 
on its face." Pliny' tells us that the usual form 
of these alabaster vessels was long and slender 
at the top, and round and full at the bottom. 
He likens them to the long pearls, called elenchi, 
which the Roman ladies suspended from their 

* B. airaAct^M Tifi' 'IcpovvoXif^, koMk avaXtt^tnn o 
oAo^affTpoc [A. jh oAajSoffTpov] awaXtu^iitfOi. icat 
naraaTfi^mu [A. -tc] «iri Tf><i<ruiroi' aimv. The Com- 
plntenslan Version and the Vulgate [diUbo Jeruulem, 
ticut deUri tolenl tabulae (Lucian's recension, nticr); 
et ddent vetUm, et duoam crebriut ityium titperfacietn 
^us] understand the passage In a very different way. 

"Et proceiioribus sna gratia est: elenchos appel- 
lant fastlgata longltudlne, alabattnrum figura In 
plenlorem orbcm dctiuentcs" (£r. N. Iz. &G}. 


fingers or dangled from their ears. He compara 
also the green pointed cone of a rose-bud to th« 
form of an alabaster ointment-vessel (//. S. 
xxi. 4). The onyx—{cp. Hot. Od. iv. 12, 17, 
" Nardi parvus onyx ") — which Pliny tsys is 
another name for alabastrites, mast not be con- 
founded with the precious stone of that Damp, 
which is a snb-species of the qvartt iamily ol 
minerals, being a variety of agate. Perhaps tht 
name of onyx was given to the pink-colouwi 
variety of the calcareous alabaster, in alluios 
to Its resembling the finger-nail (onyx) in 
colour, or else because the calcareous alabaatei 
bears some resemblance to the agate-ooyx in th'. 
characteristic lunar-shaped inark of the last-' 
named stone, which mark reminded the andenti 
of the whitish semicircular spot at the base ot 
the finger-nail. 

The term atabastra, however, was by no meuu 
exclusively applied to vessels made from thii 
material. Theocritus ' speaks of golden alabas- 
ters. That the passage in Theocritus iniplir$ 
that the alabasters were made of gold, and uit 
simply gilt, as some have understood it, seem: 

on the c«ntra Te«wl denotes the qnantitf it boU>. 

clear from the words of Plutarch (in ^fejcondre. 
p. 676), cited by Kypke on Mark xiv. 3, wher; 
he speaks of alabasters "all skilfully itrougU "J 
gold " (xpvirav liritriiidya vtpiTr&s). Alabasters, 
then, may have been made of any inaten»l 
suitable for keeping ointment in, — glass, silvor, 
gold, &c. Precisely similar is the use of the 
English word bojc ; and jwrhaps the Greek »»{« 
and the Latin buxus are additional illnstr'- 
tions. Sox is doubtless derived from the name 
of the shrub, the wood of which is so well 
adapted for taming boxes and such like object*. 
The term, which originally was limited to bol« 
made of the box-wood, eventually extended to 
boxes generally; as we say, an iron box,i J*'' 
box, &e. 

In Mark xiv. 3, the woman who brought " the 
alabaster-box of ointment of spikenard " is saiJ 
to break the box before pouring out the oint- 
ment. Some have supposed that breaUtig '*•' 
box implied merely breaking the seal which kept 

• Svptw it luipm >;pvvet' oXo^otfrpa (i3. XV. II*)- 
'* ftvpou xpvtrria.oAa^aoYpa Don sunt vaaa angneDtani 
ex aiabastrite laplde eaque auro omata, sed simpUcHer 
vasa ungoeutarla ex amo beta. Cf. Schleusn. I*i- ■^'• 
T. s. V. ilMfiairrpBr" (KleilUng, ad Iheoer. I c.) 

Digitized by 



the essence of the {wrfurae from evaporating ; 
clJiers take it more literally: the box was 
Irotes u harin; no value apart from its use as 
boldiaj the oiutnient. 

Tlie town of Alabastron in Middle Egypt 
receired its name from the alabaster quarries of 
the adjacent hill, the modern Mount St. Anthony. 
In this town was a manufactory of rases and 
retseU for holding perfumes, &c. [W. H.] 

ALATUETH (TlD^ff, Ges. = coterlng, Furst 
=yoiitt/W»cM ; B. r</iec0, A. 'EA/i<0('ft; Al- 
matt); better Alemetu. One of the sons of 
Btciier, the son of Benjamin (1 Ch. rii. 8). 

[W. A. W.T [F.] 

ALAMMEXECH OI^^i'N, perhaps *iV» 
oci ; B. 'tXtiitiktx ; ElmekcA), a place within the 
limits of .\sher, named between Achshaph and 
Amii (Josh. lix. 26, only). It has not yet been 
iJfntifieil, but Schwarz (p. 191) suggests a con- 
oeiion with the W. el-Metek, vhich falls into the 
Kiihon near Haifa, and has a large forest of oaks 
on its south side. [G.] [W.] 

ALA'MOTH (ntejiy^ff) occurs only twice 
in the Bible (Ps. xlvi.' l"and 1 Ch. iv. 20). 
The translators and commentators are much 
diridfj as the meaning of this phr<ise. 
The Targomisf , taking advantage of the Sons of 
<)orach occurring in the first, or introductory, 
reise of the said Psalm, interprets 'Al-'Atmnoth 
Midrashicallv bv, " When their father had been 
rnnoTed from ' their sight " (»D3nNn 10T3 
prUD pnUK); comp. Num. itvi. 33 ; ixvi. 11. 
This eiplanation, if we may call it one, deserves, 
of course, no further notice. Raslii gives 'Altimolh 
as an instrument of mu^ic. This explanation, 
from the construction of the word with 'Al 

<7S\ etnnot be correct [Aijkletii Suahab]. 
Ibn 'Ezra gives it as the commencement of a 
I-oem. This is an anachronism (see ul supra). 
<^nKhi's explanation, being the same as Riishi's, 
must be rejected on the same grounds. The 
same is the case as regards the tr.insLition of it 
by " Tie Virginal," Calmet's " L<i Ijawli- -lea 
/•iUt miUK-icwirs " (on Ps. ix. 1) is hiattprioally 
incorrect, since women* were not allowed, at 
(oUic worship, to sing together with men. 
The explanation of 'Alamoth by the German 
"JvntrfrmteKjreiac" is a worse anachronism 
•till than Ibn 'Kzra's. We are, then, at once 
led to the only possible interpretation, which 
i> strongly supported by the peculiar wording 
cf 1 Ch. ir. 16. There only three instrn- 
txiti are named ^Sebalim, Kitmurutit, and 
Hebiltayim: see Hakp and CrMUAls); .ind 

i^Mm t. 21 the last word (DXJ?) must refer 

»!«» to the Ust word of r. 20 (DIdW Thus 
« see that three men, Heman, Asaph, and 
Ethan (v. 19), handled the cymbals to give 

gaienl notice (JTOBTI?), while the eight men 

* WliCD one finds the expression " and shiging-women " 
JnTpQI) twice In the Bible iKirs il. 66 and Neh. 
vH <T), H must lie explained, as the cununentAtors on 
^ff* pussgea maintain, that these singers bnd nothtnfc 
» *i »1th religions songs in the Temple or any other 
I«Mo place of worship. Oompare Ps. cxlvlU. 13, and 
aiA the <filterenca there between the expression Qj^ 
>"»4slso")aadDB("wlth"). CDasce.] 



(t. 20) played on psalteries in order to direct 
the music-corps called 'Alamoth, and the six 
other men (r. 21) played on harps to direct th« 
music-corps called JJasshetninith.^ 

There would, then, remain only one more 
point that requires an explanation, viz. why 
this music-corps was called 'Alamoth, This 
will be, however, easily understood when the 
following two facts are taken into consideration. 

(1) According to the Mosaic economy (Num. 
xviii. 2-6) there subsisted a very close con- 
nexion between the priests and the Levites. 

The latter were the companions ( 117*1 ), if 
not the 8erv.int8 (Timt5''1X °f the former. 

(2) 'Alletneth and 'Alinon {Baclturim) were not 
identical but contiguous localities, and the 
dwelling-places of some of the priests ; and 
hence we may derive the nse of this woni 
'Alamoth. This theory woald likewise account 
for the plural number. As regards the feminine 
gender of 'Alatiuith, we need only refer tn 

1 Ch. xxiii. 6, Avherc the Levites are said to 
have been divided into bands (^Machlcqoth, 

nii9?nD ; which is fern. plur.). The names 
of the bauds, therefore, with rare exceptions, 
are given in that gender." [S.-S.] 

AL'CIMUS CAXKi/Bor, taliant, a Greek 
name, assumed, according to the prevailing 

fashion, as representing Eliakim, D^jpy^, 'EAia- 
«fft God setieth np) ; called also Jaceimus or 
Jakiu (4 Kol 'loMi/ios alit. 'taimiitos, Joseph. 
Ant. xii. 9, § 5, i.e, D*!?', of. Jud. iv. Starr, lectt. ; 
'Ittxi/ioi, Joseph. Ant. xx. 10, 3), a Jewish priest 
(1 Mace. vii. 14X who was attached to the Hel- 
lenizing party (2 Mace. xiv. 3).* On the death 
of Menelaus (162 B.C.), Alcimus seems to have 
obtaine<l from .\ntiochus Eupatur, through th<! 
influence of Lysins, the succession to the high- 
priesthood, thereby excluding Oniiis, the nephew 
and heir of Menelaus (Joseph. Ant. xii. 9, § 7 ; 

2 Mace. xiv. 3). Though of the stock of Aaron 
(1 Mace. vii. 14), he was probably not of the 
high-priestly family (Joseph. /. c; xx. 10, § 3); 
and, if not for that reason, yet at any rate for 
his well-known Hellenizing views, his designa- 
tion to office seems not to have been recognise<l 
by his people. In the intcrA'al which elapsol 
before the downfall of Antiochus and Lysins, 
Judas in all probability exercised the functions 
of high-priest (cp. Joseph, xii. 11, § 2, tV <>PX'- 
ffmavnty irhs Tplrov K«ra<rx<^'')> Alcimus being 
driven from the country. Of this first period 
of the high-priesthood of Alcimus we are told 
nothing in the First Book of Maccabees. It 
is, however, directly asserted by Joseph us (^Ant, 
xii. 9, § 7), and again implied by him when 
he states that Jakim (i>. Alcimus) had at the 
time of his death held the office for three years 
(i ti 'Iduaitos, Ifrq rpla TJ)y apx"pf<'^'^'' tara- 

i> It was, no doubt, called so from having been the 
eighth music-corps when only eight such bands existed. 
Later on there were twenty-four snch bands. .Sec Al- 


' Tills explantiton we owe to Kohn [Ameleth Sua- 
IIAB, note ■]. A somewhat similar one is given by Rce 
[Ameleth SiiAHAn, note ']. 

■ According to a Jewish tradition iBerahitk It. 66), 
he won ** sister's son of Jose ben Joescr." chief of the 
tisnhcdrin (Rapball. nUt. <)fitm, 1. 246,303). 

G 2 

Digitized by 




<rx^* <T«A«rfTi|ir«i', Ant. x\. 10, 3), or, as he 
Bays in another place, for four years (ipx'^P"* 
T*ia<it irt) riaaofcL, Ant. xii. 10, 6). When 
Demetrius Soter obtained the kingdom of Syria, 
Alcimus paid court to that monarch, and 
represented the dangerous character of Judas 
and his followers (1 Mace. vii. 6). Demetrius 
therefore confirmed him in his office, and 
through his general Bacchides [Baccuides] 
established him at Jerusalem. At first a con- 
siderable section of the nationalist party were 
ready to put faith in Alcimus, because he was of 
the stock of Aaron. But their confidence was 
cruelly requited. By the order of Bacchides, 
apparently with the consent of Alcimus, as 
many as sixty were treacherously murdered ; 
among them, according to Jewish tradition, the 
uncle of Alcimus — Jose ben Jocscr, the illustrious 
pupil of Antigonus of Socho. The cruelty of 
the new high-[>riest, of which this deed may be 
taken as an example, quickly undeceived those 
who had hitherto remained doubtful, lu spite 
of the force left in his command, he was unable 
to withstand the opposition which he provoked. 
The influence of Judas and the nationalist 
party (see Assideans) frustrated .ill his schemes 
of policy or revenge (1 Mace. vii. 9, 25) ; and 
he was once more compelled to flee to Demetrius 
at Antioch, who immediately took measures for 
his restoration. The first expedition under 
Xicanor proved unsuccessful. According to one 
account, it terminated in an amicable arrange- 
ment between Judas and Xicanor. This so 
little suited the purpose of Alcimus, that he 
applied again to Demetrius and charged Nicanor 
with friendship towards tho king's worst foe. 
Kicanor received a stern order from Demetrius 
to bring Judas in chains to Antioch (2 Mace, 
xiv. 2ti, 27). A second campaign ended in 
Judas's great victory of Adarsa, near Bethhoron, 
where Nicanor was killed and his forces utterly 
routed (13th Adar=March, IGl). Upon this 
Bacchides marched against Jerusalem with a 
large army, routed Judas, who fell in the 
battle of Kleasa (Xisan = April, 160 or 161 D.C.), 
and reinstated Alcimus. After his restoration, 
Alcimus seems to have attempted to modify the 
ancient worship, and was engaged in pulling 
down " the wall of the inner court of the sanc- 
tuary " (i.e. which separated the court of the 
Gentiles from it ; yet see Grimm, 1 Mace. ix. 54) 
when he was " plagued " (by paralysis), and 
" died at that time," — " in the second month," 
Ijar=May, 159 or 160 B.C. This "wall" was 
in all probability the barrier or fence of treilis- 
work (cf. the name KJniD, "sorlga"), from 
three to four feet in height, which stood between 
the inner and outer walls of the Temple. No 
Gentile nor any person rendered unclean by con- 
tact with a corpse might pass beyond it. [See 
a facsimile of the inscription placed on the wall 
in Stade, Gcsch. d. Volkea Israel, ii. p. 268.] The 
great "outer court" was limited on its inner 
side by this breastwork, which is described by 
Josephus as it appeared in the Herodian Temple 
(Spi^oKTos Xltivos rplwnxo^ f^^" !!<f'Oi> Ttivv Si 
XapiiiTict Sifipycuriidyos, Bell. Jud. v. 5, 2). 
By the Jews it was regarded with peculiar 
reverence as the work of the prophets {Ipya 
™k nfo^rrrir, 1 Mace. ix. 54 ; rh rttxoi toS 
iiyUv, ty ToAai&r «cal KtmurKtuaanivov 6wh rity 
iylcty Tpo^rrriiy, Joseph. Ant. xii. 10, 6). Ac- 


cordingly the attempt of Alcimus was regtrdcd 
with special horror by pious Jews ; for it impliol 
both the destruction of a sacred portion of their 
Siinctuary, and the intention of granting t fr« 
access to the Temple even to the Gentiles and the 
unclean. The undertaking was stopped by the 
sudden seizure and death of Alcimus, nhidi to 
the Jews appeared as a heaven-sent punishDent 
for his impiety (rXriyri tij aS^yitat h m 
Btov, Joseph. /. c). The 23rd of Marcheiwan, U. 
the second month of the civil year, = N'ovembeT, 
was observed by the people as the day on whirh 
Alcimus had begun the unholy work, which the 
hand of God had prevented him from carrjrii; 
into effect. (Cf. Mishna Middolh, 2, 3. See 
Griitz, Gcsch. d, Jiul.' iii. pp. 12, 603.) 

The character of Alcimus seems to have been 
thoroughly contemptible. Greed and lore U 
power prompted him to sue for the office of 
high-priest. During the short period of hii 
residence in Jerusalem he showed himself to be 
both treacherous and cruel. The last art of 
his life was prompted by his wish to curry 
favour with the Hellenizers and the court of 
Antioch, rather than by any ambition of nukin; 
his religion universal. 

His death is noticeable for another reison. 
The court at Antioch nominated no succenor to 
his office, and there ensued an iuterregnum ot 
seven years in the list of the high-priesti, 
during which the high-priestly functions veit 
performed by a Stgan, the representative or 
vice high-priest (cp. Buxtorf, snb rone [JD) 
Cp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 9, § 5, xii. 10 ; 1 Mace. vii. 
ix. cf. 2 Mace. xiv. xv. ; Ewald, Hist, of ftntl, 
V. 319 seq. (Eng, trans.); Graetz, Gesch. df 
Mid.' iii. pp. 11, 12, and his £xcursui o* ('< 
Mcgillath Taanith, p. 597. [R.] 

AL'EUA (iy 'A\4iuus, A. iy 'Axifuis; " 
Alimis), a large and strong city in Gilead in the 
time of the Maccabees (1 Slacc. v. 26). Its Dsme 
does not occur again, nor have we yet any mesiu 
of identifying it with certainty ; it may, how- 
ever, be ICcfr el-Ma on the right bank of iVir 
er-Rukhad in Jaulan (Schumacher, Acroo '*>" 
Jonlan, 79-83). Grimm (m toe.) suggests th»t 
it may represent BcER-iiLlM (Is. xv. 8 ; comi". 
Kum. xii. 16). [G.] [W.] 

ALE'METH (H^^r [meaning nncertsin: 
see under Alameth], Fiirst = youthfulness ; J'«- 
m.ith). A Benjamite, son of Jehoadan, or Jaisb. 
and descended from Jonathan the son of Saul 
(1 Ch. viii. 36 [B. XaXaifide, A. ToX*^], ii- 
42 [B. TaiifKie, A. raX«^f9]). The form of the 
name in Hebrew is different from that of the 
town Alemeth, with which it has been con- 
pared. [W A.W.] [F.] 

ALE'METH (R. V. more accurately, ABf 
mcth, nO>ir, B. raX.4iite, A. raKiiiit9; A<- 
tnatli), the form under which Almon, the name 
of a city of tho priests in Benjamin, appears i» 
1 (;h. vi. 60 [4 J]. Under the very simiUr form 
of 'Almit, it has been identified in the present 
day at about a mile N.E. of 'Andta, the site ct 
Aiiathoth ; first by Schwarz (p. 128) and then by 
Mr. Finn (Rob. iii. 287). Among the genealogies 
of Benjamin the name occurs in connexion vitii 
Azmaveth, also the name of a town of that 
tribe (1 Ch. viii. 36, ix. 42; compared vitk 

Digitized by 



Em ii. 24). [AufON.] In the Targnm of 
Jomtiun on 2 Sam. xri. 5, Bahurim is rendered 
Almttb. [G.] [W.] 

ALEXANDEE IIL, king of JUcedon, sur- 
named THE Great ('AA({a>>>fwt, the Itclper of 
itm ; Akvader ; Arab, the tico-homed, Golii Lex, 
.imb. p. 1806), "the son of Philip " (1 Mace, 
vi. 2) and Olj-mpiaj, was born at Pella B.C. 356. 
ih hii mother'* side he claimed descent from 
.Uliilles; and the Homeric legends were not 
without influence upon his life. At an early 
i^ he vas placed under the care of Aristotle ; 
acd while still a jouth he turned the fortune of 
iIk day at Chaeroneia (B.C. 338). On the mnr- 
•ir of Philip (B.C. 336) Alexander put down 
vith resolute energy the disatfection and hos- 
tility by vhich his throne was menaced ; and in 
two years he crossed the Hellespont (u.c. 334) 
t« carry out the plans of his father, and execute 
the mission of Greece to the civilised world. 
Tile battle of the Graoicus was followed by the 
iobjogatiun of Western Asia ; and in the follow 
iaj year the fate of the East was decided at 
Issoj (B.C. 333). Tyre and Gaja were the only 
cities in Western Syria which uflered Alexnuder 
iny resistance, and these were reduced and 
treated with unusual severity (ii.c. 332). Egypt 
aeit snbmitted to him; and in B.C. 331 he 
Quoded .Alexandria, which remains to the pre- 
sent day the most characteristic monument of 
hi; life and work. In the same year he finally 
defeated Darius at Gaugnmel.t ; and in n.c. 330 
hi unhappy rival was mardered by Bessus, 
sstxip of Bactrio. The next two years were 
occupied by Alexander in the consolidation of 
bit Persian conquests, and in the re<luction of 
Bactria. In B.C. 327 he crossed the Indus, pene- 
trated to the Hydaspes, and was there forced by 
the discontent of his army to turn westward. 
He teached Sosa B.C. 325, and proceeded to 
Babylon B.C. 324, which he chose ns the capital 
«f his empire. In the next year he died there 
(B.C. 323) in the midst of his gigantic plans ; 
wd those who inherited his conquests left his 
ifesifTis unachieved and unattempted (cp. Dan. 
'ii- 6, viiL 5, xi. 3> 

The famous tradition of the visit of Alexander 
t) Jenualem durin{e: his Phoenician campaign 
('oieph. Ant. li. 8, § 1 sq.) has been a fruitful 
worte of controversy. The Jews, it is said, had 
JTOToked his anger by refusing to transfer their 
allegiance to him when summoned to do so 
■imnjr tlie siege of Tyre, and after the reduc- 
tion of Tyre and Gaza (Joseph. /. c.) he turned 
t"w»rd« Jerusalem. Jaddua (Jaddus) the high- 
prittt (Keh. xii. 11, 22X who had been warned 
"> a dream how to avert the king's anger, 
<^aly awaited his approach; and when he drew 
»ai went out to Sapha (more generally known 
•sSeopus: cp. Joseph. Bell.Jad. v. 2, 3), within 
' Tht of the city and Temple, clad in his robes 
•rf hyacinth and gold, and accompanied by a 
train of priests and citizens nrnyed in white. 
•\.euikler was bo moved by the solemn spectacle 
that he did reverence to the holy name inscribed 
«p« the tiara of the high-priest ; and when 
rameoio expressed surprise, he replied that " he 
W leeti the GoJ Whom Jaddua represented 
o a dream at Dium, encouraging him to cross 
"«r into .Vsii, and promising him success." 
After this it is said that he visited Jerusalem, 



offered sacrifice there, heard the prophecies of 
Daniel which foretold his victory, and conferred 
important privileges upon the Jews, not only in 
Judiiea but in Babylonia and Media, which they 
enjoyed during the supremacy of his successors. 
The narrative is repented iu the Talmud {Jmna, 
p. 69 ; cp. Wiinsche, Der habyt. Talmud, i. 374 ; 
the high-priest is there said to have been Simon 
the Just, and the scene to have taken place near 
Antipatris), in later Jewish writers ( Vo;'i*>-a Ji. 
Par. 13 ; Joseph ben Gorion, ap, Ste. Croix, 
p. 5.53), and in the chronicles of Abulfeda (Ste. 
Croix, p. 555). The event was adapted by the 
Samaritans to suit their own history with a 
corresponding change of places and persons and 
various embellishmenta (.\bulfeda, quoted by 
Ste. Croix, pp. 209-212) ; and in due time Alex- 
ander w.ns enrolle<l nmong the proselytes of 
Judaism. On the other hand, no mention of the 
event occurs in Arrian, Plutarch, Diodorus, or 
Curtius ; and the connexion iu which it is 
placed by Josephus is alike inconsistent with 
Jewish history (twald. Hist. Jsr. vol. v. p. 214, 
Eng. tr. ; Griitz, Gesch. d. Jud. HA. ii. pt. 2, 
p. 221) and with the narrative of Arrian (iii. 1, 
ifit6/i^ Vli4ptf iwh rrjs rd(iis i\aiyuv fiKtr is 

But admitting the incorrectness of the details 
of the tradition as given by Josephus, there are 
several points which conKrm the truth of the 
main fact. Justin says that "many kings of 
the East came to meet Alexander wearing 
fillets" (lib. xi. 10); and after the capture of 
Tyre, "Alexander himself visited some of the 
cities which still refused to submit to him " 
(Curt. iv. 5, 13). Even at n later time, accord- 
ing to Curtius, he executed vengeance person- 
ally on the Samaritans for the murder of his 
governor Andromachus (Curt. iv. 8, 10). Be- 
sides this, Jewish soldiers were enlisted in his 
army (Hecat. ap. Joseph, c. Apion. i. 22) , and 
Jews formed an important element in the popu- 
lation of the city, which he founded shortly 
after the supposed visit. Above all, the privi- 
leges which he is said to have conferred upon 
the Jews, including the remission cf tribute 
every sabbatical year, existed in later times, 
and imply some such relation between the Jews 
and the great conqueror iis Josephus describes. 
Internal evidence is decidedly in favour of tho 
story even in its picturesque fulness. From 
policy or conriction Alexander delighted to 
represent himself as chosen by destiny for the 
great act which he achieved. The siege of Tyro 
arose professedly from a religions motive. 'I'he 
battle of Issus was preceded by the visit to 
Gordium ; the invasion of Persia by the pil- 
grimage to the temple of Ammon. And if 
it be impossible to determine the exact cir- 
cumstances of the meeting of Alexander and 
the Jewish envoys, the silence of the classical 
historians, who notoriously disregarded (e.g. 
the Maccabees) and misrepresented (Tac. Hat. 
V. 8) the fortunes of the Jews, cannot be 
held to be conclusive against the occurrenco 
of an event which must have appeared to 
them trivial or unintelligible (Jahn, Archaeol, 
iii. 300 ff. ; Ste. Croix, Examcn cntique, &c., 
Paris, 1810; Thirlwall, Hist, of Greece, vi. 
206 f. ; and on the other side Ant. van Dale, 
Dissert, sniper Aristca, Amstel. 1705, pp. 69 sq.). 

The tradition, whether true or false, present4 

Digitized by 




nn aspect of Alexander's character which has 
been frequently lost sight of by his recent bio- 
graphers. He was not simply a Greek, nor 
must be be judged by a Greek standard. The 
Orientalism, which was a .scandal to his fol- 
lowers, was a necessary deduction from his 
principles, and not the result of caprice or 
vanity (conip. Arr. vii. 29). He approached the 
idea of a universal monarchy from the side of 
Greece, but his final object was to establish 
something higher than the inmmount supremacy 
of one people. His purpose was to combine and 
equalize, not to annihilate: to wed the East 
and West in a just anion — not to enslave Asia 
to Greece (Plut. de Alex. Or. 1, § 6). The 
time, indeed, was not yet come when this was 
possible; but if he could not accomplish the issue, he prepared the way for its accom- 

The first and most direct consequence of the 
policy of Alexander was the weakening of na- 
ticrnalities, the first condition necessary fur the 
dissolution of the old religions. The swift 
course of his victories, the constant incor|>ora- 
tion of foreign elements in his armies, the fierce 
wars and changing fortunes of his successors, 
broke down the barriers by which kingdom had 
been separated from kingdom, and ojiened the 
road for larger conceptions of life and faith than 
had hitherto been possible (cp. I'olyb. iii. 59). 
The contact of the East and West brought out 
into practical forms, thoughts and feelings which 
had been confined to the schools. Paganism was 
deprived of life as soon as it was transplanted 
beyond the narrow limits in which it took its 
shape. The spread of commerce followed the 
progress of arms ; and the Greek language and 
literature vindicated their claim to be considered 
the most perfect expression of human thought 
by becoming practically universal. 

The Jews were at once most ex|)0sed to the 
powerful influences thus brought to bear upon 
the, and most able to support them. In 
the arrangement of the Greek conquests, which 
followed the battle of Ipsus D.C. 301, Judaea 
was made the frontier land of the rival empires 
nf Syria and Kgypt ; and though it was neces- 
sarily subjected to the constant vicissitudes of 
war, it was able to make advantageous terms 
with the state to which it owed allegiance from 
the important advantages which it otTered for 
attack or defence [Antiochus, II.-VII.l. Inter- 
nally also the people were prepared to withstand 
the effects of the revolution which the Greek 
dominion eflijcted. The constitution of Kzra 
had obtained its full development. A powerful 
hierarchy had succeeded in substituting the 
idea of a Church fur that of a state; and, the 
Jew was now able to wander over the world and 
yet remain faithful to the God of his fathers 
[The Dispersion]. The same constitutional 
change had strengthened the intellectual and 
religious position of the people. A rigid 
" fence " of ritualism protected the course of 
common life from the licence of Greek manners : 
and the great doctrine of the unity of God, which 
was now seen to be the divine centre of their 
system, counteracted the attractions of a philo- 
lophic pantheism [SiMON the Jujr]. Through 
a long course of discipline, in which they had 
been left unguided by prophetic teaching, the 
Jews had realise<l the nature of their mission to 


the world, and were waiting for the mcus of 
fulfilling it. The conquest of Alexander far- 
nished them with the occasion and the power. 
But at the same time the example nf Greece 
fostered pei*sonal as well as popular indepea* 
dence. Judaism was speedily diviJed intu sects, 
analogous to the typical forms «t Greek philo- 
sophy. But even the rude analysis of the «U 
I faith was productive of good. The freedui of 
Greece was no less instnunental in forming tiie 
Jews for their final work than the contempb- 
tive spirit of Persia, or the civil organizstion 
of i;.ims; for if th>- carO'T if "-^ ^'r.'-- — 
rapid, its etli-ct^ were lasting, 't'lie citj wiiicb 
lu- chose to bear his name [icrpctunted in titer 
a^es the office which he proviiientiallv dis- 
charged fur Judaism aiui niankiud ; and tbe 
historian of Christianity must confirm thcjndj- 
niont of Arrian, that Alexander, '■ who was like 
uu other man. could not have been t;iven totbt 
world without the sjx;cial design of Providence* 
(efio Tou Beiou, Arr. vii. 30). .\nd Aleiudir 
himself appreciated this design better even than 
his great teacher; for it is said (Plut. dcifer. 
Or. 1, § t.>) that wlien Aristotle urged him to 
treat the Greelis as Ireemen and the OrientaliM 
slaves, he found the true answer to this coubkI 
iu the recognition of his *• divine mission t» 
unite and reconcile the world (mivhs jiw 
dio&fv ^pfioariis Kai SiaAAoKTT/y tuv mI0 

TL-tradrachm (\tlic ulcnl) of LfsimMlitu, kiog of Thi«». 
0\'\. ITewl of Ali-SRniler tljo (Ircat. 114 a ruling JujiUT Ammoa li> 
rijil,!. Kov. B,V21AE£!i AVSIM.VXOY. Ii.Aii.ii»- 
trtm UK) ^ fallaa ttUM u Mt, boltUne * VIcUiT. 

In the prophetic visions of Daniel the in- 
fluence of Alexander is necessjirily combineii 
with that of his successors.* They representcJ 
with partial exaggeration the several phases of 
his character j ami to the Jews nationally the 
policy of the Syrian kings wiis of greater im- 
|>ortance than the original conquest of -isii. 
But some traits of '"the first mighty king" 
(Dan. viii. 21, xi. .3) are given with vigorous 
distinctness. The emblem by which he is typi- 
fied (TBV, a he-<jixit. fr. ISV, he teajA, «••*• 
TAes. 5. v.) suggests the notions of strength anl 
speed ; "> and the universal extent (Dan. viii. 5. 
. . . fi-om the Kent on the face of the vh-lf 
earth) and marvellous rapidity of his conquesu 
(Dan. I. c. he touched not the iiround) are brought 
forward as the characteristics of his |>ower, 
which was directed by the strongest persoii.ii 

• The attempt of Bertholdt to apply the description! 
of the third munivrcliy to that of Alexander has lltik lo 
recommend it [Hanikl]. 

<> There may Ik- al«o some Allusion In the word tL» 
the leftcnd of Ciramis, tlic founder of the Arglve dynistv 
In Macedonia, who was guided to vlcloiy by **a flxk of 
goato " (Justin, 1. 1). 

Digitized by 



imprtaositj (Dm. viii. 6, in the fartj of his 
poxtr). He ruled Trith great dominion, and did 
twonling to his will (xi. 3); ''and there was 
BOiK that could delirer . . . out of his hand " 
(riii. 7). [B. F. W.] [R.] 

ALEXANTJER BALAS (Joseph. Ant. xiii. 
4. }t(, 'AX({art^s 6 BciAat Xtyifitvos; Strab. 
lir. p. 751, Til- BtfAor 'AA<(a>'8fi«>' ; Just. x\XT. 
1, '*Subomant pro eo Balam quendam . . . et. . . 
nomeD ei Aleiandri inditur." Bains jxissibly 

reproeats the Aram. iwD2, lord. He was, ac- 
coriing to some, a (natural) son of Antiochus 
IV. Epiphanes (Liv. I^. 50 ; Strab. xiii. ; Joseph. 
.i»t. liii. 2, 1), but he was more generally 
rcj^arded as an impostor who fal.tely assumed 
tji« conneiinn (App. Syr. 67 ; Justin, /, c. ; cp. 
Polrb. iiiiii. 16). In any case he seems to have 
mnmed the title of his reputed father (cp. 
'AAc{v}pot, 6 ToB 'Amiixov 6 'Eiri^tu^j, 1 
Msec. X. 1, where there is so need to retul toD 
'ETi^oivfi, as Grotius and Michaelis pro]>ose). 
fie claimed the throne of Syria in B.C. 152 in 
opposition to Demetrius Soter, who hod )>ro- 
toktd the hostility of the neighbouring kings 
and oliemted the affections of his subjects 
(Joseph. I.e.). His pretensions were put for- 
ward by Heraclides, formerly treasurer of Anti- 
ochus Kpiphanea, who obtiiined the recognition 
of his title at Rome by scandalous intrigues 
(Polrb. Hiiii. 14, 16). After landing at Ptolc- 
iiiais(l Mace. x. 1) Alexander gained the warm 
support of Jonathan, who was now the leader of 
the Jews (1 Mace ix. 73); and though his first 
•forts were unsuccessful (Just. xxiv. 1, 10), in 
fcc. 150 he comi)letely routed the forces of 
Uemttrins, who himself fell in the retreat 
(I Mace. I. 48-60 ; Joseph. Ant. xiii. 2, 4 ; Strab. 
iTL p. 751). Aft«r this Alexander married 
Cleopatra, the daughter of Ptolemaeus VI. 
Philometor ; and in the arrangement of his 
kisgdom appointed Jonathan governor (jitpiS- 
ifXt't 1 Mace. X. 65) of a proriuce (Judca: cp. 
I Uacc li 57). But his triumph was of short 
duration. .A.fter obtaining power he gave him- 
self ap to a life of indulgence (Liv. Ep. 50 ; cp. 
-ithen. v. 211); and when Demetrius Xicator, 
the son of Demetrius Soter, landed in Syria in 
K.C 147, the new pretender found powerful 
>i|^rt (1 Mace. x. 67 S.'). At first Jonathan 
Jffeated and slew ApolloDitts the governor of 
Coele-Syria, who had joined the party of Deme- 
trius, for which exploit he received fresh 
fiiTours from .Alexander (1 Mace. x. 69-89); but 
tiortly afterwards (b.c. 146) Ptolemy entered 
Syria with a large force, and after he had placed 
issrrisons in the chief cities on the coast, which 
JfrAvtA him according to the commands of 
Alexander, suddenly pronounced himself in 
isTcorof Demetrius (I Mace. xi. 1-11 ; Joseph. 
iof.liiL §4, 5 iq.), alleginir, probably with truth, 
the existence of a conspiracy against his life 
(Joseph. /. c. cf. Diod. ap. Muller, Fraym. ii. 16). 
.lleiaader, who had been forced to leave Antioch 
(loseph. /. c), was in Cilicia when he heard of 
IVilemy's defection (1 Mace xi. 14). He has- 
tttti to meet him, but was defeated (1 Mace. xi. 
I3; Just. XXIV. 3), and fled to Abae in Arabia 
(Diod. (. c.\ where he was murdered B.C. 146 
(I>i»L /. c. and 1 Mace. xi.. 17 differ as to the 
Qsmier ; and Euseb. Chron, Arm. i. 349 represents 
liim to have been slain in the battle). The 



narrative in 1 Mace, and Joscphus shows clearly 
the partiality which the Jews entertained for 
Alexander " as the first that entreated of true 
peace with them " (1 Mace. x. 47) ; and the same 

TeUadrBrJim (PtolrnuUc taloot) of Aloxnndcr B*1m. 
Olr». Bm* of Kins to rijhi. B«y. BASlAEflS A.\EHAN. 
APOY. B«kI«. niWQ mtUcr. to Wt, and palm-bimnab. In fltld 
tb« moiKicnun and tymbol of Tyro; dale PEP (ISS Aer. Salsa* 
dd.). *:. 

feeling was exhibited aflerwards in the zeal with 
which thev supported the claims of his son 
Antiochus." [ASTiOClilTB, VI.] [U. F. W.] [E.] 

ALEXANDER ("AA^foi/Jpoi ; AU-xandiry. 
Several iwrsons of this name are mentioned in 
the X. T. The name was so common that 
attempts at identification are most precarious. 
In the following list 3 and 6 may be identical, 
but 4 and 6 are probably diflereut )>ersons. 

1. Son of Simon of Cyrcnc, who bore our 
Lord's Cross (Mark xv. 21). On the probable 
reason fur mentioning Simon's sons, see KuFUS. 

2. One of the high-priostly family, and im- 
jwrtaiit enough to bo mentioned by uaiiic in the 
account given (.\cts iv. 6) of the ineetiug of the 
Sanhedrin to examine Peter and Julm. It has 
been conjectured that he may possibly be the 
Alabarch Alexander I.ysimachus of Alexandria, 
brother of Philo, and father of Tiberius Alex- 
ander, procurator of Judaea (Jos. Ant. xviii. 8, 
§ 1; xix. 5, § 1). He was the first man of his 
time among the Jews of Alexandria (Ant. xx. 5, 
§ 2). But this identification has no confirmatory 

8. A Jew of Ephesus, whom his countrymen 
put forward during the tumult raised by Deme- 
trius the silversmith (Acts xix. 33). Their 
object was to dissociate theuiselvcs from the 
Christians, and to avoid any further increase of 
the habitual enmity of their Gentile fellow-citi- 
zens. This was the subject of Alexander's 
attempted defence. The verb used, which signi- 
fies " instructed " (<rvyf$iPcurtw, so best authori- 
ties), negatives the ex]>lanation that he was a 
Christian whom the Jews put forward as a 

4, A Christian who with Ilymenaeus had 
made shipwreck concerning the faith, and had 
been delivered to Satan by St. Paul (1 Tim. i. 
19, 20). For the nature of the discipline in- 
flicted, see HVMEN'AFCS. 

6. A "coppersmith " (xaXjmSs), but see 
Stephanns, ed. Hase, s. r., who proves the word 
to mean simpiv a " smith." He is mentioned by 
St. Paul (2 Tim. iv. 14, lo) as " having done 
him much evil," and " having greatly withstood 
his words." The latter expression is not to 
be connected with r. 16 and referred to oppo- 
sition to St. Paul in his defence (iiiro\oyla) 
at Rome (as Lewin, vol. ii.), but is to be under- 
stood of former opposition to the Apostle s 
teaching (cp. Acts xiii. 8, where the same 

Digitized by 




verb is used, avOiffrofiai). Against a furensio 
and technical sense of " shewed " (/ffSdjaTo), 
see Alford's note ad loc. If the epistle (2 Tim.) 
was addressed to Timothy at Ephesus, Alexander 
was probably concerned in the persecutions to 
which St. Paul was there exposed. [E. R. B.] 

ALEXANTJEIA (^ ■AXtfii.'Speio, 3 Mace, 
iii. 1; Mod., El-Jskenderceych; Kthn., 'AX«foi'- 
t/itis, H Mace. ii. 30, iii. 21 ; Acts vi. 9, jtviii. 24), 
the Hellenic, Roman, and Christian capital of 
Kgypt, was founded by Alexander the (ireat B.C. 
332, who himself traced the ground-plan of the 
city which he designed to make the metropolis 
of his western empire (Plut. Alex. 26). The 
work thus begun was continued after the death 
of Alexander by the Ptolemies; and the beauty 
(Athen. i. p. 3) of Alexandria became proverbial. 
Every natural advantage contributed to its 
prosperity. The climate and site were singu- 
larly healthy (Strab. p. 793). The hnrbours, 
formed by the island of Pharos and the head- 
land Lochias, were safe and commodious, alike 
for commerce and for war; and the Lake Mareo- 
tis was an inland haven for the merchandise of 
Egypt and India (Strab. p. 798). Under the 
despotism of the later Ptolemies the trade of 
Alexandria declined, but its population (300,000 
freemen, Died. xvii. 52 ; the free population of 
Attica was about 130,000) and wealth (Strab. 
p. 798) were enormous. After the victory of 
Augustus it sutlered for its attachment to the 
cause of Antony (Strab. p. 792); but its im- 
portance as one of the chief corn-ports of Rome ' 
secured for it the general favour of the first em- 
perors. In later times the seditious tumults 
for which the Alexandrians lial always been 
notorious desolated the city (a.c. 260 If. : Gibbon, 
Decline ami Fall, c. x.), and religious feuds 
aggravated tlie popular distress (Diony.s. Ales. 
i>. iii., xii. ; Euseb. If. E. vi. 41 ff., vii. 22). 
Yet even thus, though Alexandria suffered 
greatly from constant dissensions and the weak- 
ness of the Byzantine court, the splendour of 
" the great city of the West " amazed Amrou, 
its Arab conqueror (a.d. 640; Gibbon, c. Ii.); 
and after centuries of Muslim misrule it pro- 
mises once again to justify the wisdom of its 
founder (.Stiab. xvii. 791-9; Fraij. ap. Joseph. 
Ant. liv. 7, 2; Plut. Alcjc. 26; Arr. iii. 1; 
Joseph. B. J. iv. 5. ALEXAxu;;it the Gukat). 

The population of Alexandria was mixeil iVom 
the first (comp. Curt. iv. 8, 5); and this fact 
formed the groundwork of the Aleximdrinc 
character. The three regions into which the 
city was diviiled (^Regio Judacurnm, Ur iclicium, 
/Maeoti's) corresponded to the three cliief classes 
of its inhabitants, — Jews, Greeks, Egyptians ;' 

• The Alexandrine corii-vctsels (Acts xxvil. 6, 
xxvlll. 11) wt^re large (ActsxxTli. 37) and handsome 
(Luc. Karig. p. C6», ed. BL-ned.); and even Veepasian 
midi a voyage in one (Joseph. B. J. vlt. 2). They 
generally sailed diroct lo Puteoll (WcocorcAia, Strab. 
p. 793; >Scnec. £p. 77, l; cp. Suet. Aug. »s, Acts 
xxvill. 13) ; but, from stresi of weather, often sailed 
under the Asiatic coast (Acts xxvii. ; cp. Luc. I. c. 
p. 870 sq. ; Smitb, Voyage of SI. PatU, pp. 70 «q.). 

» Polybiua (xxxlv. 14 ; on. Strab. p. 797) spraka 
of the population as consisting ot ** tliree races (rpta 
•fitni), the nati%-e Egj-ptian . . ., the mercenary, . . . and 
thi- Alexandrine ... of Greek descent." The Jews 
mtgbt receive tlie title of ■•mercenaries," from the 
service which they originally reudered to Alexander 


but in addition to these principal races, repre- 
sentatives of almost every nation were foand 
there (Dio Chrys. Oral, xxxii.). According to 
Josephus, Alexander himself assigned to the 
Jews a place in his new city ; " and they ob- 
tained," he adds, "equal privileges with the 
Macedonians " (c. Ap. ii. 4), in consideration "of 
their services against the Egyptians" (B. J. ii. 
18, 7). Ptolemy I. imit.ited the jwlicy of Alci- 
ander, and, after the capture of Jerusalem, he 
removed a considerable number of its citizens to 
Alexandria. Many others followed of their owd 
accord ; and all received the full Macedoaiaa 
franchise (Joseph. Ant. xii. 1 ; cf. c. Ap. i. 22), 
as men of known and tried fidelity (Joseph. 
c. Ap. ii. 4). Already on a former occasion the 
Jews had sought a home in the land of their 
bondage. More than two centuries and a half 
before the foundation of Alexandria a large body 
of them taken refuge in Egypt, after the 
murder of Gcdaliah ; but these, after a geaersl 
apostasy, were carried captive to B.ibylon by 
Nebuchadnezzar (2 K. ixv. 26; Jer. ilir.; 
Joseph. Ant. x. 9, 7). 

The fate of the later colony was far diiferent. 
The numbers and importance of the Egjrptitn 
Jews were rapidly increased under the Ptole- 
mies by fresh immigrations and untiring in- 
dustry. Philo estimates them in his time at 
little less than 1,000,000 (m Place. § 6, p. 971); 
and adds, that two of the five districts of Alei- 
nndria were called " Jewish districts ;" and that 
many Jews lived scattered in the remaining 
three (id. § 8, p. 973). From a chance remark 
of Josephus we should infer that " the Delta" 
— by which name the fourth district in Alex- 
andria was known — was more especially the 
Jewish quarter (rh KoAoi/ttevay A4kTa- irvmf- 
KIOTO yiif tKtt ri '\ovSaXK6y, Joseph. Bell. J'l-i 
ii. 18, 8). Julius Caesar (Joseph. Ant. lit. 
10, § 1) and Augustus confirmed to them 
the privileges whicli they had enjoyed before, 
and they retained them w^ith various inter- 
ruptions, of which the most important, A.D. 
39, is described by Philo (/. c), during the 
tumults and persecutions of later reigns (Joseph. 

c. Ap. ii. 4 ; B. J. xii. 3, 2). They were repre- 
sented, at least for some time (from the time of 
Cleopatra to the reign of Claudius ; Jost, Gfxk. 

d. Jtidenth. 3.J3) by their own officer (^OrcfpxQS' 
Strab. ap. Joseph! Ant. xiv. 7, 2 : aXa^x'l'-' 
Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7, 3; 9, 1; xix. 5, 1; cp. 
Rup. ad Juv. Sat. i. 130: ytrifxiis, Philo, t» 
Flacc. § 10, p. 975), and Augustus appointed a 
council {yf/MViria, i.e. Sanhedrin : Philo, /. c) 
•' to supenntend the affairs of the Jews," ac- 
cording to their own laws. The establishment 
of Christianity altered the civil position of the 
Jews, but they maintained their relative pros- 
perity; and when Alexandria was tiiken by 
Amrou, 40,000 tributary Jews were leckonwl 
among the marvels of the city (Gibbon, c. Ii.). 

For some time the Jewish Church in Alex- 
andria was in close dependence on that of Jeru- 
salem. Both were subject to the civil power of 
the first Ptolemies, and both acknowledged the 
high-i)ricst as their religious head. The perse- 
cution of Ptolemy Philopator (u.c. 217) occa- 
sioned the first political separation between the 

(Josi-pli. B. J. 11. 18, 7) and the fint Ptolemies (Joseph. 

e. Ap. 11. 4). 

Digitized by 



tro bodies From that time the Jews uf Pales- 
tine attached themselves to the fortunes of 
:>rm [ANTiocncs the Great] ; and the same 
{loticr nrhicli alienated the Palestinian party 
^re unity and decision to the Jews of Alex- 
andria. The Septuagint translation, which 
strengthened the barrier of language between 
Palestine and Egypt, and the temple at Leonto- 
polis (B.C. 161), which subjected the tgyptiau 
Jews to the charge of achism, widened the 
dreach which was thus opened. But the divi- 
sion though marked was not complete. At the 
beginning of the Christian era the Egyptian 
Jews still paid the contributions to the Temple- 
strrice (Kaphall, Hist, of Jews, ii. 72). Jeru- 
salem, though its name was fashioned to a 
(■reel: shape, was still the Holy City, the metro- 
jjoUs not of a country but of a people ('UptiiroAis, 
Philo, I'a ttacc. § 7 ; Leg. ad Cai. § 36), and the 
Aleiandriaa'S had a synagogue there (Acts vi. 9). 
The internal administration of the Alexandrine 
I'hurch was independent of the Snuhedrin at 
Jerusalem; but resiject survived submission. 

There were, however, other onuses which 
tended to produce at Alexandria a distinct form 
<'f the Jewish character and faith. The religion 
and philosophy of that restless city produced an 
efect upon the people more powerful than the 
inHueace of politics or commerce. Alexander 
himself symbolised the spirit with whidi he 
wished to animate his new capital by founding 
a temple of Isis side by side with the temples of 
the Grecian gods (Arr. iii. 1). The creeds of 
the East and West were to coexist in friendly 
union; and in after-times the mixed worship of 
Senpis(comp. Gibbon, c. xxviii. ; Diet, of Qeogr. 
I. p 98) was characteristic of the Greek king- 
Jom of Egypt (August, de Civ. Iki, xviii. 5 ; 
S.mixiKut Aegyptiorum deus). This catholicity 
of worship was farther combined with the 
spread of universal learning. The same mon- 
archi who favoDred the worship of Serapis 
<Clem. Al. Protr. iv. § 48) founded and embel- 
liihed the Mnseam and library ; and part of the 
Libmry was deposited in the Serapeum. The 
new faith and the new literature led to a common 
i-'Sne; and the Egyptian Jews necessarily im- 
''ibed the spirit which prevailed around them. 

The Jews were, indeed, peculiarly susceptible 
of the influences to which they were exposed. 
They presenteil from the first a capacity for 
Eastern or Western development. To the faith 
<ind conservatism of the Oriental they united 
tbe activity and energy of the Greek. The 
mere presence of Hellenic culture could not fail 
(» call into play their powers of speculation, 
which were hardly repressed by the traditional 
leiplism of Palestine (comp. Jost, Geach. d. 
Jidtidk. pp. 293 ft'.); and the unchanging 
clement of divine revelation which they always 
tetained, enabled them to harmonize new 
tboDjht with old belief. But while the inter- 
fomse of the Jew and Greek would have pro- 
^wei the same general consequences in any 
■^ue, Alexandria was ]ieculiarly adapted to 
fosire their full effect. The result of the non- 
■wt of Judaism with the many creeds which 
»ete current there roust have been speedy and 
I»»«rful. The earliest Greek fragment of 
•'«wiih writing which has been preserved (about 
I.C. 160) [Aristobulbs] contains large Orphic 
qaotations, which had been already moulded 



into a Jewish form (comp. Jost, Gesch. d. 
Judenth. 370) ; and the attempt thus made to 
connect the most ancient Hellenic traditions 
with the law was often repeated afterwards. 
Nor was this done in the spirit of bold forgery. 
Orpheus, Musaeus, and the Sibyls appeared to 
stand in some remote period anterior to the 
corruptions of polytheism, as the witnesses of a 
primeval revelation and of the teaching of 
nature, and thus it seemed excusable to attribute 
to them a knowledge of the Mosaic doctrines. 
The third book of the Sibyllines (c. B.C. 150) is 
the most valuable relic of this pseudo-Hellenic 
literature, and shows how fur the conception of 
Judaism was enlarged to meet the wider views 
of the religious condition of heathendom which 
was opened by a more intimate knowledge of 
Greek thought ; though the later Apocalypse of 
Ezra [EsORAS, IV.] exhibits a marked reaction 
towards the extreme exclusiveness of former 

But the indirect influence of Greek literature 
and philosophy produced still greater effects 
upon the Alexandrine Jews than the open con- 
Hict and combination ot religious dogmas. The 
literary school of Alexandria was essentially 
critical and not creative. For the first time 
men laboured to collect, revise, and classify all 
the records of the past. Poets trusted to their 
learning rather than to their imagination. 
Language became a study ; and the legends of 
early mythology were transformed into philo- 
sophic mysteries. The Jews took a vigorous 
share in these new studies. The caution 
against writing, which became a settled law in 
I'alestine, found no favour in Egypt. Nume- 
rous authors adapted the history of the Patri- 
archs, of Moses, and of the Kings to classical 
models (Euseb. Praep. Ev. ix. 17-39. Eupo- 
lemus, Artapanus (?), Demetrius, Aristaeus, 
CTeodemus or ilalchas, " a prophet "). A poem 
which bears the name of Phocylides gives iu 
verse various precepts of Leviticus (^Daniel sec. 
LXX.,Apolog. p. 512 f.; Eomae, 1772); and 
several large fragments of a " tragedy " in 
which Ezekiel (c. B.C. 110) dramatized the 
Exodus, have been preserved by Eusebius (/. c), 
who also quotes numerous passages in heroic 
verse from the elder Philo and Theodotus. 
This classicalism of style was a symptom and a 
cause of classicalism of thought. The same 
Aristobulus who gave currency to the Judaeo- 
Orphic verses endeavoured to show that the 
Pentateuch was the real source of Greek philo- 
sophy (Euseb. Praep. Ev. xiii. 12 ; Clem. Al. 
Strom, vi. 98). 

The proposition thus enunciated was tho- 
roughly congenial to the Alexandrine character ; 
and henceforth it was the chief object of Jewish 
speculation to trace out the subtle analogies 
which were supposed to exist between the 
writings of Moses and the teaching of the 
schools. The circumstances under which philo- 
sophical studies first gained a footing at Alex- 
andria favoured the attempt. For some time 
the practical sciences reigned supreme ; and the 
issue of these was scepticism (Matter, Hist, dc 
rEcole d'Alex. iii. 162 if.). Then at length the 
clear analysis and practical morality of the 
Peripatetics found ready followers ; and in the 
strength of the reaction men eagerly trusted to 
those splendid ventures with which Plato taught 

Digitized by 




them to b« content till they could gain a surer 
knowledge {Phaed. p. 85). To the Jew this 
surer knowledge seemed to be already given; 
and the belief in the existence of a spiritual 
meaning underlying the letter of Scripture was 
the great principle on which all his investiga- 
tions rested. The facts were supposed to be 
essentially symbolic : the language the veil (or 
sometimes the mask) which partly disguised 
from common sight the truths which it en- 
wrapjwd. In this way a twofold object was 
gained. It became possible to withdraw the 
Supreme Being (ri Sc, 6 So) from immediate 
contact with the material world ; and to apply 
the narmtives of the Bible to the phenomena of 
the soul. It is impossible to determine the 
process by which these results were embodied ; 
but, as in parallel cases, they seem to have been 
shaped gradually in the minds of the mass, and 
not fashioned at onco by one great teacher. 
Even in the LXX. there are traces of an 
endeavour to interpret the anthropomorphic 
imagery of the Hebrew text [Skptuaoist] ; 
and there can be no doubt that the Commen- 
taries of Aristobulus gave some form and con- 
sistency to the allegoric system. In the time of 
Philo (b.C. 20 — A.D. 50) the theological and 
interpretative systems were evidently fixed even 
in many of their details, and he appears in both 
cases only to have collected and expressed the 
popular opinions of his countrymen. 

In each of these great forms of speculation— 
the theological and the exegetical — Alei- has an important bearing upon the 
Apostolic writings. But the doctrines which 
are characteristic of the Alexandrine school 
were by no means peculiar to it. The same 
causes which led to the formation of wider 
views of Judaism in Egypt, acting under greater 
restraint, produced corre8|»nding results in 
Palestine. A doctrine of the Word (Memra) 
and a system of mystical interpretation grew 
up within the Rabbinic schools, which bear a 
closer analogy to the language of St. John and 
to the "allegories " of St. Paul than the specu- 
lations of Philo. 

But while the importance of this Rabbinic 
element in connexion with the expression of 
Apostolic truth is often overlooked, there can 
be no doubt that the Alexandrine teaching was 
more powerful in furthering its receptiott. Yet 
even when the function of Alexandrianism with 
regard to Christianity is thus limited, it is need- 
ful to avoid exaggeration. The preparation 
which it made was indirect and not immediate. 
Philo's doctrine of the Word (Logos) led men to 
accept the teaching of St. John, but not to 
anticipate it ; just as his method of allegorizing 
Atted them to enter into the arguments of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews, though they could not 
have foreseen their application. 

llie first thing, indeed, which must strike 
the reader of Philo in relation to St. John is the 
similarity of phrase without a similarity of idea. 
His treatment of the Logos is vague and incon- 
sistent. He argues about tlie term and not 
about the reality, and seems to delight in the 
ambiguity which it involves. At one time he 
rej)rescnts the Logos as the reason of God in 
which the archetypal ideas of things exist (A^or 
iySUifTos), at another time as the Word of 
Qod by which He makes himself known to the 


outward world (\6yos wpi>4>opiK6>); bat he 
nowhere realizes the notion of One Who k >t 
once Revealer and the Revelation, which is the 
essence of St. John's teaching. The idea of the 
active Logos is suggested to him by the necessitj 
of withdrawing the Infinite from the finite, God 
from man, and not by the desire to bring God 
to man. Not only is it impcasible to coaceiTe 
that Philo could have written as St. John 
writes, but even to suppose that he could htn 
admitted the possibility of the Incamatioa of 
the Logos, or of the personal unity of the Legos 
and the Messiah. But while it is right to state 
in its full breadth the opposition between the. 
teaching of Philo and St. John,' it is impossible 
not to feel the important office which the 
mystic theosophy, of whicli Philo is the repre- 
sentative, fulfilled in preparing for the appre- 
hension of the highest Christian truth. Without 
any distinct conception of the personality of the 
Logos, the tendency of Philo's writings was to 
lead men to regard the Logos, at least in some 
of the senses of the term, as a person; and 
while he maintained with devout earnestness 
the indivisibility of the Divine nature, he de- 
scribed the Logos as Divine. In this manner, 
however unconsciously, he prepared the war for 
the recognition of a twofold personality in the 
Godhead, and performed a work without whicb 
it may well appear that the language of 
Christianity would have been unintelligible 
(comp. Dorner, Die Lehrc von der Person Chriiti, 

The allegoric method stands in the sanie 
relation to the spiritual interpretation of 
Scripture as the mystic doctrine of the Word to 
the teaching of St. John. It was a prepantioo 
and not an anticipation of it. Unless men had 
been familiarized in some such way with the 
existence of an inner meaning in the Lawud 
the Prophets, it is difficult to understand how 
an Apolios "mighty in the Scriptures" (Acts 
xviii. 24-28) could have convinced many, er 
how the infant Church could have seen almost 
unmoved the ritual of the Old Covenant swept 
nway, strong in the conscious possession of its 
spiritual antitypes. But that which is found in 
Philo in isolated fragments combines in the 
N. T. to form one great whole. In the former 
the truth is affirmed in casual details, in the 
latter it is laid down in its broad principles 
which admit of infinite application ; and a com- 
parison of patristic interpretations with those of 
Philo will show how powerful an apostolic 
example exercised in curbing the imagination of 
later writers. Nor is this all. While Philo 
regarded that which was pceitive in Judaism as 
the mere symbol of abstract truths, in the 
Epistle to the Hebrews it appears as the shadow 
of blessings realized (Heb. ix. 11, ytyoftiitni) ia 
the presence of a personal Saviour. History 
in the one case is the enunciation of a riddle ; 
in the other it is the record of a life. 

The speculative doctrines which thus worked 
for the general reception of Christian doctrine 
were also embodied in a form of society which 
was afterwards transferred to the Christian 
Church. Numerous bodies of ascetics ( TUra- 

• The closest antloKy to the teaching of Phil" un Ihe 
Logus occurs In the Epistle to the Hebrews. Owipsi: 
Heb. Iv. 13 with Philo, Quit rer. die. Aaerc*^ i M. 

Digitized by 



pflriae), eipeciallj' on the borders of Lake 
HuvotU, devoted theinselres to a life of cease- 
leu diiM!]plme and study. Unlike the Essenes, 
who present the corresponding phase in Pales- 
tinian life, they abjare<l society and labour, and 
often forgot, as it is said, the simplest wants of 
itatare in the contemplation of the hidden 
wisdom of the Scriptures (Philo, de \'it. Coa- 
ttmpl. throughout). The description which 
PhUo gires of their occupation and character 
seemed to Eusebius to present so clear an image 
of Christian Tirtue* tiiat he claimed them as 
C'hrutians; and there can be do doubt that 
some of the forms of monasticism were shaped 
upon the model of the Therapentae (buseb. 
U. E. ii. 16). 

According to the common legend (Euseb. /. c.) 
St. Mark drst "preached the Gospel in Egypt, 
and founded the Hrst Church in Alexandria." 
\t the beginning of the second century the 
number of Chnstians at Alexandria must hare 
b«en very large, and the great leaders of 
Gnosticism who arose there (BasUides, Valen* 
tinus) exhibit an eiageeration of the tendency 
of the Quirch. But the later forms of Alex- 
andrine speculation, the strange varieties of 
Uoeaticisni, the progress of the catechetical 
school, the derelopmeikt of Keo-Platonism, the 
rarions phases of the .\rian controversy, belong 
to the history of the Church and to the history 
ot philosophy. To the last Alexandria fulfilled 
its. mission; and we still owe much to the 
spirit of it* great teachers, which in later ages 
struggled, not without success, against the 
sterner systems of the West. 

[In the <ace of the general acceptance of 
Alexandrine syncretism, a somewhat opposite 
view is taken by lienouf (//i>6icr< £«cfuns, 1879, 
pp. 246-248), who denies that Alexandria was 
of any importance " as a medium of interchange 
of ideas between the Eastern and Western 
worlds." Alexandrine thous;ht, he maintains, 
was free from Oriental influence ; .Mexandriue 
philosophers were either ignorant or con- 
temptuous of Oriental ideas, and of the 
Egyptian language and literature. He quotes 
M- AmpJre, " Alexandre fut tri« grecque, assez 
juive et prtsque point igyptiennc " (^licvw des 
Iteux Moadet, Sept. 184(>, p. 735), and sup- 
ports bis view by pointing out that down to 
the Roman times there had been no commercial 
commnnicatioD between Alexandria and the 
distant East, the Indian traffic passing through 
the Galf of Akaba, and being conveyed to the 
Mediterranean either by Palmyra and Antioch 
or by Petra and Gaza (quoting Renaud, "Sur 
Ic royanme de la llesine et de la Kharaaine," 
in the Mim. de VAcad. da Inter, t. xxiv. pt. 2, 
fk 219 ; and Lnmbrox, Stcherchea mr C^cunomk 
ytlitique de FBg^pU soul k$ Lagides, chap. vi. 
oo Commerce). — R.] 

The following works embody what is valuable 
in the earlier literature on the subject, with 
copious references to it: Matter, 1/istoirc dc 
fEmU d'Alexandrie, 2nd edit., Paris, 1840; 
A. F. Dahne, Geschichtliche Vanteltung dcr 
JSdaeh-Alexandrmischen BeUjiona-Phihaophie, 
Halle, 18.34 ; A. F. GfrSrer, PhOo und dit 
Jwiiich-AUxandrinaclie TAeoaophie, Stuttgart, 
1835. To these may be added H. Ewald, history 
< Jsnul, ToL V. 22.3 sq.; J. M. Jost, Oesch. des 
JvknOumt, Leipzig, 1857, i. 344 sq., 388 sq. ; i 



A. Keander, History of Christian Churcli, vol. i. 
tJ6 sq., Eng. tr., 1847 ; Prof. Jowett, PhUo and 
St. Paul, St. Paui's Epistles to the Thessaloniiias, 
&c., London, 1855, i. 363 fl'. And for the later 
Christian history : H. F. Guericke, Pe Schold 
Alexandritui Caicchetica, Halis, 1825; Hasel- 
bach, De ScMa, quae Aiex. floruit, Catecheticd, 
part i., Stettin, 1826 ; cf. Matter, //. de FEcola 
d'Alex. 1820. For Alexandrian Gnosticism and 
allegory, cf. Baur's Church Historij, vol. i. pt. iii. 
chap, i., Eng. tr. (Williams and Norgate). 

In recent literature the general subject has 
been very fully discussed. S])coial mention may 
here be made of Herzfeld's Oesch. des Voltes 
Israel, B<1. iii. ; Griitz, Geach. der Jtiden, Bd. 
iii. 3 ; Hausrath, SeutestaiacHtliclte Zeitgschte. 
Bd. ii. 91-145; Stanley's Jewish Church, Lect. 
xlvii. i Schtirer's Gesch. d. Jad, Bd. ii. 493 sq. 

For Alexandrine religious thought, see also 
Zeller, Pie Philosophie der Griechen, &c., iii. 
2, 338-418 (1881); Liiwius, Alexandr. Heli- 
gionphilos., in Schenkel's Bibel Lexicon : and 
specially for Philo's treatment of the Ixigos, 
Heinze, Die Lehre torn Logos in der gricch. 
Philos., 1872 ; Soulier, La doctrine du Logos 
chez Philon d'Alexandrie, 1876; Lightfoot, St. 
PanPs Epistle to the Colossians, note on i. 15; 
Westcott, Gospel according to St. John, Introd. 
xv.-xviii., and Introduction to (Ac Study of the 
Gospels, chap. iii. ; Bigg, The Christian I'la- 
tonists of Alexandria, p. 14, &c. ; Drnmmond's 
Philo-Judaeus.' [B. F. W.] [R.] 

ALEXANDRIANS, THE(o/ 'A\ti<irS(>t7t). 
1. The Greek inhabitants of Alexandria (3 Mace, 
ii. 30, iii. 21). 2. Alexandrini. The Jewish 
colonists of that city, who were admitted to 
the privileges of citizenship, and had a syna- 
gogue at Jerusalem (.\cts vi. 9 . [Alexan- 
dria.] [W A. W.] 


algummim; D'^p^N, almuggim; (vAAoreA.^- 
Ktrra, A. f. weXefoirei, B. in 1 K. x. 11, 12; {. 
rdKwa; ligna thi/ina, ligna jiinea). There can 
be no question that these words are identical, 
although, according to Celsius (^Hiercii. i. 178), 
some doubted it. The same author ennmerates 
no fewer than filteen dilTerent trees, each one of 
which has been supposed to have a claim to 
represent the algum or almug tree of Scripture. 
Mention of the almug is made in 1 K. x. 11, 12 
{algum in 2 Ch. ix. 10, 1 1) as having been brought 
in great plenty from Ophir, together with gold 
and precious stones, by the fleet of Hiram, for 
Solomon's Temple and house, and for the con- 
struction of musical instruments. "The king 
made of the almug-trees pillars for the house of 
the Lord, and for the king's house, harps also and 
psalteries for singers ; there came no such 
almug-trees, nor were seen unto this day " (1 K. 
/. c). In 2 Ch. ii. 8 (though in 1 K. v. 6), 
Solomon — by an intelligible mistake on the 
part of the Chronicler — is represented as 
desiring Hiram to send him "cedar-trees, fir- 
trees, and algum-trees out of Lebanon " (cp. 
Speaker's Comm., note /. c). From the pass.nge 

* Alexandria occurs In the Vulgate by »n error for 
No- Amman [No-AuvonO. Jcr. xlvi. 2i ; £zek. xzx. 14, 
lt,l«; Mah. ULS. 

Digitized by 





in Kings, it seems clear that almug-trees cntne 
from Opliir, No ioformalion can be deduced 
from the readings of the LXX., which explains 
the Hebrew word by " hewn wood " (1 K. 
X. 11, B.), "unhewn wood" {ibid. A.), and 
" pine-wood " (2 €h. ii. 8, and ix. 10, 11). The 
Vulg. in the passages of Kings and '1 Ch. ix, 
read ligna thyina; but in 2 Ch. ii. 8 follows 
the LXX., and has lii/na pinea. 

Interpreters are greatly perplexed as to what 
kind of tree is denoted by the words algummim 
and almuggim. The Chaldee and the Arabic 
interpretations, with Munster, A. Montanus, 
Deodatus, NolJius, Tigurinus, retain the original 
word, as do the A. V. and R. V. in all the three 
passages. We may notice the conjectures of the 
chief modern writers on the subject. Against 
the first four given below, objections have been 
raised. (1.) borne maintain that the thyina* 
wood (^Thiii/a articulatd) is signified by algum. 
This wood, as is well known, was highly prized 
by the Romans, who used it for the doors of 
temples, tables, and a variety of purposes ; for 
the citron-wood of the ancients appears to be 
identical with the thuya. (The word occurs in 
Rev. xviii. 12.) Its value to the Romans ac- 
counts for the reading of the Vulgate in the 
passages quoted above. But the TAuya artkulata 
is indigenous to the north of Africa, and is 
not found in Asia ; and few geographers will 
be found to identify the ancient Ophir with 
any port on the N. African coast. [Ophir.] 
(2.) Not more happy is the opinion of Dr. Kitto, 
that the deodar is the tree probably designated 
by the term almtig (Pirf. ISihl., note on 2 Ch.). 
On this subject Sir J. Hooker, in a letter to the 
writer, says, " The dfodar is out of the question. 
It is no better than cedar, and never could have 
been exported from Himalaya." (3.) The late 
Dr. Royle, with more reason, is inclined to 
decide on the white sandal-wood (Santaltan 
otbmn ; see Cycl. Bib. Lit., art. " Algum "). This 
tree is a native of India and the mountainous 
parts of the coast of Malabar, and deliciously 
fragrant in the parts near to the root. It is 
much used in the manufacture of work-boxes, 
cabinets, and other ornaments. (4.) The Rabbis *■ 
understand a wood commonly call brasil, in 
Arabic albaccain, of a deep red colour, used in 
dyeing." This appears to be the bukium {Caes- 
alpina sappaii), a tree allied to the Brazil-wood 
of modern commerce, and found . in India ; and 
many of the Jewish doctors understand coral 
(i.e. coral-wood) by the word almug, the name 
no doubt having reference to the colour of the 

* Thiija appears to be a corru|:tlon of Thya^ from 
^w, ** 1 sacriflce," tbe wood having been used in 
sacrifices. Tkuja <Kcidentali$ b the well-known ever- 
green, "arbor vitae." 

» R. Salomon Ben Meiek, 1 K. x. II, and R. Dav. 
Kimcht, 2 Ch. it. f<. "Algummim est quod almygffim, 
arbor rubris colorls dicta Arabum lingua albaccam, 
vulgo bratUia." See Cflslus, who wonders ihot the 
term " Brazil-wood " (,Lignum bratUitnte) should be 
Domed by one who llvei 300 years before the discovery 
of America ; but the word bratiU nlso = red colour. 
Cf. Ro8<?nm. Bot. of BiU. p. 243, Morren's note. 

* jfij, lignum arboris magnoe, foUls amygdallnl!<, 

cujBs dccocto tlngitur color rublcundns sen pseudo- 
purpureuB— lignum breslllum — r£tam, color ejus tine- 
tnrom rcferens (Gollus, Arab. La. s. v. bakUam'i. 

wood. (5.) But little reliance can be placed 
on these rabbinical interpretations, and the 
most probable of all the attempts to identify 
the aimug is that first proposed by Celsius 
{Uierch, i. 172), viz. that the red sandal-wood 
(Pterocarpns santalintu) may be the kind denoted 
by the Hebrew word. So also Rawlinson in 
Speaier'a Comm. on 1 K. x. 11. Oetlli (in 
Strack u. Ziickler, Ktjf. Komm. on 2 Ch. ii. 7) 
indicates sandal-wood simply, without specifica- 
tion of colour. 

This tree, which belongs to the natural order 
Leguminosae, and sub-order Papilionaceae, is a 
native of India and Ceylon. The wood is very 
heavy, hard, and fine-grained, and of a beantifnl 
garnet colour, as any one may see who has 
observed the medicinal preparation, tbe com- 
pound tincture of lavender, which is coloured 
by the wood of the red sandal-tree. Dr. Lee 
(Lex. //e6. s. v. "Algummim"), identifying 
Ophir with some seaport of Ceylon, followinj 
Bochart (Chanaan, i, 46) herein, thinks that 
there can be no doubt that the wood in question 
must be either the Kalanji id of Ceylon or the 
sandal-wood (Pterccarpua santalinus) of India. 
The Kalanji wi, which apparently is some species 
of PUrocarpus, was particularly esteemed and 
sought after for the manufacture of lyres and 
musical instruments, as Dr. Lee has proved by 
quotations from Arabic and Persian works, la 
fact he says that the Ga.stern lyre is termed the 
id, perhaps because made of this sort of wood. 

As to the derivation of the word, Hillei't 
(Hierophyt.ot. i.p. 106)derivationfromtwowords 
supposed to mean "drops of gum " is untenable. 
Other etymologies that have been suggested 
may be seen in Celsius, Hierob. i. 172 sq.\ 
Salmasius, llijl. latr. p. 120, b ; Castell. La. 

ffept, s. T. DIlpK. The word is evidently 
foreign. Gesenius connects it with the Sanskrit 
mic'iitu (the Arab. art. prefixed), sandal-vmod, 
but the Sanskrit word is of doubtful existence; 
and uncertainty rests nlso, according to BSth- 
lingk, upon another Sanskrit word, valgu, ral- 
guka, with which Lassen compared it, giving 
to it the meaning of amdal-Kuoii (see MV." 

a. e. D^JDpK). Josephus, though not naming 
the almug-tree (Ant. viii. 7, § 1), makes special 
mention of a tree not unlike pine, which was 
imported by Solomon, but which he is careful 
to warn us not to confuse with the pine-trees 
known to the merchants of bis time, "Those 
we are speaking of," he says, " were in appear- 
ance like the wood of the fig-tree, but were 
whiter and more shining." This description is 
too vague to allow us even to conjecture what 
he means. On the whole, the arguments are 
in favour of the red simdal-wnod being the 
algum of the 0. T. [W, H.] [H. B. T.] 

ALI'AH. [Alvah.] 

ALI'AN. [Alvan.] 


ALLEGOBY, a figure of speech, which has 
been defined by Bishop Marsh, in accordance 
with its etymology, as " a representation of one 
thing which is intended to excite the repre- 
sentation of another thing ; " the first represen- 
tation being consistent with itself, but requiring, 
or being capable of admitting, a moral and 

Digitized by 



ipiritDul interpittation ov«r and above its 
literal koh. An allegory has been incorrectly 
masidered by some as a lengthened or sustained 
metaphor, or a continuation ot' metaphors, as by 
CSctro, thus standing in the same relation to 
metiphor as jiarable to simile. Bnt the tno 
figures are quite distinct ; no sustained meta- 
phor, or succession of metaphors, can constitute 
tD allegory, and the interpretation of allegory 
iliffers from that of metaphor, in having to do 
not with words but things. In every allegory 
there is a twofold sense ; the immediate or his- 
toric, which is understood from the words, and 
the oltimate, which is concerned with the 
thiags signified by the words. The allegorical 
interpretation is not of the words, but of the 
tilings dgniHed by them (cp. Luke viii. 11, &c. ; 
" Sam. lii. 1-14) ; and not only mar, but 
actually does, coexist with the literal interpre- 
tation in every allegory, whether the narrative 
in which it is conveyed be of things possible or 
r«a]. An illustration of this may be seen in 
Gal. ir. 24, where the Apostle gives an allegori- 
•si interpretation to the historical narrative of 
Hagsr and Sarah ; not treating that narrative 
-H an allegory m itself, aa our A. V. would lead 
iH to snppose, but drawing from it a deeper 
sense than is conveyed by the immediate repre- 
sentation, as " containing an allegory " (R. V.). 
In pav allegory no direct reference is made 
to the principal object. Of this kind the parable 
of the prodigal son is an example (Luke xv. 
11-32) In mixed allegory the allegorical nar- 
ntire either contains some hint of its applica- 
tion, as Ps. Ixxx., or the allegory and its inter- 
pretation are combined, as in John xv. 1-8 ; 
but this last passage is, stnctly speaking, an 
example of a metaphor 

The distinction between the parable and the 
allegory is laid down by Dean Trench (On the 
Par^iln, chap, i.) as one of form rather than of 
essence. " In the allegory," he says, " there is 
in interpretation of the thing signifying and 
the thing signified, the qualities and properties 
of the first being attributed to the last, and the 
two tons blended together, instead of being kept 
qnite distinct and placed side by side, as is the 
case in the parable." According to this, there 
is no such thing as pore allegory as above 
defined. [W. A. W.] 

Allegory (&XXo iiyoftifoi) has its position 
snd history in Biblical Hermeneutics. This is 
Inced, and may be followed with much profit, 
in Hamboriier, RE.* Abth. ii. a. n. Allegorie ; in 
Herzog. ££.* ; and Wetzer u. Welte's K. Lex. 
:■ n. Hermeneutik, BSilische. Cp. also Farrar's 
Bist. of Interpretation, Index, s. n. "Alle- 
gory- [F.] 

ALLELU'IA CAAAijAo^ra; Allcluii), so 
written in Kev. lix. 7 foil., or more properly 

Hallelcjah (rC wSl), " praise ye Jehovah," 
•TJ it is found in the margin of Ps. civ. 35, cv 
♦5, cvi., cii. 1, cxii. 1, cxiii. I (cp. Ps. cxiii. 
9, m. 18, cxvi. 19, cxvii. 2). The Psalms from 
ciiii. to cxviii. were usually called by the Jews 
the Hallel, though some have applied the name 
hy preference to Psalms cxxxiv.-vii. These 
lUms were sung on the first of the month, at 
the feast of Dedication and the feast of Taber- 
■wlei, the feast of Weeks and the feast of the 



Passover. [Hosanxa.] In later times, New 
Year's day and the d.ty of Atonement were ex- 
cluded from their seasons in deference to the 
grave character of these days as " days of judg- 
ment " i and the same exclusion applied to the 
feast of Purim. At the Passover Pss. cxiii. and 
cxiv., according to the school of Uillel (the 
former only according to the school of Sham- 
mai), were sung before the feast, and the re- 
mainder at its termination, after drinking the 
last cup. The hymn (Matt. xxvi. 30) sung by 
Christ and His disciples after the last snpper is 
supposed to have been the great Hallel, which 
seems to have varied according to the feast* (cp. 
Hamburger, HE. fUr liibel «. Talmud, Abth. ii. 
s. t>. " Hnllel "). The literal meaning of " Halle- 
lujah " sufficiently indicates the character of 
the Psalms in which it occurs, as hymns of 
praise and thanksgiving, 'llioy arc all found in 
the last book of the collection, and bear marks 
of being intended for use in the Temple-service ; 
the words " praise ye Jehovah " being taken up 
by the full chorus of Levites. In the great 
hymn of triumph in heaven over the destruc- 
tion of Babylon, the Apostle in vision heard the 
multitude in chorus like the voice of mighty 
thunderings bur^t forth, " Alleluia, for the Lord 
God omnipotent rcigneth," responding to the 
voice which came out of the throne, saying, 
" Praise our God, all ye His servants, and yo 
that fear Him, both ^mall and great " (Rev. xix. 
1-6). In this, as in the ofl'cring of incense 
(Rev. viii.), there is allusion to the service of the 
Temple, as the Apostle had often witnessed it in 
its fading grandeur. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ALLIANCES. In the time of Abraham 
alliances with fureignera were not forbidden. 
At Mamre he had his "confederates" among 
the chiefs of Canaan (Gen. xiv. 13); and his 
alliance with Abimelech, king of Gerar (Gen. 
XXI. 22), renewed by Isaac (Gen. xxvi. 26), is a 
model of primitive simplicity and trustfulness. 
Presently this permission was withdrawn, and 
on the first establishment of the Israelites in 
Palestine connexions between them and the 
surrounding nations were forbidden (Lev. xviii. 
3, 4 ; XX. 22, 23). The geographical position of 
their country, the peculiarity of their institu- 
tions, and the prohibitions against intercourse 
with the idolatrous Caniianitesund other heathen 
nations, alike tended to promote an exclusive 
and isolated state. But with the extension of 
their power under the kings, the Jews were 
brought more into contact with foreigners, and 
alliances became essential to the security of 
their commerce. Solomon concluded two im- 
portant treaties chiefly for commercial pur- 
poses : the first was with Hiram, king of Tyre ; 
and, if principally with the view of obtaining 

* Historically the introduction of the Hatlcl Into the 
sjoftgogat service is trmcnl, according to the Rabbinic 
teachers of tlie 3rd and 4th cent, a.d., to the men of 
the days of Mordecal and Esther, who Instituted its use 
in commemoration of great deliverances from great 
sufferings and sorrows. It was easy to go further and 
base the Idea upon the " Hallel " of a Moses and Israel 
after their passage tlirough the I!«l Sea. of a Joshua 
and Israel after their battles with the kings of Canaan, 
of a Deborah and Barak alter the victory over Slsera, 
of on Ananias, MIsacl. and Aiarlas after their deUvo 
ance tnuL the king of liabyion. 

Digitized by 




materialii nnd workmen for the erection of the 
Temple, «ud nftcrwaiils for the supply of ship- 
builders and sailors (1 K. v. 2-l".J, ii. 27), it 
was also a general league of amity (cp. the 
rebuke to Tyre in Amos i. 9): tlie second was 
with Pharaoh, king of £s;ypt, and was cemented 
by his marriage with a princess of the royal 
family (I K. iii. 1); by this he secured a 
monopoly of the trade in horses nnd other pro- 
ducU of that country (1 K. x. 28. 29). After 
the division of the kingdom, political alliances 
(as distinguished from the lamentable matri- 
monial alliances, <■.</, 1 K. xi. 1-8, xvi. 31) 
were of an oflen^ive and defensire nature : they 
bad their origin partly iu the internal disputes 
of the kingdoms of Judah nnd Israel, and partly 
in the position which these countries held rela- 
tively to Kgypt on the one side, and the great 
Eastern monarchies of Assyria and Babylonia on 
the otiier. The fresh light from the ancient 
monuments cast u|>on the Jewish scant historical 
records enables us to account for, and sometimes 
correct, views upon the alliances and connter- 
alliances formed between these |<eople3. Thus 
the invasion of Suishak iu Kehoboam's reign — 
directed as it was against the northern !Ui well 
as the southern kingdom — can no longer b« 
claimed as an alliance made with Jeroboam, who 
had previously found an asylum in Egypt (1 K. 
xi. 40, jcii. 2, xiv. 25). Each, however, of these 
inonarchs sought a connexion with the neigh- 
bouring kingdom of Syria, on which side Israel 
was particularly assailable (1 K. iv. 19) : but As« 
ultimately succeeded in securing the active co- 
operation of Itenhadad against liaasha (IK. xr. 
10-20). Another policy, induced probably by 
the encroaching spirit of Syria, led to the forma- 
tion of an alliance between the two kingdoms 
under Ahab and Jehoshaphat, which was main- 
tained until the end of -Vhab's dynasty : it 
occasionally extended to commercial operations 
(2 Oh. XX. oG). The alliance ceased in Jehu's 
reign : war broke out shortly after between 
.\maziah uiiti Jeroboam II. : each nation looked 
for foreign aid, and a coalition was formed 
lietween Kezin king of Syria and Pekah on the 
one side, and Ahaz and Tiglath-pileser king of 
.\ssyria on the other (2 K. xvi. 5-9). By this 
means an openiug was atTurded to the n<lvances 
ni the Assyrian power: and the kingdoms of 
Israel and Judah, as they were successively 
attacked, -wught the alliance of the Egyptians, 
who were strongly interested iu maintaining 
the independence of the Jews as a barrier against 
the encroachments of the Assyrian power. Thus 
Hoshea made a treaty with So (Sevechus, the 
.Sh.ibak of the 25th Dynasty ), and rebelled 
ai;ainst Shalmaueser (2 K. xvii. 4): Hezekiah 
adopted the same policy in opposition to Sen- 
nacherib (Is. XXX. 2). In neither case was the 
alliani:c productive of much good : the Israelites 
were abandoned by So: in Hezekinh's case, the 
Egyptian troops were defeated at Altnka in the 
earlier stages of the campaign of n.c. 701, Judah 
was overrun by the Assyrian soldiery, and heavy 
tribute exncteil. Later on, when a fresh move- 
ment on the part of the Egyptians and a possible 
junction of liis own forces with those of Tir- 
hakah might have tempted Hezekiah to a fresh 
alliance, he was taught by Isaiah to ally himself 
to God OS the only defence against the Assyrian 
(cp. Driver, tsaiah, ch. vii.). The weak condition 


of Egypt at the beginning of the 26th Dynasty 
left Judah entirely at the mercy of the .^ssyrianj, 
who under Esarhaddon subdued the couotty, 
and by a conciliatory policy secured the ailhesion 
of Mnnasseh and his successors to his side agtiist 
Egypt (2 Ch, xxxiii. 11-13). It was apparently 
as an ally of the Babylonians that Josiah, niiwtT 
years later, resisted the advance of Necho (2 Ch. 
XXXV. 20). His defeat, however, and the check 
to the Babylonian troops, made the Jews the 
subjects of Egypt. Nebuchadnezzar's first ex- 
pedition against Jerusalem was contemporaaeous 
with, and probably fn consequence of, the ex- 
pedition of Necho against the Babylonians (2 K. 
xxiv. 1 ; Jer. xlvi. 2): and lastly Zedekiah's 
rebellion was accompanied with a renewal of 
the alliance with Egypt (Ezck. xvii. 13). A 
temporary relief appears to have been afforded 
by the .-idvancc of Hophrah (Jer. xixvii. 11), 
but it was of no avail to prevent the extinctioa 
of Jewish independence. 

On the restoration of independence Jadss 
Maccabaeus sought an alliance with the Romans 
who were then gaining an ascendency in the 
East, as a counterpoise to the neighbouring state 
of Syria (1 Mace, viii.; Joseph. Ant. xii. lu,§6). 
this alliance — the terms of which were graven 
on brass and deposited in the Capitol at Rome- 
was renewed by Jonathan (1 Maoc xii. 1 ; A»V 
xiii. 5, §8) and by Simon (1 Mace. iv. I'j 
Ant. xiii. 7, §3): on the latter occasion theio- 
dependence of the Jews was recognised and for- 
mally notitied to the neighbouring nations B.C. 140 
(1 Mace. XV. 22, 23). Treaties of » friendly 
nature were at the same )>erioJ concluded with 
the Lacedaemonians under an itnpressioa tbtt 
they came of a common stock (1 Mace. iii. 3, 
xiv. 20; Ant. xii. 4, §10, xiii. 5, §8). The 
Roman alliance wns again renewed by Hvrcsnns, 
B.C. 128 (^Ant. xiii. 9, § 2), after his defeat by 
Antiochns Sidetes, and the losses he had «u- 
tnined were repaired. This alliance, however, 
ultimately proved fatal to the independence of 
the Jews : the rival claims of Myrcanus sad 
Aristobulus having been referred to Poinpey, 
n.c. 63, he availed himself of the opportunity of 
placing the country under tribute (Ant. xiv 4, 
§4). Finally, Herod was raised to the sove- 
reignty by the Roman Senate, acting under the 
advice of M. Antony (_Ant. xiv. 14, § 5). 

The formation of an alliance was attended 
with various religious rites: a victim wasslsin 
and divided into two parts, between which the 
contracting parties passed, invoking imprecations 
of a similar destruction upon him who should 
break the terms of the alliance (Gen. xv. 10; 
cf Liv. i. 24); hence the expression JT'lS D^J 
( = ipKta riiaifai, focdiis iccrc), to make (lit. to 
cut) a treaty; hence also the use of the term 

nPH (lit. imprecatitm) for a covenant. That 
this custom was maintained to a late period 
appears from Jer. xxxiv. 18-20. Generally 
speaking, the oath alone is mentioned in the 
contracting of alliances, either between nations 
(Josh. ix. 15) or individuals (Gen. xxvi. 28, 
iixi. M; 2 K. xi. 4; 1 Mace. iv. 17). The 
event was celebrated by a feast (Gen. /. c.\ 
Ex. xxiv. 11 ; 2 Sam. iii. 12, 20> Salt, •» 
symbolical of 6delity, was used on these oc- 
casions ; it was applied to the sacrifices (Lev. ii. 
13), and probably used, as among the Arabs, >t 

Digitized by 



linpiuble entertainmenU ; hence the expreuion 
"CDTenant of salt" (Num. xriii. 19 j 2 Ch. 
xiil 5). OccasioDally a pillar or a heap of 
(toMs waa set up as n memorial of the alliaace 
(Gen. xxxi. o2), a castom prevalent among the 
Aarrians also. Presents were also sent by the 
party soliciting the alliance (1 K. xt. 18 ; Is. 
XXI. 6, 1 Mace. XT 18> The fidelity of the 
Jews to their engagements was eonspicoous at 
all periods of their history (Josh, ix, 18), and 
any breach of covenant was visited with very 
severe ponishment (2 Sam. xxi. 1 ; Ezek. xvii. 
16X [W. L.B.] [F.] 

ALTiOM (B. 'AW^r, A. 'ASAii' , Malinon), 
I Esd. r 34. The same as Ami or AuoN. 
Cp. Ezra U. 57 ; Neh. vii. 59. [W. A. W.] [F.j 

AL.XON (fhtt or fh^), a large strong tree 
of some description, probably an oak (see Ges. 
Tics. 51, 103 ; Stanley, App. § 76). The word 
is foand in two names in the topography of 

1. Allon, more accurately ElOS, Jv^jl* 
<D^3J0^3; B. MwAi Kal B((r</iiciV, A. Mii\i»r 
K. BtvfPOflii ; Elon), a place named among the 
cities of NaphUli (Josh. xix. 33). Probably the 
more correct construction is to take it with 
the following word, uc. either (R. V.) " the oak 
in Zaananniic," or — treating the 3 as part of 
the word (K. V. marg.) — the oak (fit terebinth) of 
Bezaemanmm. In the former case, the place 
might possibly derive its name Zaanannim from 
aome nomad tribe or wanderers (see the verb in 
Is. xxxiii. 20). Such a tribe were the Kenites, 
and ia connexion with them the place is again 
iiaia«d in Judg. iv. ll,*" with the additional 
definition of "by Kedesh " (of NaphUli). The 
latter view (see Dillmann on Josh. xix. 33) is, 
however, favoured by the absence of the article be- 
fore p7K. In this case it would be better to read, 
as in Judg. iv. 11 (Cethib), D»UfV3, ^B'annim. 
The A. v., following the Vulgate, renders here 
■" the plain of Zaanaim." [R. V. as above ; B. ia>s 
tpvi>% (A. ir/>it tphir) ^tKtovtmoivTuy (thinking 
of mta. to iecotctoKs).] [Elon.] (See Stanley, 
p. 34b' noU.) [G.] [S. R. D.] 

2. Alu).«'chdth (n«3 J^^«'; K. V. 
Allon-Bacuth = " oak of weeping ; " and so 
BJa^aros irtrtovs ; Querma jletua), the tree under 
which Rebekah's nurse, Deborah, was buried 
" beneath Bethel " (Gen. xxxv. 8). Ewald {Gesch. 
iiL 29) believes the " oak of Tabor " (1 Sam. x. 3, 
A. V. "plain of T.") to be the same as, or the 
successor of, this tree ; " Tabor " being possibly 

• ^r/^t^ Allan, U the mding of V. d. Hooght, and 

ft Watton's Poljrglott ; but the best sathorltles hare as 
above (De Rcwl, Far. LecU. Snpplem. p. 3S). 

% Tbe Tsrgnm of Jonathan reoders this passage by 
—a» plain (^2f^^) of tbe pools" (X'JJK). connecting 
Brmttuannim with a late Heb. word D*rV3 {Bu'aim) 
an aat ug tanks or pnols (see Klmcbl {. I. ; Levy, Chald. 
WB. ». T. K33K> HBWB. s. v. D'BSa). upon which 
■peralatioos respecting the character of the locality 
have been bued (Ewald, JBW. U. 62). "Plain" is 
ia accordanca wiib the usoal rendering of 'K in the 
Taigtan (cp. '• tbe plains of Moreh "). [8. R. D.] 

< Tbe Ssm. Version, according to its cnstonary 
lendering of AUon, has here nn'33 ^1C'0. "the 

ylsis of BakiUi.'' See this sol^ect more fully examined 

Oder Eun. 



a merely dialectical change from "Deborah:" 
he would further identify it with the " palm-tree 
of Deborah " (Judg. iv. 5). See also Stanley, 
pp. 143, 220. [G.] [W.] 

AL'LON (li^«; B. 'K^Jty, A. 'AAAiiv; 
AUoiC). A Simeonite, ancestor of Zirza, a prince 
of that tribe in the reign of Uezekiah (1 Ch. iv. 
37). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ALMO'DAD CIlto^N; 'T^v^iH; Elmo- 
dad), named first, in order, among the descen- 
dants of Joktan (Gen. x. 26 ; 1 Ch. i. 20 [B. 
omits]), and thus as the progenitor of an Arab 
tribe. His settlements must be looked for, in 
common with those of the other descendants 
of Joktan, in the Arabian peninsula; aud his 
name appears to be preserved in that of MudSd 
(or El-Mndad, the word being one of those 
proper names that admit of the article being 
prefixed), a famous personage in Arabian his- 
tory, the reputed father of Ishmael's Arab wife, 
and the chief of the Joktanite tribe Jurhum 
(not to be confounded with the older, or first, 
Jurhum), which, coming from the Yemen, 
settled in the neighbourhood of Mekka, and 
intermarried with the Ishmaelites. The name 
of Mud^d was peculiar to Jurhum, and borne 
by several of its chiefs (Caussin de Perceval, 
Essai sw rUist. des Arabes, i. 33 scq., 168, 
and 195 uq.). Gesenius (Lex., ed. Tregelles, 
111 loc.) says, " If there were an ancient error 

in reading (for HniD/X), we might compare 

Murad, ^iy» or d\y» , jj, the name of a 

tribe living In a mountainous region of Arabia 
Felix, near Zabid." Dillmann (Gen. 1. c), D. H. 

Miiller, and Ualevy take 7K to be the name of 
God (as often in Sabaean names), and, deriving 
TIO from "W, render God is One to he loted or Ooil 
tocca (see MV." a, n.). Others have suggested 

j-rtr«, but, apart from philological objections, 

the well-known tribes of this stock are of 
Ishmaelite descent. Bochart (Phaleii. ii. 16) 
thinks that Almodad may be traced in the name 
of the 'AAov^cwToi of Ptolemy (vi. 7, § 24), a 
people of the interior of Arabia Felix, near the 
sources of the river Lar [Ar.'^dia] ; but see 
against this view ZDMG. xxii. 658. [E. S. P.] 

ALTION (jtoV?; B. ra^aAo,* A. 'AA^n; 
Alrmn), a city within the tribe of Benjamin, 
with " suburbs " given to the priests (Josh. xxi. 
18). Its name does not occur in the list of the 
towns of Benjamin in Josh, xvili. In the parallel 
list in 1 Ch. (vi. 60) it is found as Alemeth 
[B. TaKiiJuei, A. -^- ; AlmatK] — probably a later 
form, and that by which it would appear to 
have descended to us. [Alemeth.] [G.] [W.] 

AL'MON-DIBLATHAIM (accurately Dib- 

lathaimah, nD^n^STjbbr ; TtXiiitv A«flAo9<{i/»; 
Helmon-diblathaimj, one of the latest stations of 
the Israelites, between Dibon-gad and the moun- 
tains of Abarim (Num. xxxiii. 46, 47 [A. in 
V, 47 AaiiSAoediv]). Dibon-gad is doubtless the 

• This suggests that the Hebrew name of the Gamala 
BO fiunoos In the Roman war In Galilee may have been 

Digitized by 




present Dkibun, just to the north of the Arnon ; 
and there is thus every probability that Alnion- 
diblathaim was identical with Beth-diblathnim, 
a Moabite city mentioned by Jeremiah (ilviii. 
22) in company with both Dibon and Nebo, and 
that it* traces will be discovered on further 
exploration. The name Beth-diblathaim occurs 
on the Moabite stoue, and it has been identified, 
doubtfully, by Major Conder with the ruins of 
DeUiydt, south of the Zerka M'ain. [Beth- 
DinLATHAIJJ.] [G.] [W.] 

ALMOND OR"^. «^<2*e<' P''^. '»«]■ **«'V 
Sa\oy, xipvov, Koptwos, Kopvari', amygdalus, 
ami/gdala, in nuci's modam, instar nuat, rirga 
vigilaM). This word is found in Gen. xliii. 11 ; 
Ex. XXV. 33, 34, xixvii. 19, 20 ; Numb. r\-ii. 8 1 
Eccles. xii. 5 ; Jer. i. 11, in the text of the A. V. 
It is invariably represented by the same Hebrew 
word (shdied), which sometimes stands for the 
whole tree, sometimes for the fruit or nut • for 
instance, in Gen. xliii. 1 1, Jacob commands his 
sons to take as a present to Joseph " a little 
honey, spices and myrrh, nuts and almonds , " 
where the fruit is clearly meant. In the passages 
out of the Book of Exodus the " bowls made like 
unto almonds,"* which were to adorn the golden 
candlestick, seem to allude to the nut also.'' 
Aaron's rod, that so miraculously budded, 
yielded alnumd nuts. In the two passages from 
Ecclesiastes and Jeremiah, slidlted is translated 
almond tree, which from the context it certainly 
represents. It is clearly then a mistake to 
suppose, with some writers, that shdkid stands 
exclusively for "almond-nuts," and that lux 
signifies the " tree." • It appears more probable 
that this tree, conspicuous as it was for its early 
flowering and useful fruit, was known by these 
two different names. The etymology ot the 
Hebrew luz is uncertain ; and although tJie 
word occurs only in Gen. xxx. 37, where it is 
translated hazel in the text of the A. V., yet 
there can be little or no doubt that it is 
another word for the almond [so K. V. »'» loco'], 
for in the Arabic this identical word, * Ji 

liti, denotes the almond. [H-VZEl.] The early 
appearance of the blossoms on the almond-tree 
(Ami/gdalus communis') was no doubt i-egarded 
by the Jews of old as a welcome harbinger 
of spring, reminding them that the winter 
was passing away — that the flowers would soon 
appear on the earth — and that the time of 
the smging of birds and the voice of the turtle 
would soon be heard in the land ( Song of 
Sel. ii. 11, 12). Shdied is derived from a root 

* D'^pE'Di P"*' Por*- P'-> '""" denom. verb ipt^, 
always used in Heb. text iu reference to the golden 
candlestick; LXX. iicrmnnifuyQt KopvttrKovi, al. xa* 

pvi(TKOtt ; AlUilo, cfjlfivyfiaAw/^'Kilf . 

' IpC^, "est amjigdalM el amj/gilalum, arbor et 

fructus ; hlc autpm fructus potius quam arboris forma 
designarl vldetur" (Rownmail. Schol. in Ezod. xxv. 
33). That thakM = tree and /rait, see also Ftlrat, 
Concord. IpC', **amygd<Ua et amygdalum, de arbore 

et fractu ; " and Bnxtorf, Lex. Chald. ^3B', " rigniflcat 
arborcm et fructum." Mlcliaclls (S«pp(. s. v. y'J^) 
understands the almond-shaped bowls to refer to the 
llot$om. I.e. the calyx and the corolla. 

• Harris, Diet. A'ot. B. Bitit. art. " Abnond," and 
Dr. P.oyle in Kltto, art. -Shakfd." 


which signifies "to be wakeful," "to hasten," 
for the almond-tree blossoms very early in th( 
season, the flowers appearing before the leaves. 
The word shdked, therefore, or the tree which 
hastened to put forth its blossoms, was a rerr 
beautiful and fitting synonym for the lii, or 
almond-tree, in the language of a people bo food 
of imagery and poetry as were the Jews. We 
have in our own language instances of plants beia; 
named from the season of the year when ther 
are flowering — May for Haathom ; Pasqve Plorer 
for Anemone; Lent Lily for Daffodii ; Winter 
Cress for Hedge Mustard. But perhaps tbe best 
and most exact illustration of the Hebrew shdied 
is to be found in the English word Apricot, or 
Apricock, as it was formerly and more correctly 
called, which is derived from the Latin praeaypa, 
praecocia ; this tree was so called by the Romans, 
who considered it a kind of peach which ripened 
earlier than the common one ; hence its name, 
the precociovs tree (comp. Plin. iv. 11 ; Martial, 
xiii. 46). 

The almond-tree flowers early in Januaiv, 
and continues to show a mantle of white bloom 
suffused with a delicate blush, until Febraarr. 
when the fniit begins to set. The knowledge of 
this interesting fact will explain that otheririie 
nnintelligible passage in Jeremiah (i. 11, l^X 
" The word of the Lord came unto me, saying, 
Jeremiah, what seest thou ? And I said, I sf 
the rod of an almond-tree {shdked). Then said 
the Lord unto me, Thou hast well seen, for I will 
hasten (^shdked; R. V. " I watch over ") My word 
to perform it." 

In that well-known poetical representation of 
old age in Eccles. xii. 5 it is said, " the almond- 
tree shall flourish." This expression is generally 
understood as emblematic of the hoary locks of 
old age thinly scattered on the bald head, just 
as the white blossoms appear on the yet leafiess 
boughs of this tree. Gesenius, however, does 
not allow such an interpretation, for be sayi 
with some truth * that the almond flowers are 
pink or rose-coloured, not white. This passage, 
therefore, is rendered by him — " the almond is 
rejected." ' Though a delicious fruit, yet the 
old man, having no teeth, would be obliged t> 
refuse it.« If, however, the reading of the .4. \ ■ 

' ^pC' (1) dtaOmit, (1) vigilavU^Ani). jjjui, 

i>p* . injomni*. ITie Chaldee te JHJB'. p??' 
HJB'iNnjB'i i and p being Interchuiged. Tbf 

- : T ; • 

Syriac word Is similar. 

• The general colour of the almond blossom Is ptok. 
but the flowers do vary fnm deep pink to nearly wMlf . 

f -ipttj yxjV Qeseniua makes the verb yw J'"'* 
Hlphll future, from ^KJ, to deride, to dapite: }T<J| 
would then be after the Syriac form, instead of J*^]* 
But all the old Versions afrrce with the translstkm ot 
the A. V. [R. v. "blossom"], the verb being fonn»l 
regularly ftom tbe root, |'M, /lorert. [Sse Wrifbi- 
Rcletiattet, p. i68 n, who prefers ytjiy, " wiU '' 

despised."] , 

• " When the grinders cease because they «re ft* 
(Eccles. xll. 3). For some other cnrlous interprttsUoos 
of this passage, see tbat of R. Salomon, quoted by SinK" 
Pagnlnus In his rAetaurtu, sub voce pj, and VaUMo-S 
Annofata ad Scctesiatten, xlL i (CV«. S»c. Ui. »S«)- 

Digitized by 



is Klainal, th«n the allusion to the almond-tree 
ii iot(ii(l«l to refer to the hastening of old age in 
the case of him who remembereth not "his 
Creator in the days of his youth." As the 
almond-tree nshers in spring, so do the signs 
mentioned in the context foretell the approach 
of dU age and death. It has always been re- 
garded by the Jews with reverence, and even to 
this day the English Jews on their great feast- 
ilsn carry a bongh of flowering almond to the 
iroagogue, just as in old time they used to 
present palm-branches in the Temple, to remind 
them perhaps, as Lady Callcott has observed 
(Scr^. Herfi. p. 10), that in the great famine in 
the time of Joseph the almond did not fail them, 
and that, as it " failed not to their patriarchs in 
the days of dearth, it cometh to their hand in 
this day of worse and more bitter privation, as 
a token that God forgetteth not His people in 
their distress, nor the children of Israel, though 
>cattered in a foreign land, though their home 
!s the prey of the spoiler, and their Temple is 
l«conie an high place for the heathen." 

The almond-tree, the scientiKc name of which 
is Amnqdalat communis, belongs to the natural 
'•rder Rosaceae and sab-order Amygdaleae. This 
"nltr is a large and important one, for it con- 
tains more than lOOO species, many of which 
produce excellent fmit. Apricots, peaches, 
nectarinet, plums, cherries, apples, pears, 
strawberries, &c, are all included under this 
iirder. It should be remembered, however, that 
the seeds, flowers, bark, and leaves of many 
fJants in the order Rosaceat contain a deadly 
poison; namely, prussic or hydrocyanic acid. 
The almond-tree is a native of Western Asia 
and Korth Africa, but it is cultivated in the 
milder parts of Enrope. It does not appear to 
Hare been cultiv.ited in Egypt, since almonds 
were among the presents taken down thither by 
Jacob's sons. In Palestine it is indigenous. 
There are many wild almond-trees on Mount 
< 'armel, aad they abound in the lonely forests of 
Oilead, and are among the few trees which 
nliere the barrenness of the wilds of Moab. 
"3 Jebel Attarus and Jebel Shihan are many 



*>Id almond-trees. I found them covered with 
^^■vm 3000 feet above the sea in the beginning 
<>'■ February, and in Southern Gilead I have 
o^fa, in my rides, gathered wild almond nuts 
»m1 611ed in March. Though the blossom of 
l^e almond is not white, yet when, as in the 
Mule dict. — vou i. 

orchards about Nablons (Shechem), the peach- 
and almond-trees are intermingled, the latter 
look white by contrast. In early spring they 
form a beautiful picture in the landscape there, 
as the lower slopes of Gerizim, as well as the 
valley, are studded with peaches and almonds 
(the descendants, doubtless, of those which sup- 
plied Jacob's sons with their gifts), in striking 
contrast with the deep green foliage of the 
orange-trees, and rivalling an apple orchard in 
splendour of colour. Though not so thickly 
massed, they are a not less beautiful feature in 
the forest scenery of Gilead. In England the 
almond is grown simply on acconnt of its beau- 
tiful vernal flowers, for the fruit scarcely ever 
comes to maturity. The height of the tree is 
about 12 or 14 feet ; the flowers are arranged 
for the most part in pairs ; the leaves are long, 
ovate, with a serrated margin, and an acute 
point. The covering of the fruit is downy and 
succulent, enclosing the hard shell which con- 
tains the kernel. The bitter almond is the nn- 
grafted wild tree. Four species of Amygdalus 
are indigenous in Palestine. The English almond, 
Spanish almendra, the Provencal amandola, the 
French amande, are all apparently derived from 
the Greek iftvytdXri ; Latin amygdala. It 
is curious to observe, in connexion with the 
almond-bowls of the golden candlestick, that 
pieces of rock-crystal used in adorning branch- 
candlesticks are still termed by the lapidaries 
"Almonds." [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

ALMS (Chald. np*IV)> beneficence towards 
the poor, from Anglo-Sax. almesse, probably, as 
well as from the Germ, almosen, from iKtnuo- 
aiyj\ ; cicemosyna, Vulg. (but see Bosworth, A.-S. 
Diet.). The word " alms " is not found in; the 
A. V. of the canonical Books of the O. T., but it 
occurs repeatedly in the N. T., and in the apo- 
cryphal books of Tobit and Ecclesiasticus. The 
Heb. npiy, righteousneaa, is rendered by the 
LXX. in Deut. xxiv. 13, Dan. iv. 27, and else- 
where, i\ti)iu>iivvii, instead of which the modem 
Revised text reads in Matt. vi. 1, Sucaioirivii. 

The duty of almsgiving, especially in kind, 
consisting chiefly in portions to be left de- 
signedly from produce of the field, the vineyard, 
and the oliveyard (Lev. xii. 9, 10, xxiii. 22 ; 
Deut. XV. 11, 14, xxiv. 19, 21, xxvi. 2-13; 
Ruth ii. 2), is strictly enjoined by the Law. 
After his entrance into the land of promise, the 
Israelite was ordered to present yearly the first- 
fruits of the land before the Lord, in a manner 
significant of his own previously destitute con- 
dition. Every third year also (Deut. xiv. 28) 
each proprietor was directed to share the tithes 
nf his produce with "the Levite, the stranger, 
the fatherless, and the widow." The theological 
estimate of almsgiving among the Jews is indi- 
cated by the following passages : — Job ixxi. 17 ; 
I'rov. I. 2, xi. 4 ; Jjth. ix. 22 ; Ps. cxii. 9 ; 
Dan. iv. 27 ; Acts ix. 36, the case of Dorcas ; 
X. 2, of Comelins : to which may be added, 
Tob. iv. 10, 11, xiv. 10, 11 ; and Ecclus. iii. 30, 
xl. 24. And the Talmudists went so far as to 
interpret righteousness by almsgiving in such 
passages as Gen. xviii. 19 ; Ps. xvii. 15 ; Is. 
liv. 14. 

In the Somen's court of the Temple there 
were thirteen receptacles for voluntary offerings 
(cp. Mark xii. 41), one of which was devoted to 

Digitized by 




iilras for education of poor children of good 
family. Before the Captivity there is no trace 
of permission of mendicancy, but it was evidently 
allowed in later times (Matt. xx. 30 ; Mark x. 
46 ; Acts iii. 2). 

After the Captivity,-.but at what time can- 
not be known certainly, a deKnite system of 
almsgiving was introduced, and even enforced 
under penalties. Besides the tithes mentioned 
above, and the portions of produce set apart for 
the poor in fields and vineyards, there were in 
every city three collectors. The collections were 
of two kinds: 1, of money for the poor of the 
city only, made by two collectors, received in a 
chest or box (DBIp) in the synagogue on the 
Sabbath, and distributed by the three in the 
evening ; 2, for the poor in general, of food and 
money, collected every day from house to house, 
received in a dish ('inOD) by the three collec- 
tors, and distributed by them. The two col- 
lections obtained the names respectively of" alms 
of the chest " and " alms of the dish." Special 
collections and distributions were also made on 

The Pharisees were zealous in almsgiving, 
but too ostentatious in their mode of perform- 
ance (Matt. vi. 2). But there is no ground for 
supposing that the expression ^<| <roA»/o7)i is 
more than a mode of denouncing their display, 
by a figure drawn from the frequent and well- 
known use of trumpets in religious and other 
celebrations, Jewish as well as heathen (Winer, 
$. V. ; Otho, Lex Rabb. pp. 163-167 ; Carpzov. 
Elcem. Jttd. § 32, p. 745; Vitringa, de Syn. 
Vet. iii. 1, 13 ; Maimonides, de Jure Paupcna, 
a treatise devoted to the subject (Prideaux) ; 
Lightfoot, Ilorae Jiebr., on Matt. vi. 2, and Deacr. 
Temfdi, 19 ; Dkt. of Antiq. s. v. " Tuba.") [See 
Ofpeeinos; Poor; Tithes; Temple.] 

The duty of relieving the poor was not 
neglected by the Christians (Matt. vi. 1-4; 
Luke xiv. 13 ; Acts xx. 35 ; Gal. it 10). Every 
Christian was exhorted to lay by on the Sunday 
in each week some portion of bis profits, to be 
applied to the wants of the needy (Acts xi. 30 ; 
Rom. XV. 25-27 ; 1 Cor. ivi. 1-4). It was alfo 
considered a duty specially incumbent on widows 
to devote themselves to such ministrittions 
(1 Tim. V. 10). [H. W. P.] 

ALMUG-TBEE. [Aloum.] 

AL'NATHAN (A. 'E\meAy, B. 'ZyraTiiy, 
Knaathan). Elnathan No. 2 (1 Esd. viii. 44 
[LXX. V. 43] ; cp. Ezra viii. 16, B. -^). 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

ALOES, LIGN ALOES (D*^rit«, Ahdlim, 

ni^HK, AkdlM; OKrirai [in Num. xxiv. 6]; 
ffToin^ [in Ps. ilv. 8]; T.' i\<i9, H.i\o^|•, 
Syra. euiiiana [in Cant. iv. 14] : tahemacula, 
l/utta, tUoe: in N. T. 4a<1ij, aloe), the name 
of some costly and sweet-smelling perfume 
prepared from a tree mentioned in Ps. xlv. 
8, "All thy garments smell of myrrh, and 
aloes, and cassia;" in Prov. vii. 17, "I have 
perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes, and cin- 
namon." In Cant. iv. 14, Solomon speaks of 
" myrrh and aloes, with all the chief spices." 
The word occurs once in the N. T. (John xix. 
.39), where mention is made of Nicodemus bring- 
ing " a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an 
hundred pound weight," for the purpose of 


anointing the body of our Lord. The tree it»l( 
is spoken of in \umb. xxiv. 6, where Baltsm 
compares the camps of Israel to " trees of Yiga 
aloes which the Lord hath planted." Wnt«r<> 
generally, following Celsius {Hierob. L 135), 
who devotes thirty-five pages to this subject, 
suppose that the AquUaria agaUockvm is the 

AqnlUrlft ftgKllochiim. 

tree in question. The trees which belong to 
the natural order Aquilariaceae, apetaloos dico- 
tyledonous flowering plants, are for the m«t 
part natives of tropical Asia. The species ;tf 
agallochvm, which supplies the aloes-wood oi 
commerce, is much valued in India on accoast 
of its aromatic qualities for fumigationi >I><1 
incense. It was well known to the ArsVn 
physicians. Ibn Sina ' (Avicenna), in the Lstiii 
translation, speaks of this wood under the names 
of Agallochmn, Xiflaloe, or Lignum-Aloes. la 
the Arabic original a description is given of it 
under the names of Aghlagoon, Aghalookhi, (W 
(Dr. Royle, in Cyc. Bib. s. v. " Ahalim "> ^f- 
Royle (llliat. of Himalai/an Botany, p. I'l) 
mentions three varieties of this wood as beiuj 
obtained in the bazaars of Northern India. 

The AquUaria secundaria of China has the 
character of being the most highly scented. But 
it is a singular fact that this fragrancy does not 
exist in any of this family of trees when in > 

• Abdallah Ibn Sina, a celebrated Arabian fbytlaa 
and natural philoeoplier, born a.». 9»0. The Je»i 
abbre%iited the name Into Abenslni, whence the Cliifc- 
tians called It Avicenna. 

' j^» J\pV«Y«J^0X0''. .iquitttria mata, Spren- 

gel, Bitt. Itei Heri. \. p. 261 tq. j Avicenna, UL p. l* 

^^^\S-\' Id. (Frcytag, Lex. a. v.). ^^ Ugnw 

Aloef. Kam. DJ. Avic. Can., III. p. Ml ; eft. Sprenpl, 
fli»(. Rei Bfrb. 1. 1. p. »ri (Froytag. la. s. v.). 

Digitized by 



halthj and frowing condition ; it is only when 

tlw tree it diseased tliat it has this aromatic 

property. On this account the timber is often 

iuied for a short time in the ground, which 

tcoelerates the decar, when the utter, or fragrant 

oil, i> secreted. The best aloe-wood is called 

cakmiac, and is the prodnce of Aqttilaria agaU 

ixkim, a native of Silhet, in Northern India. 

This is a magnificent tree, and grows to the 

iieiglit of 120 feet, being 12 feet in girth : "The 

birk of the trsnk is smooth and ash-coloured ; 

tlut of the branches grey and lightly striped 

vitb brown. The wood is white, and very light 

.ml soft. It is totally without smell ; and the 

leivcs, bark, and flowers are equally inodoroos " 

Script. Hoi. iSi). The Hxcaecaria agallochum, 

with which some writers have confused the Aq. 

itjdl., is an entirely different plant, being a 

small crooked tree, containing an acrid milky 

poison, is common with the rest of the Eaphor- 

liKau. Penons hare lost their sight from this 

juice getting into their eyes, whence the plant's 

generic name, Excaecaria. It is difficult to 

.icttiimt for the specific name of this plant, for 

the agaiUehum is certainly not the produce of it. 

There would be no difficulty in the identifi- 

dlion olAhalan with the Oriental A. agallockum, 

3i the three passages in which the perfume is 

mentioned would imply that it was a foreign 

I'rodnct, were it not for the expression in Balaam's 

parable; for he speaks, as the paaaage would 

imply, of a tree familiar to himself or his 

besreit. But no species of Aquilaria is found 

is Mesopotamia, and we can scarcely assume 

that Balaam would take hia illustration from a 

tree absolntely unknown. It seems much more 

probable that in this case the name was applied 

to some other but familiar tree, such as the 

graceful Popuitu eupliratica, which in many 

[arts is a conspicuous adornment of the banks 

«f the Euphrates, and is pre.«minently the rirer- 

side tree of Western Asia. The difficulty seems 

to hare been recognised by the LXX., who 

translate ncip'ai, as though the original had been 

D'^iTK, 'ohalim, and in this they are followed by 
t!* Vnlg., Syriac, Arabic, and other Versions. 
Hot this reading destroys all the force and 
|«rallelism of the context. 

The passage in Ps. xIt. 8 has been sometimes 
translated thus : " The myrrh, aloes, and cassia, 
perftming all thy garments, brought from the 
■voir jnUces of the Minni, shall make thee 
^ad." The Minni, or Minaei, were inhabitants 
•! spicy Arabia, and carried on a great trade in 
t» exportation of spices and perfumes (Plin. 
oi. 14, 16; Bochart, J'haleg, ii. 22, 135). As 
'he ni/rrh and cassia are mentioned as coming 
t^-tn the Jjinni, and were doubtless natural 
[■t«diictions of their country, so it has been 
iaSerred that aloes, being named with them, was 
»a5 also a production of the same country. But 
tie translation is impossible.' The aloe of 
^ptnre has nothing to do with the modern 
•In of medicine, procured from a species of 
' - 

* S(e RoeenmtUler's note on this passage {Sckol. in 
•■ r- at Pi. iIt. »>, and Lee's Beb. Ux. (s. v. »jp). 
^ ^- tnaslstes, " Out of irory palaces stringed instru- 
laeoti have made tbee glad." See Speaker't Omm. In 
l«n nui the onnmeDtarfes of Perowne, Delitzsch, Cheyne, 
W- Sctilti, *c. In lw». 



American aloe. Aloe vera, which has become 
naturalised in Palestine. [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

A'LOTH (Jihv; B. iy if KaoKd, A. ^i- 
Maa\iiT, Luc. recension iy t§ FaXadS ; Baloth ; 
R. V. Bealoth), a place or district, forming with 
Asherthe juri^iction of the ninth of Solomon's 
commissariat officers (1 K. ir. 16). T.' and later 
scholars read iy BooAcit, " (in) Bealoth," though 
the A. V. ("in Aloth ") treaU the 3 as a 
prefix. In the former case see Bealoth. 
Josephus has tV wepl 'Apieiiy napaKtcw, 'Apxii 
being the name which he elsewhere gives to 
Ecdippa (Achzib) on the sea-coast in Asher. 
Conder {Jidbk. to Bible, 402) identi6es Aloth 
with Kh. 'Alia near Jlfo^ia ; but Gu^rin (fialilie, 
ii. 62), with more probability, believes Kh. 'Alia 
to be Hali (Josh. lii. 25). [G.] [W.] 

AL'PHA, the first letter of the Greek alpha- 
bet, as Omega is the last. Its significance is 
plainly indicated in the context, " I am the 
Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the 
beginning and the end " (Rev. xxii. 13, R. V. ; 
a passage explanatory of i. 8, xxi. 6 : cp. R. V. 
in each case), which may be compared with Is. 
xli. 4, xliv. 6, " I am the first and I am the last, 
and beside Me there is no God." So Prudentiua 
(Cathemer. hymn. ix. 11, quoted by Bp. Woi-ds- 
worth in loco) explains it : 
" Coide natus ex Parentis, ante mnndl exoidlnm 
Alpha et cognomlnatus. Ipse fons et clansnla 
Omnium quae sunt, foerunt, quseqne post fiitnra 

In Rev. xxii. 13, the speaker is oar Lord ; in i. 8, 
xxi. 6, He is, according to most commentators, 
God the Father. The appellation, taken in its 
most general sense, is equivalent to " the Eternal 
One," from Whom all things proceed and to Whom 
they tend ; and, in the special sense of the Apo- 
calypse, it is used of One Who will carry on to 
its consummation the work which He has begun ; 
" the kingdom of the world is become the king- 
dom of our Lord and of His Christ " (Rev. xi. 
15, R. v.). Illustrations of the expression " the 
Alpha and the Omega " are adduced by Abbot 
(/). B., Amer. ed.) from Josephus, c. Apibn. ii. 
22; Ant. viii. 11, § 2; Plato, <fe Legg. iv. 
7, p. 715 e; Clem. Alex. Strom, vi. 5. The 
expression "I am Alpha and Omega" is further 
illustrated by the usage in Rabbinical writers of 
Aleph and Tan, the first and last letters of the 
Hebrew alphabet. Schoettgen (/for. Ilebr. i. 
1086) quotes from Jalhit Bubeni, fol. 17, 4, 
" Adam transgressed the whole law from K to 
n," that is, from the beginning to the end. It 
is not necessary to inquire whether in the latter 
usage the meaning is so full aa in the Revelation : 
that must be determined by separate considera- 
tions. As an illustration merely, the reference 
is valuable. Both Greeks and Hebrews em- 
ployed the letters of the alphabet as numerals. 
in the early times of the Christian Church the 
letters A and tl were combined with the cross or 
with the monogram of Christ (Maitland,CAuroA«» 
the Catacombs, pp. 166-8). One of the oldest monu- 
ments on which this occurs isa mnrbletablet found 
in the catacombs at Melos, which belongs, if 
not to the first centurv, to the first half of the 
second (see Diet, of Christ. Antiq. " A and n," 
« Cross," i. pp. 495-7). [W. A. W.] [F.l 

, ALPHABET. [Writino.] 

H 2 

Digitized by 




ALPHAEUS ('AA^wuioi or 'A\<paios; Al- 
phaeiis ; Aramaic, 'D^H). 

1. Father of Levi the publican (Mark ii. U). 
Notice the Western reading 'iditw/SoF (James) for 
AtifiD (Levi), suggested by riy rod 'AA^atou 
(the son of Alphaeus). 

a. Father of James the Apostle, always 
mentioned to distinguish his son from James 
the son of Zebedee (Matt. i. 3; Mark iii. 18; 
Luke Ti. 15 ; Acts i. 13). The identification of 
this Alphaeus with Clopas (John xix. 25), and 
perhaps with Cleopas (Luke xxiv. 18), is the 
only point necessary to consider. The question 
of the identity of the persons will be taken 
first, and afterwards the independent question 
of the identity of the names. The identity of 
Alphaeus and Clopas depends on the supposition 
that James the son of Alphaens is the same as 
James " the Little " (R. V. marg., 4 /uKpit, Mark 
XV. 40 ; R. V. in text as A V., " the lest" There 
is no scriptural or early sanction for the title 
James the Great being applied to James the son of 
Zebedee). The mother of James the Little was 
Mary, and, by a comparison of the accounts of the 
Crucifixion, this Mary appears to be the same as 
Mary of Clopas, i.e. probably the wife of Clopas 
(John lii. 25). Clopas, according to Hegesippus 
(Enseb. H. E. iii. H), was brother of Joseph, the 
husband of the Blessed Virgin. Some have 
supposed that Mary the wife of Clopas was the 
Virgin's sister, on the ground of John xix. 25 
(but see Westcott's note in Speaker's Commen- 
tary'). Clopas being Joseph's brother, his son 
Simeon was regarded (though of course not 
accurately) as our Lord's cousin; and Simeon 
was on this account chosen to succeed James as 
Bishop of Jerusalem (Euseb. H. E. iv. 22). If 
Clopas and Alphaeus are the same, then James 
the son of Alphaeus is no more really related 
to our Lord according to the flesh than Simeon 
the son of Clopas, who is described as our 
Lord's cousin (iix^iiis). For the bearing of 
this point on the controversy about James the 
Lord's brother, see Jahi::8. It will be evident 
from what has been said that all inferences from 
the passages quoted are precarious. 

Admitting that Alphaeus and Clopas may be 
two names for the same man, can it be admitted 
that the names themselves are two Greek forms 

of one Aramaic name, 'B/n (Chalphai) ? Clopas 
cannot be connected with Alphaeus through 
'S'jn, for an initial (1 is seldom if ever repre- 
sented by k; the omission of a before A. in 
KXtirat and the insertion of w after it are 
unaccountable ; and the representation of D by 
X is unlikely. Delitzsch* holds with great pro- 
bability that KXiw is a contraction of 
KXe^irtu, and KAetdrar an abbreviation of 
KAcidraTpot (the masculine counterpart of 
KAcoircCrpa), a name which actually occurs 
(Plutarch, Vit. Ar. 40). The identity of the 
man Alphaeus with the man Clopas may still be 
admitted, as Jews often bore Greek in addition 
to Aramaic names, and sometimes a man chose 
a Greek name which sounded like his Aramaic 
name, though not etjrmologically connected 

• In his Heb. N. T. (1886), Delltisch renders Al- 
phaens by »B^n. Clopas by DS^p. Cleopas by DDI'^i?- 


with it. If Delitzsch's view is correct, Clopw 
and Cleopas are the same name, and the Cleopis 
of Luke xxiv. 18 may possibly be the same u 
the Clopas of John xix. 25. 

On the whole question, see Herxog, RedEmj. 
art. Alphans; Expositor, Jan. 1885, sad 
authorities there quoted ; Bishop lightfwt'g 
Ga/a<i(in»,*The Brethren of the Lordji). 253 sq., 
especially p. 260, note 3. [E. B. B.] 

AliTANE'US. Same as Mattesai (Em i. 
33, KB. MaBewla; Mathania), one of the mis of 
Hashnm (1 £sd. ix. 33, B. MaXraviMt, A. 
•A\r.;Carianem). [W. A. W.] [K.] 

ALTAB (ngn? ; «wffi«rr*p«oi', fixfiis; al- 
tare). A. The 'iSrst altar of which we km 
any account is that built by Noah when he left 
the ark (Gen. vui. 20). The TsrgnmisU indeed 
assert that Adam built an altar after hems 
driven out of the garden of Eden, and th«t en 
this Cain and Abel, and afterwards Noah inl 
Abraham, offered sacrifice (Pseudo-Jonsth. Gen. 
viii. 20 ; ixii. 9). According to the tradition, 
the First Man was made upon an altar whick 
God Himself had prepared for the purpose, sol 
on the site of this altar were reared both thou 
of the Patriarchs and that in the Temple of 
Solomon. This tradition, if in no other «y 
valuable, at least shows the great importance 
which the Jews attached to the alter as the 
central point of their religious worship (Bilir, 
Symbol, ii. 350). 

[n the early times altars were usually hnilt 
in certain spots hallowed by religions sssodi- 
tions, e.g. where God appeared (Gen. iii. '; 
xiii. 18 ; xxvi. 25 ; xxiv. 1). Generally of 
course they were erected for the offerinj; <* 
sacrifice ; but iu some instances they appear lo 
have been only memorial. Such was the star 
built by Moses and called Jehovah Nissi, «s » 
sign that the Lord would have war with Amsiek 
from generation to generation (Ex. xviL 15, lo> 
Such too was the altar which was built by the 
Keubenites, Gadites, and half-tribe of Manssseh, 
"in the borders of Jordan," and which »'» 
erected " not for burnt-offering nor for sacrifice. 
but that it might be "a witness" between 
them and the rest of the tribes (Josh. «''■ 
10-29). Altars were most jirobably originsHr 
made of earth. This was the commonest form 
of altar in antiquity. Such were the altan « 
the Greeks, Romans, and Carthaginian.^. Ter- 
tullian {Apol. 25) speaks of altars of turf (* 
ccspite altaria) as the earliest among t-te 
Romans. The Law of Moses allowed them to be 
made either of earth or of unhewn stones (u- 
XX. 26): any iron tool would have profaned the 
altar. But' this law was subsequently modifieo- 

In later times altars were frequently built m 
high places, especially in idolatrous worship 
(Dent. xii. 2 ; for the pagan notions on this sub- 
ject, see Tac. Ann. xiii. 57). The altars so erected 
were themselves sometimes called " high places 
(n^09, 2 K. xxiii. 8 ; 2 Ch. xiv. 3, &c.> Both 
in the Levitical and Deuteronomic codes ill 
altars were forbidden except those first in the 
Tabernacle and afterwards in the Temple (U^- 
xvii. 8, 9 ; Deut. xii. 13, &c.). This prohibiUoo, 
however, was not strictly observed, at least till 
after the building of the Temple, even by pio"* 
Israelites. Thus Gideon built two altars (Jndg. 

Digitized by 



Ti. 34, 26). The fint of these, which he called 
Jeiotaishalom in memory of the Diviae niani- 
fotitloo to him, mar have been only a menu- 
BwDtil tltar, as it does not appeiir that he 
tlttei ucrificet npon it. The second was 
encted by the command of God. So likewise 
did Samuel (1 Sam. Tii. 9, 10), David (2 Sam. 
iiir. 26), and Solomon (1 K. iii. 4). Elijah also 
reptind the altar of Jehorah on Mount Carmel, 
aid himself oSered sacrifice thereon (1 K. xviii. 
30-32). The sanctity attaching to the altar led 
to its being regarded as a refuge or asylum 
(£i. iii. 14 ; 1 K. i. 50). On the subject of this 
article generally, cp. W. R. Smith, The Seligion 
of tKe Semite*, L, index s. v, " altar." 

B. The earliest prorision for the erection of 
sa sitar is found in Ex. xx. 24, immediately after 
the promulgation of the Decalogue. It is as 
tollovi: "An altar of earth ahalt thou make 
udUi Me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt- 
oderings and thy peace-offerings, thy sheep and 
tUae sien ; in erery place where 1 record My 
name I will come unto thee and will bless 
thee. And if thou make Me an altar of stone, 
tiioa ihalt not build it of hewn stone*: for if 
thoa lift up thy tool opon it, thou hast polluted 
it Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto 
Mine altar; that thy nakedness be not dis- 
eoTtred thereon " (R. V.). This no doubt is 
ttie original and simplest form of the Altar of 
Bunit-ofiering. As regards material, it might 
t« of earth, or of unhewn atone. It must not 
be » elerated as to require an ascent to it, lest 
the person of the sacrificer should be exposed. 
Tfa« oSeriog of victims is not confined to the 
priests. An altar of this kind might be erected 
vhererer a Divine manifestation was made, 
jabtequently more definite directions were 
giren for two altars for the service of the 
Tabernacle : I. the Altar of Burnt-offering ; and 
IL the Altar of Incense. , 

I. The Altar of Bnrnt-offering (njwn nSTO). 
called in £i. xxvii. 1 emphatically " Vie altar " 
^'331955, sometimes "the brazen altar" 
(TlBfnjri TQtO); in Mai. L 7, 12, "the Uble of 
tke LorL" Throughout the Bible, wherever 
•*t*^ altar" is spoken of, the Altar of Barnt- 
«fftring is always meant, and where no confusion 
caa arise the shorter expression is common. 
Whe^^ however, it is necessary to distinguish 
between this and the Altar of Incease, the full 
phrase. Altar of Bumt-offeriuj; or Brazen Altar, 
U employed. This differed in construction at 
<iiffereDt' times. (I.) In the Tabernacle (Ex. 
nrii. 1 sq.j xxxviii. 1 sq.) it was comparatively 
null and portable. In shape it was square. 
It was five cubits in length, the same in 
**eadth, and three cubits high. It was made of 
!>l»»k» of shittim (or acacia) wood overlaid 
with brass (Joaephns says gold instead of brags, 
Alt. iii. 6, § 8). The interior was hollow 

WVP3133, Ex. xxvii. 8). But as nothing is 
sulaloat a covering to the altar on which the 
fittims might be placed, Koshi supposes that 
viioever the Tabernacle for a time berame 
>tati<mary, the hollow case of the altar was 
£Ucd op with earth. In support of this view 
be refers to Ex. xx. 24, where the command is 
(iTen, " make me an altar of earth," &c., and 
•iwtvea: "The altar of earth is the Brazen 
Altar itself the hollow of which was filled up 



with earth, whenever the camp was pitched." 
This may have been done, bat it is obvious, aa 
has been remarked, that there was a modifica- 
tion of the earlier enactment. 

At the four corners were four projections 
called horns, made, like the altar itself, of 
shittim-wood overlaid with brass. It is not 
quite certain how the words in Ex. xxvii. 2, 
VJJJTj? t\jnir\ »1|P, should be explained. Ac- 
cording to Mendelssohn, they mean that these 
horns were of one piece with the altar. So also 
Knobel-Dillmann (_Comm. in loc). And this is 
probably right. By others they are understood 
to describe only the projection of the horns from 
the altiir. These probably projected upwards ; 
and some have supposed, referring tn Ps. cxriii. 
27, that to them the victim was bound when 
about to be sacrifice<l. But the proper rendering 
of that passage is " even unto the horns of the 
altar " (K. V.), and Ainsworth's explanation is 
probably correct : " Unto the horns, that is all 
the court over, until you come even to the 
horns of the altar." There is no evidence that 
the victims were ever bound to the horns of the 
altar. On the occasion of the consecration of 
the priests (Ex. xxix. 12) and the offering of the 
sin-offering (Lev. iv. 7 ff.) the blood of the 
victim was sprinkled on the horns of the altar 
(see the symbolism explained by Baumgarten, 
Commentar zttm Pentateuch, ii. 63; Jukes, The 
Law of the Offerings, p. 153, &c.). Round the 
altar midway between the top and bottom (oi, 
ns others suppose, at the top) ran a projecting 
ledge (3313, A. V. " compass," K. V. " ledge 
round ; " Targ. K331D ; Gr. Ven. KiicXaita, «- 
pttxii), on which perhaps the priests stood when 
they o65ciated. No other probable use has been 
suggested; and it is clear that in the case of 
an altar three cubits high the priests could not 
have discharged their duties except by standing 
upon some part of the altar. To the outer edge 
of this, again, a grating or network of brass 
(ne'rU n^ ng*^ l???) was aflixed, and 
reacheil to the bottom of the altar, which thus 
presented the appearance of being larger below 
than above.* Otiiers have supjiosed this grating 
to adhere closely to the boards of which the 
altar was composed, or even to have been sub- 
stituted for them half-way up from the bottom. 
At any rate there can be little doubt that the 
grating was perpendicular, not horizontal, as 
Jonathan supposes (Targum on Ex. xxvii. 5). 
According to him, it was intended to catch 
portions of the sacrifice or coals which fell from 
the altar, and which might thus be easily 
replaced. But It seems improbable that a net- 
work or grating should have been constructed 
for such a purpose (cp. Joseph. Ant. iii. 6, § 8). 
At the four comers of the network were four 
brazen rings into which were inserted the staves 
by which the altar was carried. These staves 
were of the same materials as the altar itself. 
As the Law forbad any ascent to the altar by 
steps (Ex. XX. 26), it has been conjectured that 
an approach wa» provided by means of a slope 

• Knobel's opinion that the object of the network was 
to protect the altar from being injured by the feet and 
knee* of the officiating priests, and that the 2iP3 ^" 
merely an anument by way of finish, Is not accepted 
by Dillmann (In loco). 

Digitized by 




of earth which led gradually up to the 3^*13- 
or ledge round the altar already described. 
Thii must hare been either on the north or 
south side ; for on the east was " the place of 
the ashes " (Lev. i. 16), and on the west at no 
great distance stood the larer of brass. Accord- 
ing to the Jewish tradition, it was on the south 
side. The place of the altar was at " the door 
of the tabei-nacle of the tent of the congrega- 
tion " (Ex. xl. 29). The various utensils for the 
service of the altar CEi. ixvii. 3) were : (1) 
n'n'P, pans wherewith to clear away the fat 

O^^p) and ashes: elsewhere the word is used 
of the pots in which the flesh of the sacrifices was 
put to seethe (cp. Zech. xi v. 20, 21, and 2 Cb. xxxv. 
13, with 1 Sam. ii. 14). (2.) D»»J, sAow/s, 
Vulg. forctpes, Gesen. palae cineri removendo. 
(3.) n^p*1Tp, baaoiis; LXX. ^m\ai, vessels in 
which the blood of the victims was received, and 
from which it was sprinkled (r. pit). (4.) 

n jptp, flesh-hooks, LXX. Kptdypat, by means of 
which the flesh was removed from the caldron 
or pot (see 1 Sam. ii. 13, 14, where they are 
described as having three prongs). (5.) nnr)t3> 
fire-pans, or perhaps censers. These might 
either be used for talcing coals from the fire on 
the altar (Lev. xri. 12) ; or for burning incense 
(Num. ivi. 6, 7). In Ex. xxv. 38 the English 
Bible (A. V. and R. V.), following the Vulgate, 
translates it "snuff-dishes" (cp. Dillmann in 
loco). All these utensils were of brass. 

(2.) In Solomon's Temple the altar was con- 
siderably larger in its dimensions, as might 
have been expected from the much greater size 
of the building in which it was placed. Like 
the former, it was square : but the length and 
breadth were now twenty cubits, and the height 
ten (2 Ch. iv. 1). It diflered, too, in the 
material of which it was made, being entirely of 
brass (1 K. viii. 64 ; 2 Ch. vii. 7). It had no 
grating : and instead of a single gradual slope, 
the ascent to it was probably made by three 
successive platforms, to each of which it has 

Altai of BnratOlfcrinr. (Vrom Snnntiiuliu' Vlatao.) 

been supposed that steps led (Surcnhus. Mishna, 
vol. ii. p. 261, as in the figure annexed). 
Against this may be urged the fact that the 
Law of Moses, as we have seen, positively for- 
bad the use of steps (Ex. xi. 26), and the 
assertion of Josephus that in Herod's Temple the 
ascent was by an inclined plane. On the other 


himd, steps are introduced in the ideal, or sym- 
bolical. Temple of Ezekiel (xliii. 17), and the pro- 
hibitioninEx. XX. has been interpreted as applyiLg 
to a contimious flight of stairs and not to a broken 
ascent. But it is very doubtful whether the 

word ni?tfO can be confined to "stein:" it 
would seem rather to cover any kind of ascent. 
If so, the prohibition was not understood to be 
of universal application. It must have bees 
restricted to the case of worshippers who were 
not priests, the object of the prohibition beia; 
to guard against exposure of the person to the 
altar. In the case of the Levitical priests this 
danger was provided against in another way, b; 
the use of linen breeches (Ex. iiviii. 42). 
When it is said (Lev. ii. 22) that Aaron aux 
down after oflering the sin-offering, &c., it is 
implied that there was some elevated structire 
upon which he had been standing. In the ca.^ 
of Ezekiel's altar, as has been said, steps are es- 
pressly mentioned (xliii. 17). The only wsj ot 
reconciling these apparent contradictioiu it br 
supposing that the Law in Ex. xx. oontemplata 
the case of laymen approaching in their ordinary 
dress, whereas the Brazen Altar was "approscbed 
by priests protected against exposure by their 
special costume." " In fact, with a large aJtar, 
the priest could not put the blood of a viclini on 
the four horns without standing and walking m 
the altar (Mishna, Zebachim, v.), which is clearly 
against the spirit of Ex. ii., except on the 
understanding that that law does not apply to 
priests appropriately clad for the office " {Thf 
Old Test, m the Jewish Church, by Prof. Kobert- 
son Smith, Lect. xii. note 1). The prohibition 
in Ex. XX. is general, " Thou shalt not go np. 
not " the priests shall not go up." There is »> 
evidence that by the first legislation priests only 
were allowed to approach the altar. Asa, «' 
read, renewed (C'llTI) Solomon's altar (2 Ch. 
zv. 8). This may either mean that he rtpoM 
it, or more probably perhaps that he recau'- 
crated it after it had been polluted by idol wor- 
ship {iwtKalyuTfV, LXX.). Subsequently Ahu 
had it removed from its place to the north side 
of the new altar which Urijah the priest hi'l 
made in accordance with his direction (2 K. ivi- 
14). It was " cleansed " by command of 
Hezekiah (0"inp, 2Ch. xxix. 18),andMaMSKh. 
after renouncing his idolatry, either rtpBrci 
(Kethibh, p»1) or reiairt it (Keri, pM)- If^r 
finally have been broken up and the bra--* 
carried to Babylon, but thia is not mcntionrl 
(Jer. lii. 17 sq.). According to the Kabbinicsl 
tradition, this altar stood on the very spot vo 
which man was originally created. 

(3.) The Altar of Bumt-offering in the second 
(Zerubbabel's) Temple. Of this no description is 
given in the Bible. We are only told (Ezra iii. 
2) that it was built before the foundations of the 
Temple were laid. According to Josephus {A»i- 
xi. 4, § 1), it was placed on the same spot on 
which that of Solomon had originally stood. 1* 
was constructed, as we may infer from 1 M.icc 
iv. 47, of unhewn stones {KiBovs iXoitX^pew)- 
Antiochus Kpiphanes desecrated it (^KoS<ifii|f°>' 
PSiKvy/ia ipriiuifffas M rh tuvtaarriipiof. 1 
Mace. i. 54) ; and, according to Josephus (.I'"'- 
xii. 5, § 4), removed it altogether. In the 
restoration by Judas Maccabaeus a new 

Digitized by 



iras built of onhewn stone ia conformity with 
tlie l»w (1 M»cc. iv. 47). 

(4.) The altar erected by Herod, which is thus 
dfscriW by Joaephju (iJ. J. r. 5, § 6):— "In 
frost of the Temple stood the altar, 15 cubits 
in height, and in breadth and length of equal 
dimensiont, rii. 50 cubits: it was built four- 
squue, with bom-like comers projecting from 
it ; sod OS the south side a gentle acclivity led 
op to it. Moreover it was made without any 
iron tool, neither did iron ever touch it at any 
time." Eu6n. has 40 cubits square instead of 50. 
The dimensions given in the Mishna are different. 
It is there said {Middoth, 3, 1) that the altar 
was at the base 32 cubits square ; at the height 
of a cnbit from the ground 30 cubits square ; at 
5 cubits higher (where was the circuit, KSS^D) 
it vu reduced to 28 cubits square, and at the 
loms still farther to 36. A space of a cubit 
each way was here allowed for the officiating 
priests to walk, so that 24 cubits square were 
l«ft for the fire on the altar (rDnVSn). This 
description is not very clear. But the Rab- 
binical and other interpreters consider the altar 
from the K331D upwards to have been 28 cubits 
sqoare, allowing at the top, however, a cubit 
each way for the horns, and another cubit for 
the passage of the priest*. Others, however 
(as L'Empereur in fee.), suppose the ledge on 
nbich the priests walked to hnre been 2 cnbits 
lower than the surface of the altar on which the 
lire was placed. 

The Mishoa further states, in accordance with 
Josephna (see above), and with reference to the 
Lav already mentioned (Ei. xx. 25), that the 
stones of which the altar was made were un- 
bemi ; and that twice in the year, viz. at the 
Feast of the Passover and the Feast of Taber- 
nacles, they were whitewashed afresh. The 
way up (BQ3) was on the south side, 32 cubits 
long and 16 broad, constructed also of unhewn 
stones. In connexion with the horn on the 
sonth-west was a pipe intended to receive the 
blood of the victims which was sprinkled on the 
left side of the altar : the blood was afterwards 
carried by means of a subterranean passage into 
the brook Kidron. Under the altar was a cavity 
into which the drink-offerings passed. It was 
covered over with a slab of marble, and emptied 
from time to time. On the north side of the 
iltar were a number of brasen rings, to secure 
the animals which were brought for sacrifice. 
Lastlr, round the middle of the altar ran a 

K»rlet thread (K"l?'? ^ tMH) to mark where 
the blood was to be sprinkled, whether above or 
Wow it. 

According to Lev. vi. 12, 13, a perpetual fire 
*» to be kept burning on the altar. This, as 
^r (Symbol, ii. 350) remarks, was the symbol 
lad token of the perpetual worship of Jehovah. 
Fcr inasmuch as tnc whole religion of Israel was 
onccntrated in the sacrifices which were offered, 
the eitinguishing of the fire would have looked 
like the extinguishing of the religion itself. It 
VB therefore, as he observes, essentially different 
fnm the perpetual fire of the Persians (Curt. iii. 
3 ; -Vmrn. Marc iiiii. 6 ; Hyde, Bel. Vet. Pers. 
'iii. p. 148), or the fire of Vesta to which it has 
l^a compared. These were not sacrificial fires 
>t all, but were symbols of the Deity, or were 



connected with the belief which regarded fire as 
one of the primal elements of the world. This 
fire, according to the Jews, was the same as 
that which came down from heaven (ytif oiiptwo- 
wcre's), " and consumed upon the altar the burnt- 
offering and the fat " (Lev. ii. 24). It couched 
upon the altar, they say, like a lion; it was 
bright as the sim ; the fiame thereof was solid 
and pure ; it consumed things wet and dry 
alike ; and, finally, it emitted no smoke. This 
was one of the five things existing in the first 
Temple which tradition declares to have been 
wanting in the second (Tract. Joma, c. i. fol. 
21 b; cp. Wiinsche, d. Babyl. Talm. i. 353). 
The fire which consumed the sacrifices was 
kindled from this : and besides these there was 
the fire from which the coals were taken to burn 
incense with (see Carpxov. Apparat. Hut. Crit. 
Annot. p. 386). 

II. The Altar of Incense (DTb^iT nStO and 
r(J2\) ^Bj5D 'D, Ex. XXX. 1 ; emmarhpuii evfud- 
fiaros, LXX.), called also the golden altar (HUTO 
anjPI, Ex. ixiii. 38; Num. iv. 11; Bvir. 
Xpvffovy, LXX.) to distinguish it from the Altar 
of Burnt-offering, which was called the Brazen 
Altar (Ex. xxxviii. 30).' Like the Altar of 
Burnt-offering, it was called "holy of holies" 
or " most holy " imto Jehovah (Ex. xxx. 10). 
Probably this is meant by the " altar of wood " 
spoken of Ezek. xli. 22, which is further described 
as the " table that is before the Lord," precisely 
the expression used of the Altar of Incense 
(see Delitzsch, Brief an die Hebr. p. 678). The 
name D^tp, "altar," was not strictly appro- 
priate, 'as no sacrifices were offered upon it. 
This, indeed, was expressly forbidden : " Ye shall 

SuppoMd foim of tho Altar of Inceoae. 

offer no strange incense thereon, nor burnt 
sacrifice, nor meal-offering ; and ye shall pour no 
drink-offering thereon " (Ex. xxx. 9, R. V.). But 
once in the year, on the great Day of Atonement, 

>> Wellhausen points out that the Altar of Incense 
does not appear among the furniture of the inner 
sanctuary In Ex. xxv.-xxlx., but only as an appendix 
at the beginning of chap, xxx.; and very arbltrartl}- 
Infers that the author of chaps, xxv.-xxvlll. knew 
nothing of It. There may have been a good reason 
for Its appearing where It does, though we may not 
now be able to account for It. 

Digitized by 




tho high-priest sprinkled upon the horns of it 
" the blood of the sin-offering of atonement " 
(Ej. XXX. 10). 

(a.) That in the Tabernacle was made of 
acacia-wood, overlaid with pure gold. lu shape 
it was square, being a cubit in length and 
breadth, and 2 ciibits in height. like the Altar 
of Burnt-offering, it had boms at the four comers, 
which were of one piece with the rest of the 
altar. So Rabb. Levi ben Gersom : — " Discimus 
inde quod nan conreniat facere cornua separatim, 
et altari deinde apponere, sed quod comua 
debeant esse ex corpore nltaris" (^Comment, in 
Leg. fol. 109, col. 4). 

It had also a top or roof (3] ; iaxfi, LXX.), 
a flat surface like the roof of an Eastern house 
(the Hebrew word is the same), on which the 
incense was laid and lighted. Many, following 
the interpretation of the Vulgate craticulam 
ejus, bare supposed a kind of grating to be 
meant ; but for this there is no authority. 
Round the altar was a border or wreath (1,* ; 
aTftm^ir im^iiniv j(pvariv, LXX.). Josephus 
says : hniv iaxitpit xp""^"- ""'V oytcrrtSira, 
fxouaa Korit yuvlan iKianiy ari^avov (-4iif. iii. 
7). "Erat itaque cinctorium, ex solido con- 
llatum auro, quod tecto ita adhaercbat, ut in 
extreinitate illud cingeret, et prohibcrct, ne 
quid facile ab altari in terram derolveretur " 
(Carpzov. Appar. Hist. Crit. Annot. p. 273). 
Below this were two golden rings which were 
to be " for places for stares to bear it withal." 
The staves were of acacia-nood overlaid with 
gold. Its appearance may be illustrated by the 
flgnre on the preceding page. 

This Altar stood in the Holy Place, " ueiore 
the veil that is by the ark of the testimony, 
before the mercy-seat " (Ex. xxx. 6 ; xl. 5). 
Philo too speaks of it as (ru tov uporifou xara- 
vtriaitarot, and as standing between the cnnille- 
stick and the table of shewbread. In apparent 
contradiction to this, the author of the Epistle 
to the Hebrews (ix. 4) enumerates it among the 
objects which were within the second vail (/Mvi 
rh Stirtpoy Karawiriurna), i.e. in the Holy of 
Holies. It is true that by Sufuaxiiptoi' in this 
passage may be meant " a censer," in accordance 
with the usage of the LXX., but it is better 
understood of the Altar of Incense, which by 
Philo and other Hellenists is called Bviuariiptoy. 
It is to be observed also that in 1 K. vi. 22, this 
same Altar is said to belong to "the oracle" 

(Ta-?^ nS'N najen, " the altar that belonged 

to the oracle," R. V.) or most Holy Place. 
This may perhaps be accounted for by tho great 
typical and symbolical importance attached to 
this Altar, so that it might be considered to 
belong to the Sturtpa 7in)i^. On the great Day 
of Atonement it, as well as the mercy-sent, was 
sprinkled with the blood of the sin-offering 
(Lev. xvi. 18) ; and incense itself was supposed 
to have an atoning efficacy (T. B. Joma, f. 44 a ; 
Num. xvi. 47). Bnt further, the writer of the 
Epistle has the Day of Atonement in his mind ; 
and on that day, when the high-priest lifted 
the inner veil to go into the Most Holy Place, 
the separation between the Holy Place and the 
Most Holy Place seemed for the moment to 
cease, and they might be regarded as one 
sanctuary (see Prof. Milligan, ftMo Educator, 
iii. 2S0). In like manner, in the vision of 


Isaiah (vi. 1-6), the altar from which the Mnpli 
takes the "live coal," or rather "hot stone," 
wherewith he touches the Prophet's U]», and 
which clearly corresponds to the Altar of Incense 
in the earthly Temple, is before the Lord, sesttJ 
upon His throne. And similarly in the .Apo- 
calypse (viii. 1-5) the Angel whom St. Joi)n 
sees with a golden censer has much incense 
given to him, that he may offer it upon tli« 
golden altar which is before the throne {itt 
BJeek on Heb. ix. 4, and Delitzsch I'a !«.). 
Wellhausen has [loiuted out, that " the rile ol 
the most solemn atoning sacrifice takes place in 
Lev. iv. on the golden altar, but in Ex. iiii. 
Lev. viii. ix., without its use " ; and that "a still 
more striking circumstance is, that in pv<wgti 
where the holiest incense-offering is itstll 
spoken of, no trace can be discovered of the 
corresponding altar. This is particularly the 
case in Lev. xvi. To burn incense in the 
sanctuary, Aaron t'ikes a censer, tillj it vith 
coals from the altar of burnt-offering (rr. 12, 
18-20), and lays the incense ujx>n them in the 
adytum. Similarly in Lev. x., Ktm>. ivi. irii., 
incense is offered on censers of which each |iriesl 
possesses one. The coals are taken from the .Mux 
of Burnt-offering (Num. xvii. 1 1 ; A, V. xvi. 46), 
which is plated with the censers of the Korahitr 
Levites (xvii. .3, 4 ; A. \'. xvi. 38, 39) ; whoever 
takes fire from any other source incurs the 
penalty of death " {Hist, of Israel, Eng. trjuisl. 
p. .i6). 

(b.) The Altar in Solomon's Temple sas 
similar (1 K. vii. 48 ; 1 Ch. Hxviii. 18). but «>< 
made of cedar overlaid with gold. ITie .\ltar 
mentioned in Is. vi. 6 is clearly the Albr oi 
Incense, not the Altar of Burnt-offering; mi 
although, as has been said, it is the heavenly 
Altar, not the earthly, that the Prophet ttn, 
still no doubt the one was the pattern of the 
other; and if so, it may be inferred from this 
passage that heated stones (DBV*]) were isil 
upon the Altar, by means of which the inceuc 
was kindled. 

(c.) The Altar of Incense is mentioned S' 
having been removed from the Temple of Zerul- 
babel by Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Mace i. 21). 
Judas Mnccabaeus restored it, together with the 
holy vessels, &c. (1 Mace. iv. 49). On the arch 
of Titus no Altar of Incense appears. But 
that it existed in the last Temple, and «u 
richly overlaid, we learn from the Mishni 
{Hagiga 'i, 8). Ezekiel in his ideal Temple 
mentions an altar of wood before the sanctnary, 
of which he says that it was three cubits in 
height, two cubits in length and breadth, and it 
had projecting cornera, and the frame (B. V. 
text, " length ") and the walls thereof were ol 
wood : " this is the table that is before the 
Lord " (xli. 21, 22 ; cp. iliv. 16). According to 
Wellhausen and 8meud, Ezekiel makes no dis- 
tinction between the table of shew^bread and the 
Altar of Incense. But " altar " and " Ubie " »re 
here convertible terms, just ns they are in Mai. <. 
7. 12, where they are applied indifferently to 
the Altar of Burnt-offering. 

From the circumstance that the sweet incense 
was burnt upon it every day, morning ami 
evening (Ex. xxx. 7, 8), as well as that the 
blood of atonement was sprinkled upon it 
(p. 10), this Altar had a special importance 
attached to it. It is the onir -Mtar which 

Digitized by 



appean in the heaven) r Temple (la, ri. 6; 
Ibr. Tiii 3, 4> 

C. Other altMS. (I.) Altars of brick, for- 
bidden by the Law (Kx. xx. 24, '20). Some 
comnientaton hare eeeo an allusion to auch 

ig !«. Ixv. 3. The words are 70 D^'lISf)?? 

O'JJpn, "offering incense on the h-ickt," 
irUc& has been explained as referring to altars 
made of this material, and situated perhaps 
ia the " gardens " mentioned just before. Kosen- 
niUIer suggests, however, that the allusion is 
to some Babylonish custom of burning incense 
on bncks covered over with magic formulae or 
cuneiform inscriptions. This ia also the view of 
Oesenius and Haurer. I>r. Cherne under- 
stands by the "bricks," the tilings of the 
houses (2 K. xxiii. 12; Zeph. i. 5; Jer. xix. 13), 
and thinks this view, as implying that Palestine 
is the locality, and not Babylonia or Egj'pt, to be 
moK in harmony with the context. Uelitzscli, 
on the other hand, observes that the expression 
"transports us to Ribylon, the country of 
axli laieres (laterculi). The Torah mentions 

DV3p only with reference to Babylonian and 
Egyptian bnildinga, it knows and allows only of 
altars of earth, unhewn stones, and wooden 
plaaks with brazen covering." 

(2.) An altar with the inscription 'kyvAar^ 
e<f , Acts xvii. 32. St. Paul in hii speech on 
the -Areopagus mentions having seen such an 
sltar in ATHENS. The inscription, however, is 
rapalle of two renderings, either (a) " to an 
unknown goJ " (Rev. Vers.), or ((.) "to the 
unknown god " (A- V.) ; for in inscriptions of 
this kind Greek usage did not.alwnys require the 
'Utrtion of the article, (a) If we understand 
the inscription in the former sense, the altar 
nu one erected in gratitude for some benefit 
received, though the receiver did not know to 
which of the many deities of heathenism the 
oenefit was due. This interpretation falls in 



VarioQi Altan. 

1,1 i^nUu. tnio bM-nUaA. (BaasUisl.) 
%. AiiTri&n, IDIXB^ «t KbomUd. (U^nl) 
4. IMtjVm^lL, BOiliolkhliu Sattofkolt. (Lftjsrij 
i. AsiTrhB. boB Kbmiatad. (I*pu<.) 

rety well with what St. Panl had said as to 
the " somewhat anperstitious " character of the 
Athenians. It wonld be evidence of a scrupulous 
*uiety lest any deity, even though unknown, 
•hsnld not receive his meed of honour and grtiti- 
tiide. Altars of this kind, Pausaniaa tells us, 
l>e had seen in the harboar and streets of Athens, 

He snvs (i. § 4), trrauia koI /3«/ioi Ofwc re 
ifotiaiopiiyay irfniirTttv Ka\ ripiiav xal raiSuv 
riv %iia»vt ical toX^poi/. And Phili>stratui< 
(Kii. Apollon. vi. 3), att^fwiimpov rh wtpi 
mmm itin tl Xiytir, koX ravra 'A$4irriro>, ou 
Kol iyyu(rTa)V ioijiivity 0uiu>l ISpvrrcu. This, 
as Winer observes, need not be interpreted as if 
the several altars were dedicated to a number 
of iyvaaroi Otoi, but rather that eac/t altar had 
the inscription 'Ayt'ti<rr<ii Bey. It is not at all 
probable that such inscriptiou referred to the 
God of the Jews, as One Whose Name it was 
unlawful to utter (as Wolf and others hare sup- 
posed). Neauder quotes Diog. Laertius, who, iu 
his Life of Epimenides, says that in the time of 
a plague, when they knew not what god tu 
propitiate in order to avert it, he caused black 
and white sheep to be let loose from the Areo- 
pagus, and, wherever they lay down, to be ofiereil 
to the god to whom of right the victim be- 
longed (r^ irpoiHiKoirri 0t^). S0ty, adds Dio- 
genes, fri Kol •'ill' iariy fiptur icorct roiis 
iiinovs riiy *A0. 0tifu>bs hntyiiuvs. On which 
Xennder remarks that on this or similar occa- 
sions altars might be dedicated to an unknown 
god, since they knew not what eod was ofi'ende<l 
and required to be ]>ropitiatca. But it is tu 
be observed that, according to Diogenes, the 
altars were left without .nny inscripliun. Kor 
can we attach much im|>ortnnce to EichhornV 
suggestion that these altars (/3«/iol Iw^mnoi) 
might have been built before the nrt of writing 
was known, and subsequently have been in- 
scribed iyyiiar^ 9ey. A passage in the 
I'hilopatris ascribed tu Lucian, in which one 
of the s|>eakers swears " by the unknown god," 
has sometimes been quoted as confirming St. 
Paul's statement ; but as the Dialogue is of tliu 
3rd century after Christ, it may be intended 
only as a sneer at the A|xistle's words. Jerome, 
indeed (on Tit. i. 12), affirms that the inscription 
ran: "To the gods of Asia and Europe ami 
Africa, to unknown and strange gods." But 
though Jerome may have seen such an inscrip- 
tion, it is plainly not that to which St. Panl 
refers. His statement is clear and definite. 

(6.) If we adopt the rendering "to the un- 
known god," then we must take the verbal 
adjective in its extended signification, ns 
meaning not only the unknown, but the un- 
knowable. The inscription, &» Dr. Plumptru 
observes, does not affirm Atheism, but simply 
recognises the existence of a Power concerning 
which man knows and can know nothing. He 
finds a ])arallel to this inscription in that 
which Plutarch (</« laid, et Oair.) records as 
found on the veil of Isis : " I am all that liu^ 
been, and nil that is, and all that shall be ; ami 
no mortal hath lifted my reil;" and a still 
more striking parallel in the inscription on u 
Mithraic altar found at Ostia, and now in the 
Vatican, "signum Indeprehensibilis Dei." 
" This," he remarks, " is the nearest equiraleut 
that Latin can supply for 'the Unknown and 
Unknowable God ' (tfiWc Commentary for En<i- 
lith JSeadcra, in loco), [J. J. S. P.] 

AL-TASCHITH (nne»n-'?N, more cor- 
rectly, Al-Tashcheth) forms part of the first, or 
introductory, verses of Psalms Ivii., Iviii., \ix., 
liiv. The Aramaic paraphrast and Bashi, both 
of whom literally translate this phrase by 

Digitized by 




" Destroy not ! " are, though consistent, greatly 
mistaken, because these Psalms do not merely 
stand on the defensire " Destroy not ! " but 
take the offensive " Destroy my enemies ! " So 
is also Ibn 'Ezra with bis stereotyped phrase, 
" Commencement of a welUknown poem to the 
tune of which these Psalms were to be sung." 
[AUBLETTH Shahab ; Alamoth.] But Ibn 'Ezra 
also, apart from the anachi'onism on which 
his theory rests, must be wrong, since it is im- 
possible that all these four Psalms could have 
been sung satisfactorily to one and the same 
tune, seeing that they greatly difier not only in 
sentiment but also in length of diction. Qimchi 
(on Ivii.) actually believes that he has found 
the very source from which the Al-Tiultc/icth 
comes, viz. the Al-l'aahcliithehu used by David 
when Abishai wished to kill Saul (1 Sam. 
xxvi. 9). On such grounds one need not be 
astonished to find a modem writer proposing 
seriously that the source of this title was the 
Al-Taihchitheku of Isaiah (Ixv. 8) ! Although 
the explanations of the Targumist and Kashi 
cannot be true for the reasons given above, they 
have both at least some ground to stand upon, 
inasmuch as the phrase AI-Tashc/icth literally 
occurs in the Pentateuch (Dent. iz. 26), where 
it is used by Moses in a prayer for Israel. But 
what shall we say to the following explanation 
propounded in all earnest by a German scholar, 
that Al-Taahcheth meant "S'poil not !" and that 
these words were addressed to a music-director 
whose band had some time before spoiled a 
Psalm by singing it or playing it out of tune. 
If Ibn 'Ezra's theory were true, the band would 
be certain to spoil the execution of one or the 
other of these Psalms, and the reminder " Spoil 
not 1" might find an application. Since, how- 
ever, the Scripture gives us no indication of 
this, what warrant is there that Al-Taslicheth 
could have such a meaning? The fact is, 
Al-Tathcheth is itself the name of a music- 
corps, as the 'Al Q?V) virtually standing before 
it clearly testifies. The 'Ai is only left out 

on account of the Al following, as Al (7K) 

after 'Al (?r) would be somewhat difficult 
to pronounce.' (Such was evidently the 
view taken by the R. V., which inserts in 
italics the words, Set to.) Let nobody object 
that we have 'Al-'Alamoth (Alauoth) ; for in 
that case the second V cannot be pronounced by 
itself at all, and absolutely depends upon the 

7 following it (n'lD?!?). It might, however, be 
legitimately asked : Why should a music-corps 
be called by the apparently singular luime 
Al-Tashchethl Tu this legitimate question a 
legitimate answer may be given, which will 
throw light on the names of the other music- 
bands also. When there were only eight music- 
bands (Talmud Babli Ta'anith, 27*X and these 
hod no history worth speaking of, they were 
simply numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. The proof 
of this is the term Na$$hemimth = the Eighth. 
When they were increased to twenty-four and 

* The somewhat stinnar prununcistioo of ^ and J} ts 
no uuchronlsm. It ts not merely testified to In Tal- 
mndlc times (Yensbalmi BeralAoth, II. 4; Babli 
Mfffiltah, 246), but Is presupposed In tbe Bible Itself 
^ 1 Sam. 1. 10 ; Amos vl. 8, and veiy many other places). 


began to have a history of their own, or one 
partially relating to them, they received Mcenl 
kinds of names. Some were named from tlieir 
dwelling-places and functions, as Ayyelttk Has- 
thachar (AlJELETU Shahab), 'Alamatk (ku.- 
MOTH), Haggittitk (GnriTU), &c.; some ftom 
their director, as i'eduthun; some from the 
nature, character, and position of the instni- 
ments on which they excelled, as Tamtii 
Elem Bfdtoqun (Jos ATI! Elem Reciiokih); 
some from historical occurrences, as JfsfA- 
Zabben (see 1 Ch. xv. 2 and Qimchi on Ps. ii. l\ 
Of this last kind is, no doubt, this Al-Tashdntk, 
which was probably given to one of tbe buuU 
when Uzzah was struck down dead (2 Sam. vi. 
8). David commemorated that event, it h 
true, by calling tbe place where the catastnplie 
had occurred Perez- Czzah; but as he cuoU 
not give one of the music-bands such as ill- 
omened name, he called it by tbe historicalW- 
auspicious title Al-Tas/tcheth! [^••^i 

A'LUSH (2^'PN, of uncertain etymologr; 

Sam. Krhtt; AF. AlKois; B. Ai\tlii; Aba), ok 
of the stations of the Israelites on their jounef 
to Sinai, the lost before Rephidim (Num. iiiiiL 
13, 14). Ko trace of it has yet been found (kf 
conjectares in Dillmann on Exod. xvii. 1). In 
the Seder 01am (Kitto, Cyc. s. v.) it is »t»ted 
to have been 8 miles from Rephidim. Perhip 
in W. Feirdn, near the mouth of W. er Sm- 
mdneh. [G.] [W.] 

ALT AH (jvhv. The real meaning of tie 
Edomite and pre-Ldomite names is still unknewi; 
raiX<i; AltxL\ a duke (=rfujr, Vnlg.) of. Edom 
(Gen. ixxvi. 40), written Aliah (flvP) i" 
ICh. i. 51. 

2. Alvah is the name of a place as well ts ol 
.1 chief. Dillmaim (Gen. I. c.) and Delitiscli, 
Oeitesis, I, c. [1887], identify the name witk 
Alvas. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AL'VAN {\'hy, see Alvah ; A. TmUnr, VL 
-H ; Alton), a Uorite, son of Shobal (0««- 
ixxvi. 23), written Allan i]hs) in 1 Ch. i. 40 
(B. 2»A<I^ A. '\»\i(i ; Alian)'iv. A W.] [F.] 

AM'AD (nwpr ; 'A/iriJA ; A. 'KtM ; AmMS), 
an unknown place in Asher between Alammeltch 
and Misheal (Josh. xix. 26 only). It is placed 
by Major Condcr {Handbook to Bible, p. 402) tt 
A'A. et 'Amid, close to ez-Zib, but this identifica- 
tion seems doubtful. [W.] 

AMADA'THA (Esth. xvi. 10, 17); sihl 
AMADA'THUS (Esth. lii. 6). [Ha3UIEI> 


A'lLAL (^ ; B. 'A/iad ; AmcJ), a descend- 
ant of Asher, the son of Jacob (1 Ch. vii. 35). 

AM'ALEK (p!?Dl? ; 'A/*a\<(c; Aina/eiA), son 
of Eliphoz by his concubine Timnah, grandson of 
Esau, and one of the chieftains ("dukes." A. V. 
and R. V.) of Edom (Gen. xxxvi. 12, 16> His 
mother came of the Horite race, whose territorv 
the descendants of Esau had seized i and, although 
Amalek himself is represented as of equal rank 
with the other sons of Eliphaz, yet his posterity 
appear to have shared the fate of the Horite 

Digitized by 



pofniJatioii, a " reinnaiit " only being mentioned 
>> Misting in Kdom in the time of Hezekiah, 
wlitD they were dispersed by s band of the 
tribe of Simeon (1 Ch. iv. 43). [W. L. B.] 

AUALIXITES (p^V. »p^l? or ^phovn ■■ 

the abnormal pTOVp, 2 Sam. i. 1, is no doubt a 
teitnal error: see Wellh. or Driver 1. 1.; 'A/ut^1)- 
nroi ; AmaUcitae), a nomadic tribe which, pro- 
bably abont the time of iioses, first occupied the 
[wninsolt of Sinni and the wilderness intervening 
between the southern hill-ranges of Palestine 
ind the border of Egypt (Num. liii. 29 ; 1 Sam. 
ir. 7, ixTii. 8). Arabian historians (to be read 
«ith reserve : see NSldeke, Die Amatekiter, 1864) 
repreaent them as originally dwelling on the 
inheres of the Persian Gulf. Thence they were 
pressed westwards by the growth of the Assyrian 
empire, and spread over a portion of Arabia at 
a period antecedent to its occupation by the 
descendants of Joktan. This account of their 
urigin harmonizes with Gen. xiv. 7, where the 
" conutry " (" princes " according to the reading 
adapted by the LXX.) of the Amalekites is 
meationed several generations before the birth 
of the Edomite Araalek (Gen. xxxvi. 12; cp. 
Nmo. ixiv. 20) : it throws light on the traces 
of a permanent occupation of Central Palestine 
ii their passage westward, as indicated by the 



\ (}Ka"de|! 



umes Amalek and Mount of the Amalekites 
(Jndg. V. 14, xii. 15) : and it accounts for the 
aleiKe of Scripture as to any relationship be- 
tveen the Amalekites on the one hand, and the 
Uomites or the Israelites on the other. That 
s miitare of the two former races occurred at 
> later period, would in this case be the only 
inference from Gen. xxxvi. 16, though many 
niters have considered that passage to refer to 
tke origin of the whole nation, explaining 
Gea. liv. 7 as a case of protepsia (see, however, 
Schallz, J. n. in Herzog, ££.»). The physical 
cbsrarter of the district occupied by the Ama- 
Ukites [.\babia] necessitated a nomadic life, 
wbicb they adopted to its fullest extent, taking 
their tamilies with them even on their military 
apeditions (Judg. vi. S). Their wealth con- 

sisted in flocks and herds. Mention is made of 
a "town" (1 Sam. iv. 5), and Joseplius gives 
an exaggerated account of the capture of several 
towns by Saul (An(. vi. 7, §2); but the towns 
could have been little more than stations, or 
nomadic enclosures. The kings or chieftains 
were perhaps distinguished by the hereditary 
title AOAG (Num. xxiv. 7 ; 1 Sam. xv. 8). Two 
important routes led through the Amalekite 
district, viz. from Palestine to Egypt by the 
Isthmus of Suez, and to Sonthern Asia and 
Africa by the Aelanitic arm of the Red Sea. It 
has been conjectured that the expedition of the 
four kings (Gen. xiv.) had for its object the 
opening of the latter route; and it is in con- 
nexion with the former that the Amalekites 
first came in contact with the Israelites, whose 
progress they attempted to stop, adopting a 
guerilla style of warfare (Deut. xxv. 18), but 
were signally defeated at Rcphidim (Ex, xvii. 8, 
&c.). The conduct of Amalek in this cruel attack 
on a people " faint and weary " was never forgiven. 
"The Lord will have war with Amalek from 
generation to generation ; " " Thou shalt blot 
out the remembrance of Amalek from under 
heaven " (Ex. xvii. 16; Deut. xxv. 17-19). In 
union with the Canaanites they were, however, 
permitted to attack the disobedient Israelites on 
the borders of Palestine, and to defeat them 
near Hormah (Num. xiv, 4.5). Thenceforward 
we hear of them only as a secondary power, at 
one time in league with the iloabites (Judg. iii. 
13), when they were defeated by Ehud near 
Jericho; at another time in league with the 
Midianites (Judg. vi. 3), when they penetrated 
into the plain of Esdraelon, and were defeated by 
Gideon. Saul undertook an expedition against 
them, overrunning their whole district " from 
Havilah to Shnr," and inflicting an immense 
loss upon them (1 Sam. xv.). Their power was 
thenceforward broken, and they degenerated into 
a horde of banditti, whose style of warfare is 
well expressed in the Hebrew term ^)*1} (Gesen. 
Lex.y, frequently applied to them in the de- 
scription of their contests with David in the 
neighbourhood of Ziklag, when their destruction 
was completed (1 Sam. xxvii., xxx. ; cp. Num. 
xxiv. 20). [W. U B.] [F.] 

AMA'M (DON B. 2V; A. 'Kiii-ii; Amam), 
a city in the soutli of Judah, named with Shcma 
and Moladah {el-ifilh) in Josh. xv. 26 only. 
Nothing is known of it. [G.] [W.] 

A'MAN (B. 'Atiii; lUla Nadab; Syr. Ahab). 
Tob. xiv. 10. [Haman.] [F.] 

AMA'NA (ilJOt^, i.e. constant), apparently 
a mountain near Lebanon, and possibly a part 
of Anti-Lebanon which overlooks the plain of 
Damascus, — " from the head of Amana " (Cant, 
iv. 8). It is commonly assumed that this is the 
mountain in which the river Abana (2 K. v. 12 ; 
Keri, Targum- Jonathan, and margin of A. V. and 
R. V, " Amana ") has its source, and it may have 
derived its name from that river. The LXX. 
(BA.) translate Im' 4f>x3« ^iirrtm. [G.] [W.] 

AMABI'AH (riry3» and innDt?, Amarias 
usually ; whom God promised, Gesen., i. q. &fi- 
^potrrot). 1. Father of Ahitnb, according 
to 1 Ch. vi. 7 TLXX. v. 3:t, B. 'Aftaptui, A. 
'Aliaplas], r. 52 [LXX. vi. 37, B. 'AXiaptul, A. 

Digitized by 




'Altapti], and son of Meraioth, io the line of 
the high-priesU. In Josephns's Hist. (Ant. riii. 
t, § 3) he is transformed into 'Apmpatot. 

2. 'Afiapias. The high-priest in the reign of 
Jebosbaphat (2 Ch. xix. 11). He was the son of 
Azariah, and the fifth high-priest who succeeded 
Zadok (1 Ch. v'l. 11). Nothing is known of 
him beyond his name, but from the way in 
which Jehoshaphat mentions him he seems to 
have seconded that pioas king in his endeavours 
to work a reformation in Iiirael and Judah (see 
'2 Ch. xvii. xix.). JosepUus, who calls him 
'A/uuriay rhf Ufia, " Amaziah the priest," un- 
accountably says of him (as the text now 
stands) that he, as well as Zebadiah, was of the 
tribe of Judah. But if ixeeripovs is struck out, 
this absurd statement will disappear (Ant, ix. 1, 
§ 1). It is not easy to recognise him in the 
wonderfully corrupt list of high-priests given 
in the Ant. i. 8, § 6. But he seems to be con- 
cealed under the strange form A3K1PAM02, 
Axioramus. The syllable AE is corrupted from 
A2, the termination of the preceding name, 
Azarias, which has accidentally adhered to the 
beginning of Amariah, as the final 2 has to the 
very same name in the text of Nicephorus (ap. 
Seld. de Swxxas. p. 103), producing the form 
"XaiuLptat. The remaining 'Itipa/ws is not far 
removed from 'AitapUa. The successor of Ama- 
riah in the high-priesthood must have been 
Jehoiada. In Josephus *i3^at, which is a cor- 
ruption of 'Io>S/a>, follows Axioramus, There 
is not the slightest support in the sacred history 
for the names Ahitub and Zadok, who are made to 
follow Amariah in the genealogy, I Ch. vi. 11, 1 2. 

8. The head of a Leviticat house of the Ko- 
hathitea in the time of David (1 Ch. xxiii. 19 
[A. 'AfLopii, B. 'A/iotilE] ; xxiv. 23 [B. 'KiuAii, 
A. 'KitafUoK). 

4. The head of one of the twenty-fnur 
courses of priests, which was named after him, 
in the time of David, of Hezekiah, and of Xehe- 
miah (1 Ch. xxiv. 14 rB.\. 'fy/iiip, Emmer, 
hut in A. Heb. Vulg. the head of the 16th 
course, in B. the head of the 15th course]; 2 Ch. 
xixi. 15 [B. Vlapias] ; Neh. x. 3 ['Afuiput], xii. 
2 [B. Wapui, M. Map«(a, M'-* 'Kitoftia, A. -id], 
13 [B. Hoftl, «* 'Afrnfui, tC-* A. 'A/iapui]). 
In the first passage the name is written *10X, 
Immer, but it seems to be the same name- 
Another form of the name is *^0K, /inri 
(1 Ch. ix. 4 [B. 'Anptl, A. -I ; AmriH a man 
of Judah, of the sons of Bani. Of the same 
family we find, 

6. Amariah in the time of Ezra (Ezra x. 42. 
MB. Mapla, A. 'Aimpids), one of those who had 
married a " strange " wife. 

6. An ancestor of Zepbaniah the prophet 
(Zeph. i. 1, T.' 'A/uiptot, A. -«i-, K. very cor- 
rupt). [ACH.] [F.] 

7. B. iaitaputl, A. -d, K. ^AfutpuL A de- 
scendant of Pharez, son of Judah (Neh. xi. 4). 
Probably the same as Imri (above Ko. 4). 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHABr.\S (Ameria)i). An ancestor of Ezra 
<1 Esd. viii. 2, B. 'Aiuxpe*lot,A. 'A/iapuis ; 2 E*l. 
i. 2 [Gk. vii. 3, Xaiioptla]). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AHA'SA (KB»0», Ges. = o burden, Fiirst = 
bto», a ieawjV. 'H. Muller [in MV."] con- 
nects it with an Arabic word and prefers the 


meaning of vceak-sighted, having weepiog eye : 
Ani'aa). 1. Son of Ithra or Jether, by Abi- 
gail, David's sister (2 Sam. xvii. 25, B. 'Apiu- 
vtl, A. -ati). He joined Absalom ia his r(^■ 
i bellion, and was by him appointed conmMmitr- 
in-chief in the place of Joab, by whom h<r 
was totally defeated in the forest of Kphraim 
(2 Sam. xxiii. 6). When Joab incurred the 
displeasure of David for killing Absalom, Uiriil 
forgave the treason of Amasa, recognised him as 
his nephew, and appointed him Joab's successor 
(xix. 13, \i. 'AfitiTirafi [and in xi. 10], A. 
'A/iurvai). Joab afterwards, when they were 
both in pursuit of the rebel Sheba, pretended to 
salute AJnasa, and stabbed him with his sword 
(xx. 10, A. 'A^wnwO) which be held concealed 
in his, left hand. Amasa is probably iJentictl 
with ^CDtf (Amasai No. 2), who is raeatiosed 
among I)avid's commanders (I Ch. xii. 18, K. 
'Aftairai, K. -<r«. Ewald, Gexh. Israel, ii. 544). 

2. A prince of Ephraim, son of Hadlai, ia the 
reign of Ahaz (2 Cb. zxviii. 12, B. 'A^uvfio, 

A. -I-). [R. W. B.] [F.] 

AMA'SAI CbO», Gea.=burdensome, Fiir»t 
= DiDV[see Amasa]'; AiiMsai). 1. A Kohathitc, 
father of Mahath and ancestor of Shemuel sad 
Heman the singer (1 Ch. vi. 25 [LXX. vi. 10, 

B. 'A^Le<ml, A. 'A/uurC], 35 [LXX. r. 20, B. 
'Aiitt»tios, A. 'A^t]). 

8. See Amasa No. 1. Chief of the captiiw 
(Heb., LXX., and R. V. "thirty "), leader of the 
men of Judah and Benjamin, who came to Dsrid 
while an outlaw at Ziklag (I Ch. xii. 18). He 
was probably the same as Amasa, David's nephew. 

3. B. 'Aiuurai, K. 'A/uuri. One of the priest* 
who blew trumpets before the .\rk, when l>ivid 
brought it from the house of Ob«d-edom (1 Ch. 
XV. 24). 

4. B. Mao-i: cp. No. 1. Another Kohathite. 
father of another Mahath, in the reign of 
Hezekiah (2 Ch. xxix. 12), unless the name U 
that of a family. [W. A. W.] [K.] 

AMASH'AI (*De^r, according to Ges. >ii 
incorrect reading sprung out of the forms KW 
and ^DOI?; according to Olshausen [^Lekrb. |>. 
625] an error for 'boi?; 'Apuurta, A. 'Aittcii: 
Atnassai), properly " Amashsai." Son of Aia- 
reel, a priest in the time of Nehemiah (N'eh. li. 
13) ; apparently the same as Maasai (1 Ch. ii. 
12). [W.A.W.] [F.] 

AMASI'AH (n'DDi;, Jah ia bearer, cp. the 
Phoen. aOViVrntJiahinun heareth, MV.»; B. 
Mcuraiaa, A. Meurtdat ; Amaaiaa). Son of Zichri, 
and captain of 200,000 warriors of Judah, in the 
reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. xvii. 16). 

[w. AW.] m 

A'MATH. [Hamatu.] 

AM'ATHEIS (B. 'ZfuOtit, A. 'E^iofch; 
Emeus). 1 Esd. ix. 29. [Athlai.] 

[W.AV7.] [F.] 

AM'ATHIS (in some copies Amathas), " the 
LAND OP " (ti 'A/ioSiris x^^) i * district t» 
the north of Palestine, in which Jonathu 
Maccabaeus met the forces of Demetrius (1 Uacc. 
xii. 25). From the context it is evidentW 
Hamath. [G.] [W.]' 

AMAZI'AH (n'VOK or W'SOK, Je/unh it 
sti-ong; B. 'AMe<r<r«(at [usually], A. 'A/uirtas 

Digitized by 



[osiuIIt]; Am(uia$), Mn of Joasb, and eighth 
king nf Judah, succeeded to the throne at the 
age of 25 on the mnrder of his father, and 
poiushed the iDniderers (2 K. zii. 21, xiv. 2, 5) ; 
ipanng, however, their children, ia accordance 
with Dent. uir. 16, as the Second Book of Kings 
(lir. 6) expreatlj inforroi na, thereby implying 
that the precept had not been generally obsei-Ted. 
In order to restore his kingdom to the greatness 
of Jehoshaphat's days, he made war on the 
Edomites, defeated them in the valley of Salt, 
sooth of the Dead Sea (the scene of a great 
victory in David's time, 2 Sam. viii. 13 ; 1 Ch. 
xviii. 12 ; Ps. Ix. title), and took their capital, 
Sclah or Petra, to which he gave the name of 
JoKTBEEL, which was also borne by one of his 
own Jewish cities (Josh. xv. 38). We read in 
2 Ch. xxT. 12-14, that the victorious Jews 
threw 10,000 Edomites from the cliffs, and that 
Amaziah performed religions ceremonies in 
hoDonr of the gods of the country ; an exception 
to the general character of bis reign (cf. 2 K. 
lir. 3 with 2 Ch. xxv. 2). In consequence of 
this he was overtaken by misfortune. Having 
already offended the Hebrews of the northern 
kingdom by sending back, in obedience to a 
prophet's direction, some mercenary troops whom 
he had hired 6rom it, he had the foolish arrogance 
to challenge Joasb, king of Israel, to battle, 
despising probably a sovereign whose strength 
bad been exhausted by Syrian wan, and who 
had not yet made himself respected by the great 
sBcceiscs recorded in 2 K. xiii. 25. But Judah 
was completely defeated, and Amaziah himself 
was taken prisoner, and conveyed by Joash to 
Jerusalem, which, according to Joscphus (^Ant. 
ix. 9, § 3), opened its gates to the conqueror 
under a threat that otherwise he would put 
Amaziah to death. We do not know the his- 
torian's anthority for this statement, but it 
explains the fact that the city was taken ap- 
parently without resistance ('2 K. xiv. 13). A 
portion of the wall of Jerusalem on the side 
towards the Israelitish frontier was broken 
down, and treasures and hostages were carried 
off to Samaria. Amaziah lived fifteen years after 
the death of Joash ; and in the 29th year of his 
reign was murdered by conspirators at Lachish, 
whither he had retired for safety from Jeru- 
salem. The chronicler seems to regard this as a 
ponishment for his idolatry in Edom, though 
hii language is not very clear on the point (2 Ch. 
iiv. 27) ; and doubtless it is very probable that 
the conspiracy was a consequence of the low state 
to which Jndah must have been reduced in the 
latter part of his reign, after the Kdomitish war 
sal humiliation inflicted by Joash, king of 
ItneL The chronology of this king's reign is 
much disputed. Clinton (Fasti Nelletiici, i. 
p. 325) gives the dates B.C. 837-809 ; and, pre- 
vions to the comparison with Assyrian dates, 
the beginning of the regnal years has been 
variously placed between the limits B.C. 840 
(Bengel) and B.C. 809 (Seyfarth. See the Uble 
in Herzog, RE.* xvii. p. 477, j. n. Zeitrechnung). 
Since the employment of Assyrian synchronistic 
dates, the beginning of Amaziah's reign Is placed 
ktween B.C. 798 and n.c. 796, and a joint reign 
with his son Amariah (or Uzziah) is supposed to 
have begun in B.C. 786. (See Chronoi-ooy.) 

2. 'Aitaaias. Priest of the golden calf at 
Bethel, who endesvonred to drive the prophet 



Amos from Israel into Jndah, and complained of 
him to king Jeroboam II. (Amos vii. 10). 

S. A descendant of Simeon (1 Ch. iv. 34, 
B. 'A/Kwreut, B»A. -la). 

4. A Levite (1 Ch. vi. 45, B. *AM«<r<rei<( : A. 
has a longer reading, Matirirlavlov XtKx^ov vloi 
'Afuarai). [G. E. L. C] [F.] 

AMBASSADOB. Sometimes "Vf and some- 
times '<|^/9 is thus rendered ; and the occur- 
rence of both terms in the parallel clauses of 
Prov. xiii. 17 seems to show that they approxi- 
mate to synonyms. The word " messengers " 
is probably equivalent to ambassadors in the 
A. V. of Deut. ii. 2C ; Judg. xi. 12-19 ; 2 Sam. 
V. 11 ; 1 Ch. xiv. 1, xix. 2; Is. xiv. 32, xviii. 2, 
xxxili. 7, Ivii. 9 ; Jer. xxvii. 3 ; Ezek. ixi. 9 ; 
Nab. ii. 13, as well as in many of the passages 
cited below. The oflice, like its designation, 
was not definite nor permanent, but pro re natd 
merely. The precept given in Deut. xi. 10 seems 
to imply some such agency ; rather, however, 
that of a mere nuncio, often bearing a letter 
(2 K. v. 5, xix. 14), than of a legate empowered 
to treat. The inviolability of such an officer's 
person may perhaps be inferred from the only 
recorded infraction of it being followed with 
unusual severities towards the vanquished, 
probably designed as a condign chastisement 
of that offence (2 Sam. x. 2-5 ; cf. xii. 26-31). 
The earliest examples of ambassadors employed 
occur in the cases of Edom, Moab, and the 
Amorites (Num. xx. 14, xxi. 21; Judg. xi. 
17-19), afterwards in that of the fraudulent 
Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 4, &c.), of the king of 
Ammon, and in the instances of civil strife 
mentioned Judg. xi. 12 and xx. 12 (see Cunaeus, 
de Rep. Jlebr. ii. 20, with notes by J. Nicholaus ; 
Ugol. iii. 771-4). They are mentioned more 
frequently during and after the contact of the 
great adjacent moiuirchies of Syria, Babylon, 
&c. (e.g. xvii. 14), with those of Judah and 
Israel, e.g. in the invasion of Sennacherib. 
They were usually men of high rank ; just 
n» in that cose the chief captain, the chief 
cupbearer, and chief of the eunuchs were 
deputed, and were met by delegates of similar 
dignity from Hezekiab (2 K. xviii. 17, 18; sec 
also Is. XXX. 4). Ambassadors are found to 
have been employed, not only on occasions of 
hostile challenge or insolent menace (2 K. xiv. 8 ; 
1 K. XX. 2, 6), but of friendly compliment, of 
request for alliance or other aid, of submissive 
deprecation, and of curious inquirj- (2 Iv. xvi. 7, 
xviii. 14; 2 Ch. xxxii. 31). The dispatch of 
ambassadors with urgent haste is introduced as 
a token of national grandeur in the obscure 
prophecy Is. xviii. 2. The |)olitical coniplica- 
thns of the Jewish State in the Maecabean 
period and subsequently, when they were 
brought into contact with the Western republics, 
as well as with the Eastern and Egyptian 
monarchies, gave a wider range and greater 
precision to the ambassadorial function. These 
treaties with Rome and Sparta were negotiated 
by Simon the Maccabee (1 Mac. xiv. 21 foil.). 
The A. V. is rather arbitrary in its selection of 
terms to designate the oflice. Thus "the 
ambassador " of 1 Mac. xii. 8 is rhv irSpa riy 
kmirraKiiivoif ; i6. 23, " ambassador " is under- 
stood from the verb innrfyilKoiiriy. Thus 

Digitized by 




both vfiafitis and irptfrPtvral are in A. V. 
"messengers" (1 Mac. xiii. 14, 21), whereas 
"ambassadors" stands for the same words in 
ix. 70, li. 9, xiv. 21, 40, xv. 17; 2 Mac. 
xi. 34. On the other hand "ambassadors" 
stands for i.yy4\ovs in Jud. iii. 1 ; and in I Mac, 
i. 44, where the same word i.i rendered " messen- 
gers," the ambassadorial function seems clearlj 
intended. In 2 Mac. iv. 19,$(ttpoit, "special 
-messengers" in A. V., is used for the envoys 
sent by Jason, the Hellenizing high-priest, to 
the festival of Heraltles. In the N. T. the only 
mention of the office is >n parables or metaphor 
<Luke xiv. 22 ; 2 Cor. v. 20). [H. H.] 

AMBER (^Wn, clmshmal; jho^, chash- 
malah ; 1i\titrpoy ; elcctrum ; R. V. margin, 
" electrnm ") occurs only in Ezek. i. 4, 27, viii. 2. 
In the first passage the Prophet compares it with 
the brightness in which he beheld the heavenly 
apparition who gave him the Divine commands. 
In the third, " the glory of the God of Israel " is 
represented as having, " from the appearance of 
his loins even downward, fire ; and from his loins 
even upward as the appearance of brightness, as 

the colour of amber" [n<ipC'Pin }»p, words 

which Orelli {Kgf. Komm. ed. Strack n. ZSckler) 
retains, but which Comill (Das Buck dea Pro- 
pheten EzKhiel, note in loco) would strike out as 
a gloss]. It is by no means a matter of cer- 
tainty, notwithstanding Bochart's dissertation 
and the conclusion he comes to (ffieroz. iii. 876, 
ed. Rosenraiill.), that the Hebrew word chashmal 
denotes a metal, and not the fossil resin called 
amber, although perhaps the probabilities are 
more in favour of the metal, Dr, Harris 
(Nat. Hist. Bib., art. "Amber") asserts that the 
translators of the A. V. could not mean amber, 
" for that, being a bituminous substance, be- 
comes dim as soon as it feels the fire, and soon 
dissolves and consumes." But this is founded 
on a misconstruction of the words of the Prophet, 
who does not s.ay that what he saw was iiniber, 
but of the colour of amber {Pict. Bib. note on 
Ezek. viii. 2). The context of the passages 
referred to above is clearly as much in favour 
of amber as of metal. Neither do the LXX. 
and Vulg. atford any certain clue to identifica- 
tion, for the word electron was used by the 
Greeks to express both amber and a certain 
metal, composed of gold and silver, and held in 
very high estimation by the ancients (Pliny, 
H. N. ixxiii. 4). It is a curious fact, that in 
the context of all the passages where mention of 
electron is mailc in the worlcs of Greek authors 
(Horn, see below ; Hes. Sc. Here. 142 ; Soph. 
Antiij. 1038; Aristoph. Eq. 532, jic), no evi- 
dence is afforded to help us to determine what 
the eleetrtm was. In the Odyssey (iv. 73) it is 
mentioned as enriching Menclaus's palace, to- 
gether with copper, gold, silver, and ivory. In 
Od. XV. 460, xviii. 296, a necklace of gold is 
said to be fitted with electron. Pliny, in the 
chapter quoted above, understanils the electron 
in Menelaus's palace to be the metal. But with 
respect to the golden necklace, it is worthy of 
note that amber necklaces have long been used, 
as they were deemed an amulet against throat 
diseases. They are still frequently worn in 
Kngland by iwrsons liable to asthma, and are 
believed to be efficacious for the purpose. Beads 


of amber are frequently found in British barrovt 
with entire necklaces (Fosbroke, Antiq. 1.289). 
Theophrastus (ii. 18, § 2 ; and /V. ii. 29, ed. 
Schneider), it is certain, uses the term electrm 
to denote amber, for he speaks of its attracting 
properties. On the other hand, that tkctritt 
was understood by the Greeks to denote a nwul 
composed of one part of silver to every four of 
gold, we have the testimony of Pliny to show : 
but whether the early Greeks intended the 
metal or the amber, or sometimes one and some- 
times the other, it is im)x>98ible to detennioe 
with certainty. Passow believes that the metal 
was always denoted by electron in the writing* 
of Homer and Hesiod, and that amber was not 
known till its introduction by the Pboenicius : 
to which circumstance, as he thinks, Herodotos 
(iii. 115, who seems to speak of the resin, ind 
not of the metal) refers. Others again, witii 
Buttmann {MytluA. ii. p. 337), maiDtain that 
the electron denoted amber, and they very 
reasonably refer to the ancient myth of the 
origin of anU>er. Pliny (If. A'. xxxviL 2) ridi- 
cules the Greek writers for their crolulity 
in the fabulous origin of this substance ; ud 
especially finds fault with Sophocles, who, in 
some lost play, appears to have believed in it 

From these considerations it will be seen thit 
it is not possible to identify the chashmai by the 
help of the LXX., or to say whether we are to 
understand the metal or the fosail resin by the 
word. The derivation of the word is entirely 
unknown, nor is there any plausible explana- 
tion of it. Bochart (Hieror. iii. 885) con- 
jectures that chashmal is compounded of two 
Chaldee* words meaning copper — gold-ore, tn 
which he refers the aurichalcmn. But ovn- 
chalcum is in all probability only the Latin form 
of the Greek onchalcon (mountain copper. See 
Smith's Lat.'Engl. Dict.,t.y. " Orichalcum "). 
Isidorus, however (Orii;. x\i. 19), sanctions the 
etymology which Bochart adopts. But the 
electron, according to Pliny, Paiuanias (v. 12, 
§ 6), and the numerous anthorities quoted by 
Bochart, was composed of gold and sileer, not 
of gold and copper. The Hebrew word msv 
denote either the metal electron or amber ; but it 
must be left as a question which of the two snl>- 
stances is really intended. [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

A'MEN (JOK), literally "firm, true; "and 
used as a substantive, " that which is true,' 
" truth " (Is. Ixv. 16) ; a word used in strong 
asseverations, fixing as it were the stamp ot 
tmth upon the assertion which it accompanied, 
and making it binding as an oath (cp. Num. 
V. 22). In the LXX. of 1 Ch. xvi. 36, Neh. 
V. 13, viii. 6, the word appears in the form 
'A/i^v, which is used throughout the N. T.* In 
other passages the Heb. is rendered by yiroero, 
except in Is. Ixv. 16. The Vulgate adopts the 
Hebrew word in all cases except in the Psalms, 
where it is translated fiat. In Dent, ix vii. 1 5-26. 

• Fried. Delltnch (Pref. to User's ed. of EzekirL 
p. xU.) compares with it an Assyrian word, fhmaH, 
which he conjectures, from the context of the pASMi^e 
In which It occurs, m»y have meant some white m^'tsl. 

>> The 'A^iii' of the Rec. text at the end of most of the 
Books of the N. T. Is thought to be genuine only in 
Homsns, Oalatians, Hebrews (?), and Jode (see West- 
cott and Hort's ed. of the N. T. In Greek). 

Digitized by 





the ptople were to sar " Amen," as the Lerites 
prononoMd each of the curses upon Moant Gbal, 
sigBifjiog bf this their assent to the conditions 
Dvier which the cnrwa would be inflicted. In 
accordance with this usage we find that among 
the iiabbis "Amen " inrolres the ideas of swear* 
tug, acceptance, and tmthfalness. The first two 
senses are illustrated hj the passages already 
quoted; the Ust by I K. i. 36 ; John iii. 3, 5, U 
(A.y. "rerilf "X in which the assertions are 
made with the solemnity of an oath, and then 
ansgthened by the repetition of "Amen." 
■'Amen" was the proper response of the person 
lo whom an oath was administered (Neh. t. 13, 
riJL 6 ; 1 Ch. xTi. 36 ; Jer. zi. 5, marg.) ; and 
tilt Deity, to Whom appeal is made on such oc- 
ctaoos, is called " the God of Amen " (Is. Izt. 16), 
u being a witness to the sincerity of the implied 
compact. With a similar significance Christ is 
called " the Amen, the faithful and true witness " 
(iter. iiL 14 ; comp. John i. 14, liv. 6 ; 2 Cor. 
i. 20)l It is matter of tradition that in the 
Temple the "Amen" was not uttered by the 
people, but that instead, at the conclusion of the 
priest's prayers, they responded, " Blessed be the 
name of the glory of His kingdom for ever and 
erer." Of this a trace is supposed to remain in 
the conelading sentence of the Lard's Prayer 
( cp. Rom. xi. 36 y. But in the synagogues 
ud printe houses it was customary for the 
people or members of the fiimily who were 
praeat to say " Amen " to the prayers which 
were offered by the minister or the master of 
the boose, and the custom remained in the early 
Christian Church (Matt. ri. 13; 1 Cor. liv. 16). 
.\ad not only public prayers, but those offered 
in prirate, and doxologies. were appropriately 
widuded with " Amen " (Rom. ix. 5, xi. 36, xv. 
33, XTi. 27 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 14, Ac.). [W. A. W.] 

AJtETHTST (nO^HN, achl&ndh, deriva- 
tion asjcnown. Ges. [i^x-] connects it with 

DTn, /rem the idea, that it caused dreams to 
those that wore it ; according to Fried. Delitzsch 
traa AJUami, an Armenian district in which he 
coojectnres that the stone may hare been found 
[UA, Lang. p. 36^ ; i/itBurros ; ametAystus). 
Mention is made ot' this precious stone, which 
fumed the third in the third row of the high- 
|iri«t's breastphtte, in Ex. xxriii. 19, xxxix. 12, 
"And the third row a ligure, an agate, and 
«i imethyst." It occurs also in the N. T. 
(Rer. ixi. 20) as the twelfth stone which 
Tuiuthed the fonndations of the wall of the 
lesresly Jerusalem. Commentators generally 
>re agreed that the amethyst is the stone 
i»lieat«d by the Hebrew word, an opinion 
Thick is abundantly supported by the ancient 
^enioiu. The T.-irgum of Jerusalem indeed 
"rTit smaragdin (tnuiragdua) \ those of Onkelos 
»d Pi.-Jonathan hare two words which signify 
~ cslfs-eye " (ocWus vihtli), which Braunius (de 
^atii.Sooerd. Heb. ii. 711) conjectures may be 
ileitical with the Beli oculus of the Assyrians 
(PliiT, B. S. zxxrii. 55), the Cat't-eye Chalce- 
^<*;, according to Ajasson and Desfontaines ; 
'et, ts Braunius has observed, the word ach- 
ItnuA according to the best and most ancient 
•nthorities signifies amethyst. 

Modem mineralogists usually understand by 
"M term amethyst the amethystine variety of 
■T'/'^i, which is crystalline and highly trans- 

parent : it is sometimes called Rose quartz, and 
contains alumina and oxide of manganese. There 
is, however, another mineral to which the namp 
of Oriental amethyst is usually applied, and 
which is far more valuable than the quartz 
kind. This is a crystalline variety of Cormdum, 
being found more especially in the E. and W. 
Indies. It is extremely hard and bright, and 
generally of a purple colour, which, however, it 
may readily be made to lose by subjecting it to 
fire. In all probability the common Amethystine 
quartz is the mineral denoted by achldmdh ; for 
Pliny speaks of the amethyst being easily cut 
(scalpturis facilis, H. N. xzxvii. 40), whereas the 
Oriciital amethyst is inferior only to the diamond 
in hardness, and is moreover a comparatively 
rare gem. 

The Greek word atn«tAtu(os, the origin of the 
English amethyst, is usually derived from i, 
" not," and fuSia, " to be intoxicated," this stone 
having been believed to have the power of dis- 
pelling drunkenness in those who wore it 
(Dionys. Perieg. 1122; Anthol. Paiat. 9, 7T>2; 
Martini, Escurs. 158). Pliny, however (//. X. 
xxxvii. 9), traces the name of these stones " to 
their peculiar tint, which, after approximating 
to the colour of wine, shades off into a violet." 
Theophrastus also alludes to its wine -like 
colour.* [W. H.] [H. B. T.] 

A'MI (*PM; 'tt/ul; Ami), name of one of 
"Solomon's servants" (Ezra ii. 57); calleil 
Amon (l^DM) in the parallel passage Neh. vii. 
59 CH/t<(/( ; Amon), of which, according to Ges., 
it is a corruption. The transcriptional varia- 
tions between the parallel lists are tabulated by 
Smend, Die Listen d. BB. Esra «. Nehemin 
(Basel, 1881> [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMIN'ADAB CA/uvaUP ; Aminadab). Am- 
MlHiLDAB No. 1 (Matt. i. 4; Luke iii. 33). 

[W. A. W.] 

AMITTAI CrmH=true, faithful; B. 'Afuad, 

A. -I ; Amatht), father of the prophet Jonah (2 K. 
liv. 25 ; Jon. i. 1> [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AM'MAH, the hill of (HSK TW3|; 6 0ouvis, 

B. 'Afi/tiy, A. 'Aitfti; collis Aqtkieductus ), a 
hill " facing " Giah by the way of the wilder- 
ness of Gibeon, named as the point to which 
Joab'a pursuit of Abner after the death of 
Asahel extended (2 Sam. ii. 24). Josephus {Ant. 
vii. ch. i. § 3), rinot ris, %y 'AmidToy Ka\ouai 
(comp. Targ. Jon. ttFlDK). Both Symmachus 
(rirti = (pi//!/)andTheodotion (itpaYvyiJt''), who 
is followed by the Vulgate, find an allusion to 
a watercourse here, possibly some place near 

W. Kelt, on the road by which Abner fled to the 
Jordan valley. Can this point to the " excavateil 
fountain," " under the high rock," described as 
near Gibeon (El-Jib) by Robinson (i. 455)? 

[G.] [W.] 

AM'MI CBff; Aorfi ftov; populus mens), 
i.e. as explained in the margin of the A. V. and 

• Tb i* aiU9vvw oiMMi^ tij XP^* (^* ^' ^^» ^' 

>> In poet-Blbllcal Hebrew a« In Aramaic HIOK ac- 
quired tbe meinini; of aqueduct. Had this sense, bow- 
ever, been inten<led here, tbe word would natarallj have 
been provided with tbe article. IS. R. D.] 

Digitized by 




R. v., " My people ; " a fignratire name applied 
to tbe kingdom of Israel in token of God's 
reconciliation with them, and their position as 
" sons of the living God," in contrast with the 
vqually significant name Lo-ammi, giren by the 
prophet Hosea to his second son by Gomer, the 
daughter of Diblaim (Hos. ii. 1). In the same 
manner Ruhamah contrasts with Lo-Ruhamah. 

[W. A. W.] 

AM'MIDOI, in the Geneva Version AMMI- 
DIOI (B. 'A/iiiiStoi, A. 'A^touu; Vulg. has 
different names), people who, together with the 
men of Chadias, came up from l^bylon with Ze- 
rubbabel (1 £sd. v. 20). If Chadias be identified 
with Kedesh (Josh. xv. 23), the Ammidioi may 
be (Fritzsche) the men of Humtah (nopn, Josh. 
.tv. 54). If so, the tXX. A. xifP^ri (B. Ei/xd) 
furnishes the connecting link with Ammidioi 
or (replacing the guttural) Chammidioi (see 
Lnpton, Spmker't Commentary, note on 1 Esd. 
V. 20). [F.] 

AMMl'EL ( VsP, MV." = peopfe of God. 
Many Heb. names are compounded of Qlf, bat 
the sense in which it is to be understood is un- 
certain. See Nestle, Die Israel. Eigennamen, p. 
187, n. a; Fried. Delitzsch, Pnlegg. p. 201, n. 3 ; 
B. 'A/utfiX, AF. 'A/uliK ; Ammiel). 1. The spy 
selected by Moses from the tribe of Dan (Num. 
xiii. 12). 

2. The father of Machir of Lodebar (2 Sam. 
ix. 4 [B. 'A/taVi ■*• 'AfullX], V. 5 [B. 'A/<cr4x, 
.\. -1-], ivii. 27 [h. 'A>Ki4^ A. 'Afuiip]; Ammi- 

3. The father of Bathshaa, or Bathsheba, 
the wife of David (1 Ch. iii. 5% called Eliau 

(OItSm) in 2 Sam. xi. 3 ; the Hebrew letters, 
which are the same in the two names, being 
transposed. He was the son of Ahithophel, 
David's prime minister. 

4. B. 'Afiftiih, A. -I-. The sixth son of 
Obed-edom (1 Ch. xxvi. 5), and one of the door- 
Iteepers of the Temple. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMMI'HUD O'f'Dir, MV.» = my people 
is majesty ; 'E^oi>S in Num., 'A^ioiiS in 1 Ch. ; 
Ammiud). 1. An Ephraimite, father of Eli- 
shama, the chief of the tribe at the time of the 
Exodus (Num. i. 10, ii. 18, vii. 48 [F. 2«/uo*», 
and in x. 22], 53, x. 22), and through him 
ancestor of Joshua (1 Ch. vii. 26 [B. 'Aiuovtli, 
A. -ou«]). 

2. B. 2cM«>^>;B*'EK.'E/uoiiS. ASimeonite, 
father of Shemuel, chief of the tribe at the time 
of the division of Canaan (Num. xxxiv. 20). 

3. AF. 'AntM, B. Beno/tcioiiS, Ti\-iu-. The 
father of Pedahel, chief of the tribe of Naphtali 
at the same time (Num. xxxiv. 28). 

4. •y^tVip'O, Keri n^n^Btf; 'E/uoii». Ammi- 
hud, or "Ammichur," as the written text- has 
it, was the father of Talmai, king of Geshur 
(2 Sam. xiiL 37). 

6. A. 'Aiuoii, B. 'Saniuoi. A descendant of 
Pbarez, son of Judah (1 Ch. ix. 4). 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMMI'NADAB (3'13n^, Vl\'.^^ = my peo- 
ple is noble: the passages Judg. v. 2, Ps. ex. 3 
marg., seem however rather to suggest the sense 
my people is Killing [tee v. 4] ; B. 'AiitanSifi, 


AF. -II"- [usually ; in Ex. vi. 23, A. and in Num. 
i. 7, F. 'A/umttc^t] ; Amtnadd)). 1. Son of Ram 
or Aram, and father of Nahshon, or Naasson (a* 
it is written. Matt. i. 4; Luke iii. 32; B. V. 
Nahson in both places), who was the prince of 
the tribe of Judah, at the first numbering of 
Israel in the second year of the Exodns (Num. L 
7, ii. 3 ; Ruth iv. 19, 20 ; 1 Ch. ii. 10). We 
gather hence that Aiumlnadab died in Egypt 
before the Exodus, which accords with the 
mention of him in Ex. vi. 23, where we read 
that "Aaron took him Elisheba daughter of 
Amrainadab, sister of Nahshon, to wife, and she 
bare him Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Itha- 
mar." This also indicates that Amminadab 
must have lived in the time of the most grierooa 
oppression of the Israelites in Egypt. He i* 
the fourth generation after Judah, the patriarch 
of his tribe, and one of the ancestors of Jesus 
Chuist. Nothing more is recorded of him ; but 
the marriage of his daughter to Aaron may be 
marked as the earliest instance of alliance- 
between the royal line of Judah and the priestly 
line of Aaron. And the name of his grandson 
Nadab may be noted as probably given in honour 
of Ammi-nadab his grandfather. 

8. KA. 'AiuyaSdfi, B. -cii^. The chief of the 
112 eons of Uzziel, n junior Levitical hooae of 
the family of the Kohathites (Ex. vi. 18X in the 
days of David, whom that king sent for, to- 
gether with Uriel, Asaiah, Joel, Shemaiah, and 
tlliel, other chief fathers of Leviticml hoosei, 
and Zadok and Abiathar the priests, to bring 
the ark of God to Jerusalem (1 Ch. xv. 10-12). 
to tbe tent which he had pitched for it. The 
pa.ssage last quoted is instructive as to the mode 
of naming the houses; for besides the sons of 
Kohath, 120 in v. 5, we have the sons of Cliza- 
phan, 200 in v. 8, of Hebron, 80 in c. 9, and of 
ITzziel, 112 in r. 10, all of them Kohathites 
(Num. iii. 27, 30). 

8. At 1 Ch. vi. 22 (r. 7, Heb.) Ixh«r, the 
son of Kohath, and father of Korah, is called 
Amminadab, and the LXX. has the some read- 
ing (B. 'AiuaraSiP, A. 'Ivaadp). But it is 
probably only a clerical error. 

4. In Cant. vi. 12 it is uncertain whether we 
ought to read 3'n3'Bl?, Amminadib, with tbe 
A. v., or 3n3 'BB, my willinj people, as in the 
margin [R. V. " my princely people "] and mo»t 
moderns (Delitzsch, Oettii, &c). If Ammi- 
nadib is a proper name, it is thought to be 
either the name of some one famous for hU cwift 
chariots, ni33'1D, or that there is an allnsioa 
to Abiiladab, and to the new cart on which they 
made to ride (nD'Sn^ the ark of God (2 Sam. 
vi. 3). But this last, though perhaps intended 
by the LXX. version of Cant., which has 'Afiir- 
aSip, is very improbable. In vii. 2 (r. 1, A. V.) 
the LXX. (T.') also renders anrOS, «0 
prince's daughter," by tiyartf KaSifi ; A 
reads Biyartp 'AiuyttSd$; Vulg. filia prin- 
cipis. [A. C. H.] [F.] 

AMMI'NADIB (Cant. vi. 12> [Ammisa.- 

DAB No. 4.] 

AMMI'SHADDAI C"^t3». MV.»= propfe 
of the Almighty ; B. 'A^icraSaf, AF. -i<r- [except 
in Num. ii. 25, where A. reads iaiuuraial, and io 
I. 25, MtiraSeiQ ; Amitaddai, Ammisaddai'). Th* 

Digitized by 



fither of Abiezer, chief nf the tribe of Dan at 
tie time of the tCxodus (Num. i. 12, ii. 25, rii. 
66, Tl, I. 25). His name is one of the few 
vhich we find at this period compounded with 
tie ucient name of God, Sbaddai ; Zuri-shaddai, 
ani posiiblf Shedenr, are the only other in- 
stances: both belong to tbia earljr time. 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMMI'ZABAD 03rp», MV.»=ifj/ peo- 
Fit luti gnoUed{it) ; for the verb 1Z1 (ix. \ty.) 
*« Gen. III. 20. 121 is common in proper 
urno in the Palmyrene Inscriptions [cp. Enting, 
Setit Phon. Inschriften, p. 15]; B. Aiu$a- 
(i>, A. 'Aiupa(<iB; Amizcimd). The son of 
iieniiali, who apparently acted as his father's 
lieoteoant, and commanded the third dirision 
(f DsTid's army, on duty for the third month 
(1 Ch. iivii. 6). [W. A. W.] [S. R. D.] 


OF AMMON • (jiDr. ■<iSw. n^iSm ; ]isr '^a ; 

'Afiftir [B. sometimes 'A/i^y], 'A^^oyTrai, 
LXX. in Pent. ; elsewhere 'kjiiuiv, vloX 'A/t/tiiv ; 
Jo»ph. 'KniuatTcu ; Ammon, AmTnenitae), a 
pwple desceaded from Beu-Ammi, the son of 
Lot by hii younger daughter (Gen. x\x. 38; 
tf. Pi. Uxiiii. 7, 8), as Moab was by the elder ; 
and listing from the destruction of Sodom. 

The near relation between the two peoples 
indicated in the story of their origin continued 
tlrongkont their existence : from their earliest 
mention (Deut. ii.) to thrir disappearance from 
the biblical history (Jud. v. 2) the brother- 
tribes >i« named together (cp. Judg. x. 10; 
i Cb. u. 1 ; Zeph. ii. 8, &c.). Indeed, so close 
VIS their onion, and so near their identity, that 
«3ch Toold appear to be occasionally spoken of 
Buler the name of the other. Thus the " land 
uf the children of Ammon " is said to hare been 
giTcn to the "children of Lot," ue. to both 
Ammon ind Hoab (Deut. ii. 19). They are 
both said to hare hired Balaam to curse Israel 
(Dent uiii. 4), whereas the detailed narratire 
of that erent omits all mention of Ammon 
{.Vom. ixii„ ixiii.). In the answer of Jephthah 
to the king of Ammon the allusions are con- 
tinually to Moab (Judg. xi. 15, 18, 25), while 
Ckmcsh, the peculiar deity of Moab (Num. xxi. 
■iSX i» called " thy god " (Judg. xi. 24). The 
Uad from Amon to Jabbok, which the king of 
Amnion calls "my land " (Judg. xi. 13X is else- 
wliere distinctlr stated to hare once belonged to 
» "ting of Moab " (Num. xxi. 26). Possibly on 
1 later occasion also the name represents both 
I«rt> of the nation of Lot (2 Cb. xxri. 8). 


I'nlike Moab, the precise position of the terri- 
tory «f the Ammonites is not clearly aacertain- 
aUe. In the earliest mention of them (Deut. ii. 
-•>) they are said to have destroyed those 
Ktpbaim, or non-Semitic people, whom they 
<aUel the Zamznmmim, and to hare occupied 
ikrir eoimtry which lay north of Moab, between 



' TV expresilun moat commonly emplojed for this 
^<*^ fi " Brae-Axnnwa ; " next In frequency cornea 
" Anmoid ' or ■ Ammonim " (nanaUy In lata writers) ; 
■d Inst oAen " Ammoo." The translators of the 
'iJ'L Toiion have net^ected these minnte dlfferenan, 
m ksn catpiojni tbe three terms— children of Amman, 
^BBoailm Ammoo — indiscriminately. 
*mK WCT. — YOU I. 

the Amon and the Jabbok.** Shortly, howerer 
before the .idrent of the Israelites in Palestine 
the Amorites had dispossessed the Ammonites of 
a portion of their territory and established a 
kingdom under Sihon, whose seat was at Hesh- 
bon (Num. xxi. 26). It was on this prior pos- 
session that the Ammonite king appears to 
hare grounded his claim in the time of Jephthah 
(Judg. xi. 13); a claim |)erhaps admitted in 
Josh. xiii. 25. The kingdom of Sihon was 
dirided between Gad and Reuben, but the 
Israelites were not permitted to occupy that 
portion of the Ammonite territory which the 
Amorites had failed to subdue. This indepen- 
dent kingdom lay between the Amon and the 
Jabbok, and its western boundary was conter- 
minous with the limits of the tribe of Qad (see 
Reland, 105, on Josh. xiii. 25), which included 
the town of Aroer near Kabbah ; it consisted of 
the eastern portion of the district now called 
Belka, and its capital was Rabbab, or Rabbath, 
the modern Amman [Rabdah]. " Land " or 
" country " is, however, but rarely ascribed to 
the Ammonites, nor is there any reference to 
those habits and circumstances of civilisation — 
the " plentiful 6elds," the " hay," the " sum- 
mer-fruits," the " rineyards," the " presses," 
and the " songs of the grape-treaders " — which 
so constantly recur in the allusions to Moab (Is. 
XV., xvi. ; Jer. xlviii.) ; but, on the contrary, 
we find everywhere traces of the fierce habits of 
marauders in their incursions — thrusting out 
the right eyes of whole cities (1 Sam. xi. 2), 
ripping up the women with child (Amos i. 13), 
and displaying a very high degree of craftv 
cruelty (Jer. xli. 6, 7 ; Judg. vii. 11, 12) to 
their enemies, as well as a suspicious discourtesy 
to their allies, which on one occasion (2 Sam. x. 
1-5) brought all but extermination on the tribe 
(xii. 31). Nor is the contrast less observable 
between the one city of Ammon, the fortified 
hold of Kabbah (2 Sam. xi. 1 ; £zek. xxr. 5 ; Amos 
i. 13), and the " streets," the " house-tops," and 
the "high-places" of the numerous and busv 
towns of the rich plains of Moab (Jer. xlriii. ; 
Is. xr., xvi.). Taking the abore into account, 
it is hard to aroid the conclusion that, while 
Moab was the settled and civilised half of the 
nation of Lot, the Bene-Ammon formed its pre- 
datory and Bedouin section. The confirmation 
of this opinion, once deduced (cp. 1st ed. of the 
B. D.) from the Succoth of Amos r. 26 (cp. 
LXX. ; Acts vii. 43), that the special deity of 
the tribe was worshipped, in a booth or tent 
deaignated by that word Succah which most 
keenly expressed to the Israelites the contrast 
between a nomadic and a settled life, is now 
giren np, Cp. the R. V. of Amos, /. c. 

On the west of Jordan they nerer obtained n 
footing. Among the confusions of the times of 
the Judges we find them twice passing orer ; 
once with Moab and Amaiek seizing Jericho, 
the " city of palm-trees " (Judg. iii. 13), and a 
second time " to fight against Judah and Benja- 
min, and the house of Ephraim " (Judg. z. 9) ; 
but they quickly returned to the freer pastures 
of Gileaid, tearing but one trace of their pre- 
sence in the name of Chepliar ha-Ammonai, 
" the hamlet of the Ammonites " (Josh, xriii. 

* Joeephns sUtea (^n(. 1. 11, $ 6) that the Hoabitee 
and Ammonites lived In Coele-^ri*. 


Digitized by 




24), situated in the portion of Benjamin some- 
where at the head of the passes which lead up 
from the Jordan valley, and form the natural 
access to the table-land of the west country. 

The hatred in which the Ammonites were 
held by Israel, and which possibly was con- 
nected with the story of their incestuous origin, 
is stated to have arisen partly from their oppo- 
sition, or, rather, their want of assistance (Deut. 
zxiii. 4), to the Israelites on their approach to 
Canaan. But it evidently sprang mainly from 
their share in the aSair of Balaam (Deut. xxiii. 
4; Neh. xiii. 1). At the period of Israel's first 
approach to the south of Palestine the feeling 
towards Ammon is one of regard. The com- 
mand is then, " distress not the Moabites . . . 
distress not the children of Ammon, nor meddle 
with them" (Deut. ii. 9, 19; and cp. t. 37), 
and it is only from the subsequent transaction 
that we can account for the fact that Edom, 
who bad also refused passage through his land 
but had taken no part with Balaam, is punished 
with the ban of exclusion from the congrega- 
tion for three generations, while Moab and 
Ammon are to be Isept out for ten generations 
(Dent, zxiii. 2), a sentence which acquires 
peculiar significance from its being the same 
pronounced on " bastards " in the preceding 
Terse, from its collocation amongst those pro- 
nounced in reference to the most loathsome 
physical deformities, and also from the emphatic 
recapitulation (ver. 6), " Thou shalt not seek 
their peace or their prosperity all thy days for 

But whatever its origin it is certain that the 
animosity continued in force to the latest date. 
Subdued by Jephthah (Judg. xi. 33), and scat- 
tered with great slaughter by Saul (1 Sam. xi. 
11) — and that not once only, for he " vexed " 
them " whithersoever he turned " (xiv. 47) — 
they enjoyed under his successor a short respite, 
probably the result of the connexion of Uoab 
with David (1 Sam. xxii. 3) and David's town, 
Bethlehem — where the memory of Ruth must 
have been still fresh. But this was soon brought 
to a close by the shameful treatment to which 
their king subjected the friendly messengers 
of David (2 Sam. x. 1 ; 1 Ch. xix. 1), and for 
which David destroyed their city and inflicted on 
them the severest blows (2 Sam. xii. ; 1 Ch. zx.). 

In the days of Jehoshaphat they made an in- 
cursion into Judah with the Moabites and the 
Maonites,' but were signally repubed, and so 
many killed that three days were occupied in 
spoiling the bodies (2 Ch. xx. 1-25). In Uz- 
ziah's reign they made incursions and com- 
mitted atrocities in Gilead (Amos i. 13); but 
afterwards were his tributaries (2 Ch. zzvi. 8), 
where perhaps the name represents both the 
children of Lot (comp. Jos. Ant. ix. 10, § 3). 
Jotham had wars with them, and exacted from 
them a heavy tribute of " silver (comp. " jew- 
els," 2 Ch. XX. 25X wheat, and barley " (2 Ch. 
zxvii. 5). In the time of Jeremiah we find them 
in possession of the cities of Gad from which the 
Jews had been removed by Tiglath-pileser (^Jer. 

* There can be no doubt tbat Instead of ** Ammon- 
ites " In 2 Cb. XX. 1 we should rrad, with the LUC., 
"Maottltes" or "Hebunlm." The reasons for this 
will be given under MxBDiiiK. 


xlix. 1-6) ; and other incursions are elsewhere 
alluded to (Zeph. ii. 8, 9). At the time of the 
Captivity many Jews took refoge amoag the 
Ammonites from the Assyrians (Jer. il. IIX but 
no better feeling appears to have arisen ; tnd on 
the return from Babylon, Tobiah the Ammonite 
and Sanballat a Mosbite (of Choronsim, Jer. 
xlix.) were foremost among the opponents of 
Nehemiah's restoration. 

Among the wives of Solomon's harem are in- 
cluded Ammonite women (1 K. xi. 1), one of 
whom, Naamah,' was the mother of Rehoboam 
(1 K. xiv. 31 ; 2 Ch. xii. 13), and henceforwwd 
traces of the presence of Ammonite womei in 
Judah are not wanting (2 Ch. xiiv. 26 ; Neh. 
xiii. 23 ; Ezra ii. 1 ; see Oeiger, Ursdirift, ic, 
pp. 47, 49, 299). These may have been either 
bestowed during the intervals of actnsl wufue 
or taken prisoners. 

The last appearances of the Ammonites is the 
biblical narrative are in the books of Judith (t. 
vi. vii.) and of the Maccabees (1 Mace. v. 6, 3*- 
43), where they are found (c. 39) in alliance with 
the Arabs ; and where, as it has been alieulj 
remarked, their chief characteristics — close slli- 
auce with Moab, hatred of Israel, and cnsoinf 
cruelty — are maintained to the end. By Justin 
Martyr (Dial. Tryph.') they are spokes of u 
still numerous (rDy voXfr rKr)$ot) ; but notwith- 
standing this, they do not appear sgain, tad 
Origen, about a century afterwards, sars (n 
Jobum, lib. i.) that the term Ammonites hiil 
become merged in that of Arabs. 

The tribe was governed by a king (Jndg. li. 
12, &c. ; 1 Sam. zii. 12 ; 2 Sam. i. 1 ; Jer. iL 
14) and by « princes," ^"^ (2 Sam. x. 3 ; 1 a 
xix. 3). It has been conjectured that Nahuh 
(1 Sam. xi. 1 ; 2 Sam. x. 2) was the offidal title 
of the king as Pharaoh was of the Egjptiu 
monarchs ; bat this is without any clear 

The divinity of the tribe was Milcom-''tii« 
abomination of the children of Ammon" (1 K. 
zi. 5), a name only dialectically different hm 
the Phoenician Milk (Molech ; Baethgen, Bd- 
trSge z. Sem. ReligionsgeachichU, p. 15). h> 
more than one passage under the word rendered 
" their king " in the A. V. an allusion is in- 
tended to this idol. [MoLECH.] 

The Ammonite names preserved in the sacred 
text are as follow. It is open to inqnii; 
whether these words have reached us hi their 
original form (certainly those In Greek h»« 
not), or whether they have been altered in 
transference to the Hebrew records. 

Achior, 'Axi^f*. quasi T^K 'fit?, JrotJero/lij*'. 
Jnd. V. 5, &c. 

Baalis, DvVS (see s. n.), Jer. xl. 14. 
Hanun, \^V\, treated graciously, 2 Sam. x. L 

Molech, 1I?b, king. 

Naamah, nO^], pleasant, 1 K. xiv. 31, &c 
Nahash, E'rU, serpent, 1 Sam. xL 1, fcc: 
NcuUrqt (Jos. Ant. vi. 5, 2). 
Shobi, 'at? (the Nabatean ♦3B», if the name 

< According to the LXX. [B. not A.} additions to 1 f- 
xU. [v. 24 a, ed. Swete}, she was tbe daughter of Bsnnn 
son of Nshash. 

Digitized by 



be tbe same, is probably to be vocalized Shabbai ; 
Entmg, Nab. Inschr. pp. 57, 74), 2 Sam. ivii. 27. 

Timotheua, Tiii69tos, 1 Mace. v. 6, &c. 

Tobiali, n'^^, goodness of Jah, Neh. ii. 10, &c 

Ztlek, p}"^, in post-biblical Heb. = a tear' 
2 Sun. niii 37. 

Ammoi appears in tbe caneiforin inscriptions 
M Bit Ammana, Beth Ammon (comp. Beth 
Humri, "hooae of Omri," for Samaria). A 
ling Padniln, Puduel (cp. Pedabel, Kum. miv. 
2J), is mtntioDed in the records of Sennacherib 
sad Esarhaddon ; Saniba (Fried. Delitzsch = 
Shiiab, Gen. lir. 2) in those of Tiglath-pileser ; 
sod Bs-'-sa (cp. Baasha, 1 E. zt. 33) son of 
Rochnb, in those of Shalmaneser U. ( Schrader, 
KAT.' pp. 141, 613). 

The same Zamzommim, applied by the Am- 
monites to tbe Rephaim, a non-Semitic (possibly 
Turanian) people whom they dispossessed, 
should not be omitted. [G.] [W.J 

AMMOXITESS (n'JbPri: B. 'AM/uu'emt, 
Mmelimes with and sometimes without the 
irtide ri; A. usually ij 'Aiuviris, sometimes 
'*W-- ^nmanitis). A. woman of Ammonite 
race. Snch were Naamah, the mother of Re- 
hoboam, one of Solomon's foreign wives (1 K. 
liv. 21, 31 ; 2 Ch. xii. 13^ and Shimeath, whose 
son Zabad or Jozachar was one of the mur- 
derers of king Joash (2 Ch. xiiv. 26). For 
ailasions to these mixed marriages see 1 K. xi. 1 
«>i Neb. xiiL 25. Where in the Hebrew the 
vord hss the definite article, it should be 
rendered "the Ammonitcss." [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMTION (jiJDK, Get.=faitAful, once ^VDK. 
either a diminntire formation used contemptu- 
««!ly [Wright, Arab. Or. i. § 269] or an error 
[Wellhansen, i. I.'] ; 'A/u^£x; Amnon). 1. Eldest 
»n of David by Ahinoam, the Jezreelitess, bom 
in Hebrott while his father's royalty was only 
Jckoowledged in Judah (2 Sam. iii. 2). He dis- 
ionoared his half-sister Tamar, and was in con- 
sequence murdered bv her brother (2 Sam. xiii. 
1-39; 1 Ch. iii. 1). [ABMlOll.] [S. R. D.] 

a Son of Shimon (1 Ch. ir. 20). 

[G. E. L. C] 

A'HOK (pIDD, deep; Amoc). A priest, 
whose &niily returned with Zerubbabel, and 
•ere represented by Eber in the days of 
J'iakim (Neh. xii. 7 [A. ««•• -« ■•' 'AftoiK], 
20 [««•••=• "»'A/io«a3e'8. B. omits almost the 
whole of rr. 3-7, 14-21 ; AN* omit m. 14-21]). 
[W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMOTfUM. In the descriptive list of the 
merchandise of Babylon (Rev. xviii. 13) the 
tut shoald read «al Kirrdfuifuni «al i/ioiioi'. 
L V. omiU the latter words ; R. V. translates 
them "and spice." Lee {Speaker's Commentary 
'•loco) describes ii as "a zingiberaceons plant, 
^ith aromatic seeds, much employed under the 
'^'e of cardamoms, grains of Paradise, tic, 
»»! fonnd only in the hot parts of India and 
^^nx." From the amomum the Romans pre- 
I«r«l in oil or balsam for funeral rites (Pcrs. iii. 
I«; Ovid. Pont. i. 9, 51), and unguenU for the 
kar (Ovid. Her. xxi. 166; Mart. vlli. 28; 
l-noiL x. 164 ff.). Abbot (Z). B. Amer. ed.) 
•feis that modem botanists have found it 

' Compare the Mubri^uet of " Le Balafre." 



didiciilt to identify the plant with any known 
species. [f.] 

A'MON (;to^; 'Aau<Jv), the name of an 
Egyptian god, the chief object of worship at 
Thebes. It occurs as the second element in the 
name of Thebes, in Heb. No-Amon ([iDK M, 
Nah. iii. 8) ; in hieroglyphics, Nu-Amon, " the 
city of Amon;" also called No, K3, "the city," 
hierog. Nu and Nu-aS, "the great city." If 
with Brugsch (Diet. Gebgr. s. v.) we read Ni, 
the equivalent to No may be the distinctive 
name Ni-aS. The Assyrian form is Ni. Nu, 
however, seems the preferable transliteration of 
the Egyptian. 

Amon is probably mentioned in Jer. xlvi. 25, 
where we should rather render Kjp }iD^, 
" Amon of No," as in the LXX. and the Coptic 
Version, than " the multitude of No " (Vulg. 
tumultum Alexandriae) : note the parallelism 
of " Amon " with " their gods," and " Pharaoh " 
with " their kings." In the parallel passage in 
Ezek. XXX. 15, "the multitude of No," flV!J, the 
equivalent of jiO^ as a Heb. word, is used 
(Vulg. multittuHnem Alexandriae). It does not 
appear venturesome to read the Egyptian name 
as Hamon here also. Comp. also rw. 4, 10, 
for the use of the latter word with reference to 
Egypt. The destruction of the false gods of 
Noph (Memphis, not Napata; NOPB) in v. 13 
seems to support this parallel in the case of the 
other great city. Thus the two forms Amon 
and Hamon are no more unlikely than the Latin 
Ammon and Hammon. If this explanation be 
rejected, there is certainly a play on the name 
•*™<»»- [R. S. P.] 

Amon in Egyptian means "hidden," as in 
Ament, « the hidden land," Hades. The worship 
of Amon was not of very ancient origin in 
^KTP*- His name does not occur in the Book 
of the Dead, and Maspero has but once fonnd it, 
as part of a proper name, in the inscriptions of 
the first six dynasties (Hiit. anc. des Peuples de 
rOrient,* p. 97). 

Amon was at first the local god of Thebes, 
and his worship appears with the 11th and 12th 
dynasties, which 
founded the great 
temple of Amon. 
Afterwards, in the 
New Empire, when 
Thebes biecame the 
capital of Egypt, it 
spread over other 
parts of the land, 
and the god him- 
self took a rank 
in the Egyptian 
Pantheon which he 
had never before 
held. If we con- 
sider all his attri- 
butes, we find that 
they are very much 
the same as those 
of the other gods, 
and that some of 
the hymns which 
are dedicated to 
him sum up all the characters which constitute 
the Egyptian deity. The distinctive features of 

I 2 

The goA Amon. (Wilkinion.) 

Digitized by 




the Egyptian gods, their rank in the Pantheon, 
their pedigree, their history are generally not 
well marked, and have been very much exag- 
gerated by the fact of their names being trans- 
lated in Greek, and reasoned on by the late Neo- 
Platonists, who laboured hard to philosophise 
Egyptian mythology. It would convey a very 
wrong idea of the nature of Amon to consider 
him as the equivalent of the Greek Zens. 

In the time of the 18th, Idth, and 20th 
dynasties, when the imperial power of Thebes 
had raised the worship of Amon to its highest 
importance, we generally lind him called Amon 
Ra, " AmoD the sun," showing his identi- 
fication with the solar god ; and having the 
attribute of mten ncteru, king of the gods, out 
of which the Greeks have made the word 'Aftoy- 
pcurayBiip. His special character, as far as it is 
possible to determine it, is indicated by this 
sentence, Amon lia Ka mvt-f, " Amon Ka, the 
bull or the husband of his mother ; " the never- 
ceasing generative power, the hidden action of 
nature which manifests itself through its two 
principal agents, the sun and the water. This 
idea may probably be traced in most of the texts 
relating to Amon. It has been developed in 
a rich and poetical style in a hymn contained in 
a papyrusof theUoolakMuseumofTheban origin, 
which has been tronslated by Gr^baut {Hytime a 
Amman Sa, Paris, 1874), and in the inscrip- 
tions which cover the temple of the Great 
Oasis, and which belong to the time of Darius I. 
(Brugsch, Reiae nach der Case ron £1 Khaargehy. 
These two remarkable compositions, which 
both bear a marked pantheistic character, are 
not to be considered as giving the distinctive 
features of Amon. They arc interesting as 
showing how an Egyptian priest conceived his 
god, bow he pictured his god to himself. Here 
his god was Amon ; but if we take the hymn 
to Osiris translated by Chabas, or even Enna's 
hymn to the Nile, or any of the numerous prayers 
which are addressed to Ra Harmachis, we find in 
them most of the same attributes, which must 
be considered as belonging to the deity in 
general, but not to any particular god. 

The history of the worship of Amon is in- 
timately connected with that of the Theban 
power. As the god of their capital, he was to 
the conquering kings of TheUs, and particularly 
to Kamses II., what Assur was to the Assyrians. 
An interesting episode, where Amon assumes a 
more personal character, is related by the poem 
of Pentaur ; it is the intervention of the god in 
the battle against the Chetas (Hittites), when 
Kamses, surrounded by their chariots, calls on 
him for help. Anion hears and comes to his 
rescue ; the king hears his voice behind him, 
which promises him victory 

The dignity of high-priest of Amon must hare 
been very high. We know the names of a 
great number of those officials who seem to have 
ranked next to the king. At the time of the 
20th dynasty they were the great constructors 
who enlarged the temple of Amon, now called 
Kamak. They encroached more and more on 
the power of the Ramesside kings ; and at last 
put them aside and founded the 21st dynasty 
(Naville, Imcr. de Pinot€m HI.). They were 
superseded and expelled to Ethiopia by the 
Bubastite house of Shishak, who, though very 
likely of Libyan origin, still adhered to the 


worship of Amon at Thebes, and enlarged the 
sanctuary of the god. When the exiles foundei a 
kingdom at Napata (Gebel Barkal), this ciiy «i 
the seat of the Theban worship. When, a little 
before the fall of Samaria, the Ethiopian kin; 
Pianchi reconquered Egypt, an intensely Theban 
worship was the result; and the succeedii; 
Ethiopians, who fill so large a space in the riev 
of the Prophets, maintained their devotion lo 
Amon. His position was not lost in the linal 
decline of Thebes. His worship had alresdy 
spread to the Oases, to find its way gradnslly to 
the Cvrenaica and to Greece. His nuk in 
Egypt led the Greeks to identify him vith 2<u9 : 
thus he is called Zeus Ammon, the Latin Jupiter 

The Theban triad was composed of ^mm, Jfaf. 
and Khonsu, this last one being decidedir a 
lunar god ; while here Mut may be considered 
as being a representative of the sky. Mat m\ 
Khonsu had both their special temples at Thebei 
in the vicinity of the sanctuary of Amon. 

Amon is generally represented in honuu \ 
form, standing or sitting, painted blue, and weir- 
ing a cap surmounted by tall plumes. We »i« i 
see him in the shape of Khem, the genentiir 
power ; or ram-headed, as he was in the Oasis of 
Ammon, or even under the form of a ram wear- 
ing a solar disk. This explains why Mveial 
temples of Amon, at Thebes and in Nubia, art 
preceded by long avenues lined on each aide by 
criosphinxes, of which at Kamak there Dost 
have been hundreds. 

To the Hebrew Prophets, Amon seemed em- 
phatically the national god of Egyptian and 
Ethiopian alike. Hence probably the fact tb: 
he alone is mentioned by name in their writing 
except perhaps the bull Apis (Jer. ilvi US j 
LXX.; Lagarde). [Hapu.] [E.S.J 

A'MON (I^DK : B. 'A;i«ii, A. "AM^'io Kinp; 
T.' 'Kii^y, B. ^'Kyiv^y, B'^A""'" 'kfAi '» 
1 Ch.; BA. "AMiii in 2 Ch. and Jer.; AB."" 
'A/tcit, M. 'Anfti/y in Zeph. ; 'A/ubs in Matt ; 
Joseph. 'A/u«rot : Amon). 1. King of Judaii. 
son and successor of Manasseh. The naof 
would naturally mean arc/iitect, but perhaps it 
is Egyptian, and connected with the Theban 
god ; possibly it may have been given by Man- 
asseh to his son in an idolatrous spirit. Fold- 
ing his father's example, Amun devoted himself 
wholly to the service of false gods, bot wa* 
killed in a conspiracy after a reign of two 
years. Probably by insolence or tyranny bi- 
had alienated his own servants, and fell a victim 
to their hostility, for the people avenged him 
by putting all the conspirators to death, and 
secured the succession to his son Josiah. Ti 
Amon's reign we must refer the terrible picture 
which the prophet Zephaniah gives of the mors' 
and religious state of Jerusalem : idolatry sup- 
ported by priests and prophets (i. 4, iii. 4), li" 
poor ruthlessly oppressed (iii. 3), and shameleu 
indifference to evil (iii. 11). According ti> 
Usher, the date of his accession is B.C. 643, an! 
of his death, B.a 641 (2 K. xxi. 19 ; 2 Ch. iiiiij- 
20) ; according to Kamphausen, 640 and ti^^- 
The name occurs in 2 K. xxi. 18-25 ; 1 Ch. iii- 
14; 2 Ch. xxxiii. 20-25; Jer. i. 2, xxv. 3; 
Zeph. i. 1 ; Uatt. i. 10. 

2. (ibK, I^DK;B.S.M<p[Kings],'Mp[C>'l- 
A. 'Anitir [Kings], Stju^^p C^h.]: -^'"^) 

Digitized by 



Prince or ^manoT of Samaria in the reisn of 
Abtb (I K. iiii. 26; 2 Ch. xviii. 25). What 
vis the precise oatore of his office is not known. 
Vtihtf the prophet Uieaiah iras entrusted to 
his ore as captain of the citadel. The LXX. 
B. Iits rir Bairi\4a (A. ipxarra) T^t niKtut 
m 1 K., bat BA. ifxorra in 2 Ch. Josephns 
{A»t. riil. 15, § 4) calls him 'Ax'lfun'. 
3. See Ami. [G. E. L. C] L^O 

''pijil [always in the singular], accurately 
'■Uie£morite" — the dwellers on the summits 
— uKnintaineen ; ^kftofficuot ; Amorrhaci), one 
'1 tbe chief nations who possessed the land of 
Cuun before its conquest by the Israelites. 

Id the genealogical table of Gen. x. " the 
Amorite " is given ns the fourth son of Canaan, 
nith ■' Ziion, Heth [Hittite], the Jebuaite," &c. 
The interpretation of the name as " monntain- 
rtn" or " highlanders "— due to Simonis (see 
hU Oiio)iKK<i(X>n), though commonlv ascribed to 
Kmid — is qaite in accordance with the notices 
of the teit, which, except in a few instances, 
fftak of tlie Amorites as dwelling on the ele- 
cted portions of the country. In this respect 
thej are contrasted with the Canaanites, who 
ven the dwellers in the lowlands ; and the two 
ihos formed tbe main broad divisions of the 
Holy Land. "The Hittite, and the Jebnsite, 
int the Amorite dwell in the mountain [of 
.Igdsh and Ephraim], and the Canaanite dwells 
'T the HI [the lowlands of Philistia and Sharon] 
i'i by the ' side ' of Jordan " [in the valley of 
the Arabah], — was tbe report of the first Israel- 
ites who entered the country (Num. liii. 29 ; 
^ndiee Josh. v. I, x. 6, xi. 3; Deut. i. 6, 20: 
"Uonstain of the A." 44). This we shall find 
iorne ont by other notices. In the very earliest 
times (Gen. xir. ly they are occupying the 
barren heights west of the Dead Sea, at the 
place which afterwards bore the name of £n- 
2«<li; hills in whose fastnesses, the "rocks of 
the wild goats," Darid afterwards took refuge 
I'rom the pursuit of Saul (1 Sam. xxiii. 29, 
rnr. 2). [Hazezon-Tamar.] From this point 
they stretched west to Hebron, where Abram 
•tis then dwelling under the " onk-grove " of 
the three brothers, Acer, Kshcol, and Mamre 
(<ViL liv. 13 ; comp. xiii. 18). At this period 
they would appear to have formed part of the 
yaX Hittite kingdom, or confederation; it is 
Tool a Hittite that Abraham buys the cave of 
Machpelah (Gen. xxiii. 8, 9), and tbe obsequious- 
ness iown by the Patriarch to the " children of 
Hnh " indicates that they and not the Amorites 
'ei» the ruling people. This may perhaps also 
le inferred from the lists of the early inha- 
'itaata in which the Amorites are usually 
uationed as secondary in importance to the 
Hittites. The campaigns of Sethi I. and Ra- 
i^MM II. against the Hittites, which occurred 
lurigg the interval between the settlement of 
Jwob in Egypt and the Exodus, would seem, 
knvever, to have weakened their power and to 
^Te been favonrable to the growth of inde- 
J'^tint kingdoms in Southern Palestine. At 
'hia later period the dominant people appear 
t'l hate been the Amorites, who had established 
i^iii^omii in the Jebnsite town of Jerusalem, 
ipl at Hebron, Jarrouth, Lachish, and Eglon ; 
ihey had also crossed the valley of the Jordan, 



tempted by the high table-lands on the east, 
and founded the larger kingdoms over which 
Sihon and Og then ruled. Sihon had taken 
the rich pasture-land south of the Jabbok, and 
had driven the Moabites, its former possessors, 
across the wide chasm of the Arnon (Num. xxi. 
13, 26), which thenceforward formed the bound- 
ary between the two hostile peoples (Nnm. xxi. 
13). [Sihon.] The Israelites apparently ap- 
proached from the south-east, keeping " on the 
other side " (that is on the east) of the upper part 
of the Amon, which there bends southwards, so 
as to form the eastern boundary of the country 
of Moab. Their request to pass through his land 
to the fords of Jordan was refused by Sihon 
(Nam. xxi. 21 ; Deut. ii. 26) ; he " went out " 
against them (xxi. 23 ; ii. 32), was killed with his 
sons and his people (ii. 33), and his land, cattle, 
and cities were taken possession of by Israel 
(xxi. 24, 25, 31 ; ii. 34, 35). Josephns {Ant. iv. 
5, § 2) odds some singular details to the Bible 
narrative of this event, and sums up the charac- 
ter of the Amorites as " neither wise in council 
nor sagacious in war." This rich tract, bounded 
by the Jabbok on the north, the Amon on the 
south, Jordan on the west, and " the wilder- 
ness" on the east (Judg. xi. 21, 22) — in the 
words of Josephns " a land lying between three 
rivers after the manner of an island " (Ant. iv. 
5, § 2) — was perhaps, in the most special sense, 
the "land of the Amorites" (Num. xxi. 31; 
Josh. xii. 2, 3, xiii. 9; Judg. xi. 21, 22); but 
their possessions are distinctly stated to have 
extended to the very feet of Hermon (Deut. iii. 
8, iv. 48X embracing "all Gilead and all 
Bashan " (iii. 10), with the Jordan valley on 
the east of the river (iv. 49), and funning to- 
gether the land of the " two kings of the Amor- 
ites," Sihon and Og (Deut. xxxi. 4 ; Josh. ii. 10, 
ix. 10, xxiv. 12*). In the reign of Sethi I. the 
Amorites appear to have had settlements north 
of Herman, for Kadesh on the Orontes is said to 
have formed i>art of the land of the Amorites 
although it was under the jurisdiction of the 
Kbits (Hittites). Later, in the reign of Kameses 
III., the Egyptians defeated a combined force of 
European maritime people, in the land of Taha, 
a part of Palestine, apparently the south, in 
which was comprised Amaur or the Amorites 
{Birch, Egypt from the Earliest Ttmea, 116, 141). 

After the passage of the Jordan we again meet 
with Amorites disputing with Joshua the con- 
quest of the west country. But although the 
n.tme generally denotes the mountain-tribes of 
the centre of the country, yet this definition is 
not always strictly maintained, varying probably 
with the author of the particular part of the 
history, and the time at which it was written. 
Nor ought we to expect that the Israelites could 
have possessed very accurate knowledge of a set 
of small tribes whom they were called upon to 
exterminate — with whom they were forbidden 
to hold any intercourse — and, moreover, of 
whose general similarity to each other we have 
one proof in the confusion in question. 

Some of these differences are as follows: — 
Hebron is " Amorite " in Gen. xiii. 18 (ep. xiv. 
13), though "Hittite" in xxiii. and "Canaanite" 

• Bat here the LXX. reads tMttta, not jvo ; and the 
context shows that Wat Faleetine is probably referred 
to (see DlUmann, and QPB.> in loco). [S. R. D.] 

Digitized by 





in Judg. i. 10. The "Hivites" of Gen. xiiiv. 2 
are " Amorites " in xlviii. 22 ; and so alao in 

lUp of the Oonntry of the Eeitern Amorites. 

Josh. ix. 7, xi. 19, as compared with 2 Sam. xxi. 
2. Jerusalem is " Amorite " in Josh. x. 5,' G ; 
but in -w. 6.3, xviii. 28, Judg. i. 21, lix. 11, 
2 Sam. V. 6, &c., it is "Jebusite." The 
" Canaaiiites " of Num. xiv. 45 (comp. Judg. i. 
17) are "Amorites" in Deut. i. 44. Jarmuth, 
Lachish, and Eglou were in the low country of 
the Shefclah (Josh. xv. 35, 39), but in Josh. i. 5, 
ti, they are " Amorites (hat dwell in the moun- 
tains ; " and it would appear as if tlie " Amor- 
ites" who forced the l)anites into the moun- 
tain (Judg. i. 34, 35) must have themselves 
remained on the plain." 

It appears plain that " Amorite " was a 
descriptive title, and not the name of a dis- 
tinct tribe. Tliis is confirmed by the follow- 
ing facts : — (1) The wide area over which the 
name was spread. (2) The want of connexion 
between those on the east and those on the west 
of Jordan — which is only once hinted at (Josh, 
ii. 10). (3) The existence of kings like Sihon 
and Og, whose territories were separate and 
independent, who are yet called " the two kings 
of the Amorites," a state of things quite at 

t> The TiXX. lus here ritv 'Ufiovtraiuy. 

• The clue to most. If not all, of these differences Is, 
that In ptrttcaUr nriters (esp. the Heiucachal source E, 
Deul., Amos Ii. 9, 10, 3 Sam. xxi. 2) Amorite is the 
general name of the primitive population of Canaan 
(cp. Wellbauseo, Camp. d. HtxtU. p. 341 sq. [1889]; 
nillmann on Gen. x. 16, Dent. I. 7, and p. 617 sq. ; 
Dclitzach on Ocn. xlviii. 22). [.S. R. D.] 

variance with the habits of Semitic tribes. (4) 
Beyond the three confederates of Abram, sal 
these two kings, no individual Amorites appar 
in the history (unless Araunah or Ormu the 
Jebusite be one). (5) There are no traces ol 
any peculiar government, worship, or cuitomt, 
different from those of the other "utiom ci 

One word of the " Amorite " langnsge bu 
survived — the name Senir (R. V., not "Shenir" 
A. V.) for Mount Herman (Deut. iiL 9) ; but 
may not this be the Canaanite name ss opp««l 
to the Phoenician (Sirion) on the one side, oA 
the Hebrew on the other ? 

All mountaineers are warlike ; and, from the 
three confederate brothers who at a monrat's 
notice accompanied " Abram the Hebrew " ia bii 
pursuit of the five kings, down to those who, 
not depressed by the slaughter inflicted by 
Joshua and the terror of the name of Isntl, 
persisted in driving-the children of Daa into the 
mountain, the Amorites fully maintained thii 

After the conquest of Canaan nothing is bcud 
in the Bible of the Amoritea, except the oco- 
sional mention of their name in the usosl fn- 
mula for designating the early inhabitants of th; 
country. [G.] [W.] 

AMOS (Dtor, i.«. apparently the bearer of i 
burden [^$<urrdiuy, Jerome, Pnf. to Jot(]- 
'Afiiis ; Amos), a Prophet whose short bat impot- 
tant Book stands third in the collection kootra 
by us as the "Minor Prophets," bntbytheJe»i 
called " the Twelve " (cp. Ecclus. xlii. 10). 

I. Circunatancea of the life and age of iiKs- 
— From the title to his Book (i. 1), we leini thit 
he was " among the herdmen from Tekoa,"i.<.,«s 
it would seem, one of a settlement of herdmeo vh" 
had their home at Tekoa (cf. Jer. i. 1), sad *'>"' 
as the word used implies, reared a special brwl 
of shee)i, of small and stunted growth, but priied 
on account of their wool. From vii. 14 ** 
learn further that he had under his charge heidi 
of larger cattle as well; and that he »»> 
employed besides in the cultivation of sycamm 
trees. The attention which the cultivation "i 
this tree demanded, and the artificial means by 
which its fruit was rendered edible, are eipUiorl 
under the article Sycamore. The Tekoa nan- 
tioned has been commonly supposed to be lb* 
well-known |>lnee of that name about nine mii" 
south of Jerusalem ; and Amos has been re;aide<i 
accordingly as a Judaean, who received a spetii- 
commission to deliver his prophetic niesage i ■ 
the northern kingdom. Kimchi, however, ooDJec- 
tured Tekoa to be a town in the tribe of Asher; 
and recently internal grounds have been alleccJ 
to show that the northern kingdom must have 
been his home, and that the Tekoa in question i> 
at not the Tekoa in Judah (Gratz, Gexh. dcr 
Juden, ii. 1, 82; Oort, in the Theol. Tijdxhr'A 
1880, pp. 123-7). Much weight will not indetJ 
be attached to the argument drawn from hi- 
familiarity with the life and scenery of Israrl 
(which he might have acquired from penonsl 
obsen-ation or by report, withoDt being actuilly 
a native) ; but that derived from his uccupatiin 
as sycamore-cultivator deserves greater atten- 
tion. Sycamores, travellers are agreed (ci. 
Tristram, Nat. Hist, of Bible, p. 398X are highly 
susceptible of cold; and in Palestine "grof 

Digitized by 



onJf in tne mild climate of the maritime plain 
ffid the hot Jordan valley." I< it probable, 
therefore, it is aalced, that they could bare been 
csltirated on the bare and elerated plateaa on 
which Tekoa stands ? Jerome, who must hare 
koovn the district, describes it as wild and 
bama, and expressly mentions that no sycamores 
were to be found there ; conjecturing indeed on 
thii account that the word used by the prophet 
dtnoted rather "brambles" {Pref. loAmos, and on 
fii. 15). The difficulty is a real one ; for as the 
temperature here ia due to elevation [Palestine, 
Clioiate], a change of climate can hardly be 
asamed to hare taken place since the days of 
-Imos. On the whole, inasmuch as only one 
Tekoa is known, it seems safest, pending further 
mrestigation, to suppose that Amos, being a 
satire of it, cairied on the cultivation of syca- 
mores at some spot in the neighbourhood suited 
t» their growth — or even in the lower part of 
the Jordan valley itself. But, however this may 
lie, ve must tliink of Amoa as busied with his 
rural tasks when he became conscious of the 
iiigher vocation reserved for him : " And Jehovah 
took me from following the sheep, and said unto 
me. Go, propheay to My people Israel " (vii. 15). 
In co&nedon with the nature of prophecy, it ia 
important to notice that Amos disclaims (v. 14) 
txiag a Prophet by profession or education : he 
a DO member of a prophetic guild ; his inspira- 
tion is independent of any artificial training. 
The date cannot be fixed with precision: for 
*" the earthquake in the days of king Uzziah," 
though a sulHcient clue at the time when the 
title was affixed, and though it lived for long in 
the memory of the people (Zech. liv. 5), is not 
mentioned in the Historical Books, and cannot 
U assigned to any particular year of Uzziah's 
reign. Internal evidence, however (vii. 10 f.), 
agrees folly with the general limits specified in 
the title, pointing pretty conclusively to the 
latter part of the reign of Jeroboam 11.; i.e. 
according to the chronology as corrected by 
Assyrian data, c. 760-50 B.C. The reign of 
Jeroboam U., though passed by briefiy in the 
Historical Books (2 K. xiv. 23-29), was the cul- 
minating point in the history of the northern 
kingdom. A long series of successes abroad 
aecwed prosperity at home, and the Book of 
Amos shows us the nation reposing in opulence 
and ease (e.g. vi. 1-5): the ritual of the calf- 
worship at Beth-el, Gilgal and elsewhere (cp., 
a little later, Hos, iv. 15 ; x. 1, 5) was splendidly 
and punctiliously maintained (Amos iv. 4 f. ; 
v. 21-23 ; vii. 13 ; viii. 14) : general satisfaction 
reigned: the proud citizen of Ephraim conld 
?ay, "Have we not taken to us horns by our 
own strength ? " (vi, 13.) Such was the condi- 
tion asd temper of the people, when Amos was 
sammoned to appear as a stranger amid the 
throng assembled at the great national sanctuary 
of Beth-el (vii. 10-17), and to interrupt the 
rejoicings with his unwelcome words. 

11. Contents and character of the Booh of 
Amoi. — The Book falls naturally into three 
{arts, each dominated by the same fundamental 
tkoeghts, and the whole pervaded by a unity of 
pha which leaves no reasonable doubt that the 
wnngement is the author's own. We may sup- 
fm that, having first delivered bis discourses 
snllv, after his ejection from Beth-el he arranged 
them at leisure in a literary form. Thtfint part. 



eh. i. ii., is introductory. After the fine exor- 
dium (i. 2), so graphically descriptive of 
Jehovah's power, he proceeds to take a survey 
of the principal nations bordering on Israel, with 
the object of showing that as none of these will 
escape retribution for having broken the common 
and universally recognised dictates of morality, 
so Israel, for similar or greater sins (ii. C-9), 
aggravated indeed in iu case by ingratitude 
(vv. 9-12), will not be exempt from the same 
law of righteous government : a disaster, darkly 
hinted at (re. 13-16), will undo all the conquests 
achieved by Jeroboam II. t The enumeration of 
countries is evidently meant to lead up to Israel : 
the mention of Judah may seem unneeded, but 
the Israelite would listen with some satisfaction 
to the prospect of Judah's humiliation (cp. what 
had happened under Jeroboam's father, 2 K. xiv. 
8-14) ; and by the " law of Jehovah," the 
Prophet doubtless means primarily those moral 
precepts the neglect of which, not unconnected 
with superstition or idolatry (" lies "), so deeply 
stirred Hosea (iv. If.; vi. 6, compared with viii. 
1, 12). The tecond part (iii.-vi.) consists of 
three discourses, each introduced by the emphatic 
Hear ye this word (iii. 1 ; iv. 1 ; v. 1). Here the 
indictment and sentence of ii. 6-16 are further 
justified and expanded. Amos starts by disillu- 
sioning the Israelites. The latter argued that 
the fact of Jehovah's having chosen the nation 
was a guarantee of its safety ; he replies : Yon 
mistake the conditions of His choice ; for that 
very reason He will punish you for your iniqui- 
ties (iii. 2). Nor, he continues, does the Prophet 
say this without a real power constraining him ; 
for does any effect iu nature take place without 
its due and adequate cause (cr. 3-8) ? Call the 
heathen themselves to witness whether justice 
rules in Samaria 1 (c. 9 f.) The toils will, ere 
long, have closed around the land (rv. 11-15). 
Ch. iv. begins by denouncing the cruelty and 
frivolity of the women (tw. 1-3) ; the Prophet 
next asks the Israelites ironically whether their 
punctiliously performed ritual will save them 
(v. 4 {.) : the fivefold warning has passed unheeded 
(vv. 6-11) ; prepare thyself, then, for judgment ! 
(V. 12.) Ch. v.-vi. is a longer discourse, with two 
clearly marked subdivisions at r. 18 and vi. 1, 
each beginning Woe. Here the grounds of the 
judgment are repeated with greater emphasis : the 
infatuation of the people is exposed in desiring 
the " Day of Jehovah," as though that could be 
anything but an interposition in their favour; 
a ritual unaccompanied by any sense of moral 
obligation is indignantly rejected (v. 21-24); 
the nature of the coming disaster is described 
more distinctly (exile, v. 27), and the enemy 
indicated, though not named (the Assyrians, 
spoken of more familiarly in Hosea, and destined 
soon to exercise an important influence on the 
fortunes of both Israel and Judah), who should 
"afilict" Israel over the entire limits of that 
territory, which Jeroboam had not long before 
recovered (vi. 14 ; see 2 K. xiv. 25). The third 
part (vii.-ix.) consists of a series of visions, with 
an historical interlude (vii. 10-17) and an epi- 
logue (ix. 7-15). The visions, which are simple 
and unartificial in structure, reinforce, under an 
effective symbolism, the lesson which Amos 
found so hard to impress (ix. 10): in the first 
two (vii. 1-6), the threatened judgment is 
interrupted at the Prophet's intercession ; the 

Digitized by 




third, which spoke without any concealment or 
ambiguity (vii. 7-9), aroused the alarm and 
opposition of Amaziah, the priest of the golden 
calf at Beth-el, and is the occasion of the 
historical notice, vii. 10-17. The fourth vision 
is the text of a fresh and more detailed denun- 
ciation of judgment (ch. viii.) : the fifth depicts 
the desolation falling upon the people as they 
arc assembled for worship in their own Temple, 
and emphasizes the hopelessness of every effort 
to escape (ix. 1-6). With ix. 7 the transition 
to a brighter prospect begins : Israel, indeed, if 
it sins, will be dealt with as any other nation ; 
but it is only the sinners who will be thus 
treated (ev. 7-10) ; and so the Prophet concludes 
with a promise that the house of David (which 
had probably not yet fully recovered from the 
blow inflicted on it by Jehoash, 2 K. xir. 13 f.) 
will be restored to its former splendour and 
]>ower (o. 12 ; see 2 Sam. viii. 14; Ps. xviii. 43), 
and the blessings of unity and prosperity shared 
by the entire nation (13-15). From this analy- 
sis, the unity of plan before spoken of will be 
manifest : the main theme, gradually introduced 
in the opening section of the Book, is developed 
with increasing distinctness in the portions 
which follow, till it gives place to the Messianic 
outlook at the close. Amos, by his allusions to 
contemporary life, gives us many a glimpse into 
the social condition and religious life of the 
northern kingdom under Jeroboam 11. : the pic- 
ture drawn by him is not indeed so dark as that 
which presented itself to Hosea (ch. iv.-xiv.) a 
few years later, when the dynasty of Jehu had 
fallen, and the spirit of anarchy and discord 
reigned uncontrolled ; nevertheless the amend- 
ment, which was still viewed by him (v. 14 f.) 
as a possibility, never came; and a generation 
had hardly passed away, when his forebodings of 
invasion, disaster, and exile (ii. 13-16 ; iii. 1 1-1.^> ; 
iv. 12 ; V. 2 f., 16 f. ; v. 27 ; vi. 14 ; vii. 9, 17 ; 
viii. 2 f. ; ix. 1-4), were amply realised by 
Tiglath-pileser, Shalmaneser, and Sargon (2 K, 
XV. 29 ; ivii. 3 ff.). Judah is alluded to but 
incidentally (ii. 4 f. ; iii. 1, " the tcAofe family ;" 
vi. 1, and ix. 11). 

The place of Amos in Hebrew literature can 
only be properly estimated by an independent 
study of his Book, and comparison of it with 
other parts of the 0. T. We confine ourselves 
to a few p.articulars, referring for a fuller treat- 
ment to the works quoted below. 1. As the 
earliest of the Prophets whose writings are 
extant and of undisputed date, it is worth 
noticing that his Book imiJies the existence of a 
recognised phraseology, and of familiar ideas to 
which he could appeal. The prophetic style, 
which in his hands appears already fully matured, 
had doubtless been formed gradually : among the 
Prophets to whom he alludes (ii. 11; iii. 7) 
may well have been some who were his literary 
predecessors. Whether his language presup- 
poses an acquaintance with the Pentateuch, 
and, if so, to which of its component parts, is 
disputed. The allusions which are most dis- 
tinct appear to be to the injunctions contained 
in the code Ex. xxi.-xxiii. (cp. ii. 8, v. 12, 
with Ex. xxii. 26 f., xxiii. 6) : other phrases that 
have been cited are met with elsewhere, so that 
their occurrence in Amos is not a demonstration he borrowed them from the Pentateuuh. 
Passages such as ii. 9, 10; iii. 2; iv. 11; 


ix. 15; and iv. 46, 5a; v. 126, 21, 22; viii. .% 
show that he was familiar with erents aid 
usages, related, or codified, in the Pentateuch: 
it may be doubted whether, taken by themsclrw, 
they are a sufficient proof that he was acquaintcil 
with the written Pentateuch, as we know it. 
Too much must not, however, be built ujxia 
this admission : for the whole prophecy iiayYin 
the existence of a body of establisheil ideas ainl 
institutions, to the true meaning and import of 
which he recalls the people. Amos both recog- 
nises an authoritative Divine teaching (ii. 4; 
iii. 7), and appeals to a tradition reaching back 
to a remote past (cp. Smend's article, dttd 
below). 2. As regards the influence of Amos 
upon his successors, his younger contcmpomy 
Hosea borrows from him (e.g. iv. 15 frern 
Amos V. 5 [Heb.]; viii. 146 from ii. 5; L 4, 
X. 8, cp. Amos vii. 9). Isaiah, in tone and style, 
often recalls Amna(e.g. xiix. 21, cp. Amosr. 10; 
ixx. 10, cp. ii. 12; xxxi. 2, cp. vii. 9; xxxii. 11, 
cp. iv. 1, vi. 1) ; and his most characteriitic 
doctrine may be considered as foreshadowed 
in Amos v. 15 : cp. also Is. i. 25-28 vitli 
Amos ix. 8-10 (the purification of the nation 
by elimination of its guilty members). Tlu 
example set by Amos (ch. i.) of noticing the 
fortunes and deserts of the nations boiderin; 
upon Palestine, especially in their bearing upoi 
Israel, was also at'terwaixls followed by Isaiali, 
Jeremiah, Ezekiel. Whether in his use of the 
term " Day of Jehovah " (v. 18, 20) Amoi had 
been preceded by Joel (ii. 2 if.), or not, nut 
depend upon the date to which that Prophet is 
assigned ; but in any case, he totally reversed 
the popular application of the idea, and shoved 
what it really implied (see W. R. Smith, Profbtif 
of Israel, pp. 131, 397). 3. The special charac- 
teristics of Amos appear most distinctly when 
he is compared with Hosea. While both Prophet* 
naturally share the same fundamental heliels, 
their temper and attitude of mind are rer; 
difierent. Hosea is the man of deep and sus- 
ceptible religious emotion: Amos bums with 
zeal on behalf of the moral law. The standard 
by which he primarily judges Israel is thus the 
common morality recognised as binding alike b; 
it and other nations. Jehovah, it has been 
remarked, is never termed by him the "God of 
Israel ; " he is God of the whole earth, of other 
nations not less than of Israel (ch. i. ; ii. 'tX 
and will only be Israel's God in so far as thai 
same morality is practised in their Imd^1. 
Jehovah had been pleased to enter into a per- 
sonal relation with Israel : this fact, to which 
the common people pointed as their security 
(v. 14 end), in the eyes of Amos only aggravates- 
their guilt (iii. 2). " Wrong is wrong ever)* 
where, even against Israel's bitterest foe " (ii. l)i 
it is the first charge which he brings against 
Israel itself (ii. 6-8) ; and his indignation against 
it, in whatever fonn, is vehemently expressed 
(cp. e.g. the outburst in viii. 4-8, against 
deceit in commercial dealings; notice also the 
oath t;. 7, iv. 2, vi. 8). The observances of re- 
ligion are no substitute for honesty, and will not 
be accepted by Jehovah in lieu of righteousness- 
of heart (v. 21-24). 

In vi. 66 ; ix. 10, we see the first traces of that 
opposition to popular opinion, especially when 
strengthened and directed by the leaders of the 
nation, which in Isaiah and Jeremiah assnmed 

Digitized by 



a reil political importance. Amos only alludes 
to the Assjritus darkly ; but it is plain that he 
Ktlisei the crisli which their actiritT would 
iinasioii, long before his coustr^'inen saw that 
tii«re was aay cause for alarm ; and that by the 
ittitsile which he assumed in face of them, he 
prtpared the way for Isaiah, who saw yet more 
distinctly, in the advance of the Assyrians, a 
msifestation of Jehovah's justice. 

111. The style of Amos. — " Imperitus sermone, 
ltd Qos scientia," wrote Jerome (Pre/, to Amoa), 
irgmng a priori (m the context suggests) from 
tiK Prophet's antecedents; and hence it has 
ifa sometime* the custom to speak of the 
ludomed " rusticity " of his style, and to 
Kirch for eiamples of homely imagery drawn 
Ir him from the objects of country life. Recent 
critics hare protested with justice against such 
ccDcltuions ; and, indeed, a much sounder judg* 
meat was expressed long ago by Bishop Lowth 
(Led xiL), who rightly contended that the style 
of Amos possesses great literary merit, and 
only em when he describes it in terms which, 
tsken strictly, would place it on an equality 
Kith thtt of Isaiah. His language — with three 
"T four exceptions, possibly due to copyists — 
U pure, his syntax idiomatic, his sentences 
tmwtbly constructed and clear. His literary 
p>ta is shown in the regularity of structure 
icfaich often characterises his periods, as i. 3-ii. 6, 
iv. 6-11 (the fivefold refrain), and the visions 
(rii. 1, 4, 7, viii. 1) ; in the fine climax, iii. 3-8 ; 
IS the balanced clauses, the well-chosen images, 
t!w effective contrasts, in such passages as iii. 15, 
r. 2, T. 21-24, Ti. 11, viii. 10, ix. 2-4 ; as well 
u in the ease with which he evidently writes, 
ud the skill with which his theme (as shown 
^bare) is unfolded and developed. If in Amos, 
V compared with other Prophets, images de- 
rived from rural life somewhat preponderate, 
tkey are tlways applied by him worthily (e.g. 
i. 2 ; iiL 4, 8 ; r. 8 [a shepherd's observation], 
16, 17, 19 ; ii. 9X and never strike the reader 
:-s occurring too frequently or as out of place. 
At other times his language is particularly fine 
C. 24, riii. 8, ix. 5 f.). It is plain that Amos was 
Ko nscaltnred Sninit. His intelligence, of 
csnne, was of the Eastern type. He was a jnan 
utorally shrewd and observant : alike in his 
-tmn of foreign nations (comp. also ri. 2, viii. 8, 
ii. 7), and in his allusions to Israelitisb life and 
oaatn, he leveals a width of knowledge and 
rndsion of detail which are remarkable (comp. 
^, p. 127 f.). 

Tie Hassoretic text of Amos appears, with 
^it few exceptions, to be free from corruption. 
"^t best edition of it is that in S. Baer's Liber 
^"oiecim Prophetanan (Lipsiae, 1878); compare, 
«i»eTer, the criticism of Baer's methods by 
Srsck m Schurer's Theot. IMteitg. 1879, No. «. 
!>'. AnOumtidty of the Book of Amos.— This 
'as never been disputed.* Only particular 
jitsages have been thought by some to be later 
losertioos. Thna Duhm (see below), p. 119, 
>j«u iL 4 t, IT. 13, V. 8f., ix. 5f., partly 
i' istermpting the connexion and partly as 
a«taiiing ideas not so distinctly expressed till 



' '^ed exceptions as tbcee of £. Havet, Li CkrUtia- 
^u^etla arltuKt, Ul. (1878), pp. 178 f., 1»8 f., 233 f., 
"** ot M. Venxs, La compotUion et Vorigine du DeuUro- 
""t (IstT), p. 49, ue bardly worthy of mention. 

later ; and he is followed by Wellbausen, Getch. 
i. 59, 349, note (omitted, Prolegomena, p. 322), 
Oort, p. 116 ff., who discusses them at length, 
and Stade, Geschichte des Volkes Israel, 1887, 
i. p. 371. As explained above, however, the 
mention of Judah is relieved of suspicion ; and 
all the passages are defended by Smith, p. 398 f., 
and shown to be in harmony with Amos' thought. 
Oort is inclined further to doubt v. 13-15, vi. 14, 
viii. 11 f. ; but his arguments to show that they 
are out of place or break the connexion, are far 
from convincing, 

V. Literature. — ^The commentary of Jerome 
(with much matter of interest); those of Kashi. 
Ibn Ezra, and David Kimchi (printed in the 
Rabbinical Bibles, and indispensable, as always, 
for a complete acquaintance with the exegesis) ; 
Le Alercier (Jo. Merceri Commentarii locupletia- 
simi in Prophetat quinque priorea inter eoi qui 
minores vocaniur ; no date, published post- 
humously towards the end of the 16th century : 
learned); Ewald, in Vie Propheten da Alien 
fumjcs (translated, London, 1873: i. p. 143 ff.); 
Hitiig (in Die Kleincn Propheten, 3rd ed., 1863 : 
the 4th ed., by Steiner, 1881, contains but little 
additional matter); Gustav Baur, I)er Proph. 
Ainos erklirt, 1847 (the fullest monograph iu 
modem times ; introduction specially useful) ; 
E. B. Posey (in the Minor Prophet! ; learned and 
valuable); C. F. Keil (in his ZwBlf Kl. Proph. 
3rd ed. 1888); Otto SchmoUer (in Lange's 
Bibelwerk, translated, Edinburgh, T. &T. Clark) ; 
Oort, u. ». pp. 114-158 (often arbitrary); G. 
Hoffmann, in Stade's Zeittchrift, 1883, pp. 87- 
126 (chiefly lexical : to be followed with 
caution); see also I'o. p. 278 f.; J. H. Gunning, 
De Godspraken van Amoa vertaald en xcrklaard, 
1885 ; Orelli in Strack u. ZSckler's Kgf. Komm. 
On older commenbitors further information may 
be found in Baur, pp. 151-162. 

On the ancient vertiona of Amos, in addition 
to the particulars given by Baur, p. 131 S., the 
article of K. Vollers on the LXX. in Stade'» 
Zeitachr. 1883, pp. 260-72, J. Z. Schunrmans 
Stekhoven, De Alexandnjnsche Vertaling van 
het Dodekaprophcton (Leiden, 1887), and M. 
Sebiik, Die Syriache Udieractzung der xvrilf Kl. 
Proph. (Breslau, 1887), should be consulted. 

On the position of Amos in the history of theo- 
logy, see Uuhm, Theologie der Propheten, 1875, 
pp. 109-26, with the criticisms of Rud. Smend, 
in the Studlen v. Kritiken, 1876, p. 599 ff. ; 
Wellhausen, in the Encycl. Brit. (9th ed.), liii. 
p. 410 f. ( = Iliat. of Israel, pp. 470-474) ; W. I!. 
Smith, Prophets of Israel, 1882, Lecture III., 
with the notes, also pp. 163-5; Kuenen, Hib- 
bcrt Lectures, 1882, pp. 178 ff., 317 (with the 
references), &c. ; Castelli, La Profetia nelki 
Bibbia, 1882, pp. 126-146 ; C. von ©relli, Alt- 
testamentliche Wcisaagung, 1882 [translated 
under the title Old Testament Prophecy], § 26 ; 
W. H. Green, Mosea and the Prophets, 1883, 
passim (see Index) ; C. A. Briggs, Messianic 
Prophecy, 1886, pp. 160-3 ; A. B. Davidson, iiv 
the Expositor, 1887, vol. v. pp. 161-179, vi. 

The passage v. 21-26 is dealt with most 
thoroughly by Eugelhardt in the Zeittch. fir 
Lnth. Theol. 1874, pp. 409-22, and Rud. Smend, 
in Muses apud Proplietas, 187.% pp. 23-36 (comp. 
also the article mentioned above, p. 659 f.). 
See, besides, K. H. Graf in Men's .^rcAir, ii. 

Digitized by 




1871, pp. 93-6 (comp. i. p. 486); Oort, u. «. 
p. 144 f. ; Smith, u. s. p. 399, with the refer- 
eoces; Bredenkamp, Oesetz undProphetm, 1881, 
pp. 83-90 ; F. E. Konig, Hauptprobleme dcr altitr. 
Jiel.-Geach. 1884, p. 9 f. ; Baethgen, Beitrage 
zur Semitischm Sel.-Geach. (1888), pp. 180-83. 
To the present writer it appears that the refer- 
ence in V. 26 is to the future. Amos says 
nothing in palliation of the idolatrous service 
rendered to JehoTah at Beth-el and the other 
sanctoaries : but it is clear that what he feels 
most strongly is the indiSereoce shown by 
the people to Jehovah's moral demands (see 
t'sp. ii. 6-8, viii. 4-8). The passage is addressed 
then to those who observe ostentatiously an 
external ceremonial, but are heedless of moral 
duties ; and the argument is that of Isa. i. 
11-15. Sacrifice, aa such, the Prophet says, 
is not demanded by God (vv. 21, 22): it is de- 
manded only as the expression of a righteous 
heart (c. 23 f.). So far is it from being of 
the essence of religion, that in the wilderness, 
where circumstances were unfavourable to its 
regular^ observance, it was dispensed with (e. 
25). Yet you treat sacrifice as paramount ; you 
neglect the moral demands of God, and trust to 
that to indemnify you. The end of your neglect 
will be exile (vr. 26, 27). An allusion in c. 25 
to idolatry practised in the wilderness would be 
out of place in the argument : ancrifioes, not fa 


Me, has in the Hebrew the emphatic poeitioi] 
' (cp. e.g. Isa. xxviii. 24) ; nor is there any. 
thing in the verse to suggest an antithuis be- 
tween Jehovah and other gods. There is a real 
ambiguity in DJIttdl ; but treated as eipressiij 
a future, it stands evidently upon the same footing 

syntactically as 'Jl^jni in v. 27. The allusloiis 
in V. 26 are still obscure : cp. Kuenen, Bdigion 
of Israel, i. 265 f. ; Schrader, in bis Cmtiform 
Inscriptions and the 0. T. ad loc, and mort 
fully in the Stud. u. Krit. 1874, p. 324 S. 
(where plausible grounds are adduced, from 
Assyrian sources, for identifying Siccath [R. V.j 
and Chiun with Ador and Saturn, respectively): 
Smith, p. 400 f. [S. E. D.] 

2. 'Afuis ; Amos. Son of Naum, in the geua- 
logy of Jesus Christ (Luke Ui. 25). [W.A.W.] 

ATIOZ (POK; 'A/uii; Amos), father of tbe 
Prophet Isaiah (2 K. xix. 2, 20, ii. 1 ; 2 Ck. 
xxvi. 22, xxxii. 20, 32 ; Is. i. 1, ii. 1, liii. 1. 
IX. 2, ixivii. 2, 21, iiiviii. I). [G.] 

AMPHIP'OHS CA/»"?''»<>A«), a city oi 
Macedonia, through which Paul and Silas pissal 
on their way from Philippi to Thessalonio 
(Acts xvii. 1). It was distant 33 Roman mile 
from Philippi (/tin. Anton, p. 320). It ns 
called Amphi-polis, because the river StrrnxD 
flowed almost round the town (Thnc ir. 103). 


It stood upon an eminence on the left or eastern 
bank of thia river, just below its egress from 
the lake Cercinitis, and at the distance of about 
three miles from the sea. It was a colony of 
the Athenians, and was memorable in the Pelo- 
ponnesian war for the battle fought under its 
walls, in which both Brasidas and Cleon were 
killed (Thuc. v. 6-11). At the spot where 
St. Paul crossed the Strymon on his missionary 
journey, there had Xerxes in his invasion of 
Greece offered a sacrifice of white horses to the 
river, and buried alive nine youths and maidens 
(Herod, vii. 114). In Amphipolis, Paulus 
Aemilins, after the battle of Pydna, publicly 

proclaimed the Macedonians free ; and here 
another Paul came to proclaim another liberty, 
the service of perfect freedom. Its site is no» 
occupied by a village called Seokhirio, in Turk- 
ish Jeni-Keni, or " New-Town." See Conybeirt 
and Howson, Life and Epp. of St. Paul, L ch. ii. 
(ed. 4to), and Diet, of Geography, s. n. [F.] 

AMTLIAS ('A/iirA/aj [Westcott and Hoit, 
'A^ir\iaTos] ; Ampliatus), a Christian at Rom«. 
saluted by St. Paul as bis " beloved in the Lord " 
(Rom. xvi. 8). [F.] 

AM'BAM. 1. (D101?, MV." = the p^il. 
is exalted or exalted people; NSldeke [^ZDUO. 

Digitized by 



il 1«5] would derive it, like *iptf, from l/OV ; 
i. nssall}' 'Afififdfi [in Ex. ri. 20, 1 Cb. v'u 3, -r, 
aid ID Xnm. 'Aitpiii], AF. in Ex. 'K/ipifL, in 
Kam. 'A/ifipiit, and A. elsewhere usually 'Aftpdn ; 
Amraa). A Levite, father of Moses, Aaron, 
lad iliriam (Ex. ri. 18, 20 ; Num. iii. 19, xxvi. 
58, 59; 1 Ch. li. 2, 3, 18, xxiu. 12, 13, xxiv. 
20> [R.W. B.] [F.] 

3. |"ipn; B. 'Zntpir, A. 'AitaSi ; Hamram. 
Properly Hamran or Chamran ; son of Dishon 
ud descendant of Levi (1 Ch. i. 41) ; in Gen. 
usri 26 called Heudan, and this is the read- 
in; in 1 Ch. cf many of Kennicott's MSS. and 
preferred by Ges. MV., though not by Dillmann. 

aOTOP; 'A^Lpdfl, K. 'A/iflpdM, B. Moftl; 
Arnvm. One cf the sons of Bani, in the time 
of Eini, who had married a foreign wife (Ezra x. 
34) ; called Omaebcts in 1 Eld. ix. 34 (B. Kitipos, 
i.'lvitiiipos;Abramus). [W. A. \V.] [F.] 

AM-BAMITES, THE (n?"npr ; Amramitae). 
i biaach of the great Kohathite family of the 
tribe of Leri (Num. iii 27, B. 'Aftpaiult, A. 
•k/jfifaiit tXs, F. 'A^^jtt fTs; 1 Ch. ixvi. 23, 
B. 'A/ififiii, A. 'AitfOfd) ; descended from Am- 
raa, the father of Moses. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AMBATHEL ^^-pt^i'Aiuip^ Amar' 
plat), the name of a' king of Shinar or 
Sonthera Babylonia, who aided Chedorlaomer 
agiiiut the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah and 
the cifio of the plain (Gen. xiv.). The name of 
tli] king lias not yet been found in the cunei- 
Ivrm in^riptions. It seems, however, to be 
^<cniitic, and is, perhaps, to be rendered in 
Babylonian Amar-apla (Amar-psI), " I see a son," 
• r Amta-apla (Amra-p2il), "See, a son ! " Future 
fictratioDs in Babylonia will probably shed 
ii.oK light on the early history of Babylonia, 
>nd the events of the period to which this ruler 
Ulongs. [T. G. P.] 

AMULETS (^uAovr^fHa) were ornaments, 
paa, tcroUi, jtc, worn as preservatives against 
tile power of enchantments, and generally in- 
scribed with mystic forms or characters. As 
nch they would come under the general de- 
vmciation of heathen " abominations " specified 
in Dent iviii. 10-12 (cp. Num. xxiii. 23). The 
*• earrings" in Gen. hit. 4 (D'DJJ ; iniria; 
itmret, but more properly nose-rings or fore- 
k«id rings, Theod. Symm. imf^iytOy Gen. xxiv. 
i' ; E/ek. xvi. 12) were obviously connected 
cith idolatrous worship, and may have been 
vnalets taken from the bodies of the slain 
^liechemites. Nose-rings arc subsequently men- 
tioned among the spoiU of Midian (Jndg. viii, 
U), and perhaps their objectionable character 
'u one reason why Gideon asked for them. 
He golden calf in the wilderness (Ex. xxxii. 3), 
» well as Gideon's " ephod," was made of these 
Qtpty Again, in Hos. ii. 13, " decking herself 
with earrings " is mentioned as one of the signs 
of the " days of Baalim." Hence in Chaldee an 
orriig is called ttt^'?^- ^ amulet worn in 
tbe ear was supposed to avert the danger of 
torsts, lie. Such earrings are denounced by St. 
Ani^tine, Bp. 75. 

But amulets were more often worn round the 
•Kk, like the golden bulla or leather lonim of 
tie Koman boys (Jur. S-it. v. 153: cp. Plut. 
^fot. v. 7 ; Varro, de Ling. Lot. vi. 6). Some- 



times they were precious stones, supposed to be 
endowed with peculiar virtues. In the Mirror 
of Stonet the strangest properties arc attri- 
bnted to the amethyst, Kinocetus, Alektoria, 
Keraunium, &c. ; and Pliny, talking of succi- 
num, says, " Infantibus alligare amuleti ratione 
prodest" (xxvii. § 50). He also speaks of 
cyclamen (xxv. § 115X wild vine (xxiii. § 20), 
jasper (xxxvii. § 118), saliva (xxxviii. §§35-39), 
and bats (xxix. § 83) being used for the purpose 
of amulets. Amulets were generally suspended 
as the centre-piece of a necklace, and among 
the Egyptians (Maspero, L' Archiologie Kiyp- 
tienne, p. 235) often consisted of the emblems 
of various deities, or the symbol of truth 
and justice (" Thmei "). A gem of this kind, 
formed of sapphires, was worn by the chief 
judge of Egypt (Diod. i. 48, 75), and a similar 
one is represented as worn by the youthful 
deity Harpocrates (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, iii. 
130, ed. 1878). The Arabs hang round their 
children's necks the figure of an open hand ; ii 
custom which, according to Shaw, arises from 
the un/ucMn«ss of the number 5. This principle 
is often found in the use of amulets. Thus the 
basilisk is constantly engraved on the talismanic 
scarabaei of Egypt, and the phallus was among 
the sacred emblems of the Vestals {Diet, of Gk. 
and Bom. Ant., art. Fascinmn). According to 

Jahn (.drc*. BM. § 131, Engl, tr.), the U^V^JP 
of Is. iii. 20 (A. V. " earrings," R. V. " amulets "> 
were " figures of serpents rarried in the hand " 
(more probably worn in the ears) " by Hebrew 
women." SchrSder (de Vettitu, pp. 168, 170) 
says that Arab women wore golden ser|>ents 
between the breasts ; a practice forbidden by 
Mohammed, because the serpent is an emblem 

of the devil (see Gesenius, s. e. BTI?). The word 
is derived from Vfn?, sibilavit, and means both 
" enchantments " (cp. Is. iii. 3 ; A. V. " eloquent 
orator," K. V. "skilful enchanter;" Aqu. 
iTvytrhs ^liupurii^ ; Theodot. trvcer^j imtSf. 
In Is. xxvi. 16 it is rendered " a prayer : " marg. 
" secret speech ") and the magical gems and 
formularies used to avert them (Gesea. a, v.). 
Amulets were used by the Phoenicians. Thoso 
that are found are Egyptian in type (see Perrot ct 
Chipiez, I/iat. de CArt data VAntiquM, iii. 237). 
The commonest amulets were sacred words 
(the tetragrammaton, &c.) or sentences, written 
in a peculiar manner, or inscribed in some 
cabbalistic figure like the shield of David, and 
Solomon's Seal (Bartolocci, BilA. Jiahbin. i. 576). 
Another form of this figure is the pentangle (or 
pentacle), which " consists of three triangles 
intersected, and made of five lines, which may 
be so set forth with the body of man as to 
touch and point out the places where our 
Saviour was wounded" (Sir T. Browne's Vtilg. 
Errors, i. 10). Under the head of amulets fall 
the 'E<piirut ypiiifurra (Acts xix. 19), and in later 
times the Abraxic gems of the Basilidinns, and 
the use of the word " Abracadabra," recom- 
mended by the physician Serenus Samonicus as 
a cure for the hemitritaeus. The same phy- 
sician prescribes for quartan ague : 

" Useontae Ukdos quartum suppone tlmcntl." 

Charms " consisting of words written on 
folds of papyrus tightly rolled up and sewed 

Digitized by 




in linen," hare been found at Thebes (Wil- 
kinson), and our English translators possibly 
intended something uf the kind when they 
rendered the curions phrase (in Is. iii. 20) 
C'Bjri 'R3 (R. V. "perfume boxes") by 
"tablets." But though many scholars hare 
understood the phrase to mean amulets (Targ. 
]*tfn5, "earrings "X SchrBder has proved that 
it means " scent-boies " (dc Vest. i.). It was 
the danger of idolatrous practices arising 
from the abuse of amulets that probably 
induced the sanction of the use of phylacteries 
(Deut. vi. 8; xi. 18, n'lDljto). The modem 
Arabs use scraps of the Koran (which they call 
" telesmes " or " alakakirs ") in the same way. 

Amulets are frequently alluded to in the 
Talmud under the name DlinSp. Horses had 
n fox's tail or a crimson ornament placed 
between their eyes ; and cows and goats were 
similarly protected {Shabbath, f. 53, 1). An 
approved amulet is one which has effected three 
cures ; and whether it consistedof written charac- 
ters or of roots (see Jos. Ant. viii. 2, § 5), it was 
considered so important that it might be worn 
even on the Sabbath, provided it were attached 
to a chain or ring, so as to look as if it were 
meant for an ornament and not for a remedy 
(Shabbath, f. 61, 1, 2). The disease cardiacus 
could be cured by an amulet on which was 
written the name of the demon which caused 
the disease (Gittin. f. 67, 2). See Hamburger, 
Talm. WSrieri, s. v. Kamea. 

A very large class of amulets depended for 
their value on their beinc constructed under 
certain astronomical conditions. Their most 
general use was to avert ill-luck, &c., especially 
to nullify the effect of the o^oX/iii /Scio-Koros, 
a belief in which is found among all nations. 
(Mark vii. 22; Gal. iii. 1. See Divixation, 
§ 7.) The Jews were particularly addicted to 
them, and the only restriction placed by the 
Kabbis on their use was, that none but approted 
amulets were to be worn on the Sabbath 
(Lightfoot's Ilor. HiAr. in Matt. xxiv. 4). It 
was thought that they kept oflf the evil spirits 
who caused disease. Some animal substances 
were considered to possess a power of averting 
demons, as we see from Tobit. Pliny (xxviii. 
47) mentions a fox's tongue worn on an amulet 
as a charm against blear eyes, and says (xxi. 15), 
" Scarabaeorum cornua alligata amuleti natnram 
obtinent ;" perhaps an Egyptian fancy. In the 
same way one of the Koman emperors wore u 
seal-skin as a charm against thunder. Among 
plants, the white bryony and the Hypericon, or 
Kuga Daemonnm, are mentioned as useful (Sir 
T. Browne, Vvlg. Errori, i. 10. He attributes 
the whole doctrine of amulets to the devil, but 
still throws out a hint that they may work by 
" imponderouB and invisible emissions "). 

Since the use of amulets was thus common 
among the Jews and the heathen, it is not 
unnatural that it should have lingered on 
among some Christians. Chrysostom (Bom. 
Ixxii. in Matt., ed. Field, ii. p. 347) speaks of 
many women who used the Gospels as amulets 
(eioYT^Aia r&y rpaxh^MV i^ofriocu). Comp. 
Isidor. Pelns. ii. Ep. cl., who also alludes to 
these *bceyy4\ta fUKpi. Jerome (m Matt. iv. 24) 
confe^es that he once used the Gospels in this 
superstitious way. The Fathers denounce all 


amulets, and the use of them was fi>rbid<l<.'n 1>f 
the Council of Laodieea. 

Amulets are still common. On the Mod. 
Egyptian " Hegib," see Lane, Mod. Egypt ell; 
and on the African "pieces of medicine," s 
belief in which constitutes half the religion of 
the Africans, see Livingstone's Tratds, p. '.Si 
et passim. [Teraphiu; Tausxan.] 

Anakt (" Hegib "). (Vna Lum'i Moinm ^yi>fMt.'.) 

The word " amulet " it derived from the 
Arabic hamdlet, " a thing suspended." Tlie 
Greek equivalent, ^AoKT^ptoy, does not occur 
in the LXX. (but see Rosenmiiller's tclulia on 
Ezek. xiii. 18), and in the N. T. only in Matt 
xxiii. 5. On Roman, Greek, and Christian ok 
of amulets, see the Dictt. of Orcck and Ranaf 
and Cliriatian Antiquities, s. v. [Frostlets ; 


AM'ZI (*VP^, strong or valiant ; possibly u 
abbreviation ot ii' VOK, Jah is strong ; B. 'A»i»- 
ircia, A. Ma«rir(a; Amasat). 1. A Levite of llie 
family of Merari, and ancestor of Ethas tke 
minstrel (1 Ch. vi. 46). 

2. B. 'AittuTfi, A. 'Aftaa-l, K. 'A^emrt! ; inn. 
A priest, whose descendant Adaiah with his 
brethren served the Temple in the time of 
Nehemiah (Neh. li. 12). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ANA'B (2iV, perhaps, place of grapes, Gil.; 
Anal), a town in the mountains of Judah (Jocb. 
IV. 50, B. 'Avuv, A. 'Ar^fi), named, with Debir 
and Hebron, as once belonging to the Au- 
kim (Josh. xi. 21, AF. 'Aviv/S, Ii. 'AivM)- '^ 
has retained its ancient name, and lies among 
the hills to the west of edh-Dhalieriyeh, Debir, 
close to Shoco and Eshtemoa (Rob. i. 494; set 
also P. F. Mem. iii. 393). The conjecture of 
EusebiuB and Jerome (OS.' pp. 128. 12, 240. U) 
is evidently inadmissible. [G.] [W.] 

ANA'EL CAko^X; Chald. ^f); Heb. 
7{<33n [ed. Neubauer]; Vulg. omitii). The 
brother of Tobit (Tob. i. 21). [0.] [F.] 

ANA'H (mV, meaning uncertain; 'Ari: 
Ana). 1. The fourth son of Seir the Horite 
and a "duke" (Gen. xxxvi. 20, 29) in the land 
of Seir. He was the father of Abolibamah, the 
wife of Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 2, 14). 

2. AE. 'Ovit, D. 'AvtE. The grandson of Seir, 
I.e. son of the " duke " Zibeon the Horite, the 
third son of Seir (Gen. ixrri. 24). Of him 
it is told (A. V.) that he " found the males 
(D»C(^rrn^, R.V. "the hot springs ;" Vulg. 
aquas calidas ; LXX-'la/itly) in the wilderness." 
Modem scholars generally accept the render- 
ing of the Vulgate, though the derivation is 
uncertain, and identify the spot with the sul- 
phur-springs of Calirrhoe (Lasha, Oen. r. 19) 
on the east side of the Dead Sea (DelitxKh, 

Digitized by 



Gentsii, |i. 431 [1887]). Anah's discovery of 
tb«3« springs ''as he ted the asses of Zibeon his 
fither" wss probabjjr bronght about by the 
irinleriag habits of his herd, aad is compared 
bj Riehm, Delitzsch, and others with the dis- 
torfrj- of the waters of Carlsbad through the 
bwliag of the hound which, pursuing the stag, 
iitd fallen into some boiling springs. 

Sach interpretations as— -(a) that of the Sam. 
led Targ. of Onkelos, which identifies D^^ with 
Q*P(( (Ueut. ii. 10, 11), the £mim or Sephaim, 
the giant aborigines of the Sloabite border, and 
vttoni Asah is here supposed to hare met and 
enqncTed (KSO, as in I's. xxi. 9), or (6) the 
Esbbinic translation of the word by mulea (as in 
A. v.), whom Anah is supposed to have procured 
C'foDnd") by the conjunction of horse and ass — 
miT be said to find no support to-day. 

Noi I and 2 are sometimes taiien to be the 
nme person. Aholibamah is described as " the 
Jaoghter of (DS) Anah, the daughter of (HS) 
ZibeoD the Hivite " • (Gen. ixxvi. 2, 14). The 
LXS., Samar., and Peshito Versions read " son 
(■JB) of Zibeon ; " others read " (grand-) 
(lugliter of Zibeon ; " but in either case identify 
the Auh of r. 2 with the Anah of r. 24. 
Others, however, talce the expression "daughter 
uf Zil>eon " to be equivalent to " niece of Zil>eon," 
^ lieep the Anah of vv. 20, 25 distinct from 
tlie Aath of r. 24. Robertson Smith (Joum. of 
PIMogy, "Animal Worship and Animal Tribes," 
ii. p. 90) alleges the variations connected with 
ktaii u indication* of no true genealogy, but of 
a lyiteoutization of tribal facts. Adopting the 
rtading " daughter of Zibeon," he deduces kin- 
iUp through females among the Horites ; and 
from the existence of a sub-clan, Anah, among 
tke Zibeonites as well as among the Seirites, he 
ctsadudes that there was "exogamy" or that 
law which forbad the members of the Horite 
clan to intermarry. This is admitted to be 
probable only so far as the Edomites are concerned 
(Jawta, Arckaolog. Review, iii. p. 153). 

On the identification of Anah the Horite with 
B«ri the HitUU, see Beeei. [F.] 

AXA-HABATH (n"iroK; B. 'Ai-axap^*; 
A. 'AffariS ; Anaharath'), a place within the 
i»fder of Issachar, named with Shihon and Rab- 
)>iUi (Josh. xii. 19). It is now probably the 
'illap m-iTairaA, N.E. of Jezreel (A F. Mem. 
'^H [G.] [W.] 

ANAIAU (n^, Jah amicert; •Atmias, B. 
■i; Ama). 1. Probably a priest ; one of those 
"bo stood on Ezra's right hand as he read the 
Uw to the people (Neh. viii. 4). He is called 
Aiuug in 1 Esd. ii. 43. 

8. B. 'kmaU, M*A. 'Ayif- 'AnU, K'-* 'Avdy • 
'Aiwia; Amrio. One of the "heads" of the 
l'»>ple,who signed the covenant with Nehemiah 
(N«li. X. 22). [W.A. W.] [F.] 


ANA'KIM (WpyO; A. 'Znucl^ B. ^ya ; Ena- 
**X » race of giants or Rephaim (Deut. ii. 
'(•X sad probably so called from their sta- 
tw {longtcoUia), descendants of Arba (Josh. 



• Miiach iemetU, p. 438 [1881]), vtth most modenw, 
«<« BMU p^rin) to be a mistake for fli>ri»« (nhfl)- 

IV. 13, xxi. 11), dwelling after the time of 
Abraham iu the southern part of Canaan, and 
particularly at Hebron, which from their pro- 
genitor received the name of I?3^K ri'"1i5, city 
of Arba. Besides the general designation Ana- 
kim, they are variously called pit! *j)3, sons of 

Anak (Num. xiii. 33, LXX. raits ylyeanas), 
piOn '•yh), descendants of Anak (Num. xiii. 22), 
and'D'pjy '33, sons of Anakim* (Deut. i. 28, 
LXX. viobs yiydyruy). designations serve 
to show that we must regard Anak as the name 
of the race rather thnn that of an individual, 
and this is confirmed by what is said of Arba, 
their progenitor, that he " was a great man 
among the Anakim " (Josh. xiv. 15). The race 
appears to have been diA-ided into three tribes or 
families, bearing the names Sheshai, Ahiman, 
and Talmai. Though the warlike appearance 
of the Anakim had struck the Israelites with 
terror in the time of Moses (Num. xiii. 28 ; 
Deut. ix. 2), they were nevertheless disjwssesscil 
by Joshua, and utterly driven from the land, 
except a small remnant that found refuge in the 
Philistine cities, Gazn, Gath, and Ashdod (Josh, 
xi. 21). Their chief city Hebron became the 
possession of Caleb, who is said to have driven 
out from it the three sons of Anak mentioned 
above ; that is, the three families or tribes of the 
Anakim (Josh. xv. 14 ; Judg. i. 20). After this 
time they vanish from history. [F. W. G.] [F.] 

ANA'MIM (Dn?3» ; A. •Enntruiy, B. A/w- 
/itTulfi; Anamim), a Mizraite people or tribe 
mentioned only in the Noachian list (Gen. x. 13 ; 
1 Ch. i. 11 [A. 'Afofutlfi, B. omits]). Its 
settlement is to be sought within the Mizraite 
territory, Egypt, Libya, South-west Palestine, 
and possibly the neighbouring islands of the 
Mediterranean. [Mizraiu.] 

Several identifications have been proposed in 
the Egyptian inscriptions. De Rouei {Etudes 
sttr lea six preTnierei Dynasties de itanithon, p. 6) 
compares this name to the Anu, a population 
which spread over a great part of the valley of 
the Nile, which gave its name to Heliopolis and 
Hermonthis, and which is found at last in Nubia, 
between the Nile and the Red Sea. The difficulty 
in this identification is that the sign with which 
the name of the Ann begins is nearly always 
transcribed by K. Ebers {Aegypten und die 
Backer Moses, p. 98) translates " the wandering 
Amu " (ShepherdsX and considers them as the 
inhabitants of the eastern part of the Delta, 
around what is now Lake Mcnznleh. The chief 
objection is that the Amu of the sculptures are 
decidedly a Semitic nation, with a Semitic type. 
The most satisfactory identification has been 
pointed out by Brugsch {Seise nach den grossen 
Oase, p. 68), who, relying on the fact that the 
hieroglyphical k or gh is sometimes transcribed 

^7 ^ ci considers the Anamim as the in- 
habitants of Kenem or Ghenem, the Great Oasis 
of El Khargeh, in the Libyan desert. It is to 
be observed that the Coptic Version has a variant 
midiim, which has not been explained. Both 
Josephus and St. Jerome confess their ignorance 

• The A. V. "Anakims," which adds < to a plural 
termination (cp. also Emims, cbemblms), is corrected la 
B. V. to An 

Digitized by 




of the meaning of the name of Anamim, which 
was forgotten in their time. [£. N.] 

ANAMME'LECH (11^133? ; B. *A«)/.«A.x, 
A. 'A^i)- ; AnamelecK), a divinity worshipped by 
the colonists brought into Samaria by Shalmane- 
ser II., king of Assyria, from Sepharraim (Sipar 
or Sippara). This deity is named (2 K. xvii. 
,31) as the companion-god to Adrammelech. 
Both of these deities were worshipped with rites 
similar to those of Moloch, children being sacri- 
ficed to them. According to Rawlinson, the first 
part of the name is the same as Anunita, the 
goddess Venus as the morning and evening star, 
worshipped at Sippara of Anunitn. Schrader 
connects the first part of the name with Ann, 
and restores it as Ann-malik (" Anu is king "). 
The principal gods, however, besides Anunitn, 
worshipped at Sepharvaim, were Samas ; Aa, 
the moon-goddess, his consort; and Bnnene, 
and it is likely that Anammelech is only a by- 
name of one of these. A very probable expla- 
nation is that it is a name of the son-god 
Samas, who was called also Amna (or Atma) ; 
and if so, the Babylonian form would be Am- 
namalik. Another and perhaps better expla- 
nation is, that we have in Anammelech one of 
the names of the goddess Anunitn or Venus, 
worshipped at the less important of the two 
Sipparas. This goddess also bore the name 

»-i— >^ 2^ l^'flf ' '■>'<=•' ""y- 

according to the syllabaries and bilingual lists, 
be read Nin-malga or Ennin-Tmlga in Sumerian, 
and iVin-mt/Au or Ennin-mSku in Semitic Baby- 
lonian — forms which answer almost exactly to 
the biblical Anammelech, especially in its Greek 
form. Adapting this explanation, the probable 
meaning is " Lady of counsel." [T. G. P.] 

A'NAN ()3»; B. 'Hw(m, A. 'Hriy, K. ■Hrct; 
Anom). 1. One of the " heads " of the people 
who signed the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. 
X. 26). 

2. 'Krir; A. 'ArriEy; Anani. Haxax 4 (1 
Esd. V. 30 ; cp. Ezra ii. 46). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ANA'NI OJJB, probably abbreviated for 
iT]]V; A. 'AvovCb. Hartl; Anani), the 7th son 
of tUioenai, descended through Zernbbabel from 
the royal line of Judah (1 Ch. iii. 24). 

[W. A. W.] [F.] 

ANANI' AH (nyjl?; the meaning is un- 
certain ; perhaps from the Arab., Jah meets ; 
'hrarla; Ananicu). Probably a priest, the an- 
cestor of Azariah, who assisted in rebuilding the 
city wall after the return from Babylon (Neh. 
iii. 23). [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ANANI' AH (n'JJff ; Anama), a place named 
between Nob and Hazor, in which the Benjamites 
lived after their retnrn from captivity (Neh. xi. 
32). The MSS. of the LXX. BK. omit all 
mention of this and the accompanying names; 
but A. has 'Kvaarla. It is now the village Beit 
Hanlna, near A'efry SantKil (_P. F. Mem. iii. 8). 

[G.] [W.] 

ANANI'AS CAwu'du ; Ananias ; same name 
as ri^JJn = Hananiah, which signifies "Jehovah 
is gracious"). 


1. High-priest when Paul was biDoglit before 
the Sanhedrin (Acta xxiii. 2 S. ; xxiv. 1) His 
father's name was Nedebaeus, and he wu 
nominated high-priest by Herod, king of Chilcis, 
in place of Joseph, son of Camitbos, abost 
A.D. 47 (Jos. Ant. XX. 5, § 2). A slaughter bj 
the Samaritans of Galileans on their Vij to > 
feast (cp. Luke ix. 53) had received no redrett 
from Cumanus the procurator, and had therefoR 
been fiercely avenged by a band of Jews isd 
Galileans. Samaritan complaints broagkt io 
Ummidius Quadratns, Legate of Syria, who Kit 
his subordinate Cumanus to Rome for jadgmcDt, 
and with him Ananias the high-priest and otbci 
Jews (Jos. Ant. xx. G, §§ 1-3). The Jewish csuk 
triumphed : Cumanus was exiled, and ve itt 
left to. infer that Ananias returned t« enjoy hit 
office, until he was superseded by Ismael, md of 
Phabi, shortly before Felix left Judaea,' pn- 
bably a.d. 60 (Jos. Ant. xx. 8, § 8). Amaias 
would thus be high-priest at the time of Psal'i 
arrest, which took place two years before tlie 
date above mentioned. Ananias continued, hit 
other deposed high-priests [Aknas], to RUia 
and even increase his power. He was gnllty of 
much violence, for which he obtained impaiutr 
by bribes (Jos. Ant. xx. 9, § 2). At the ontbnsk 
of the last revolt, A.D. 66, he was mnrdered br 
the rebels as a leader of the Roman and ptci& 
party ; a terrible fulfilment of the proph«T of 
St. Paul, riwrtiy at ii4\Xti 6 Bfis, Acti iiiii.3 
(Joseph. B. J. ii. 17, 9). In the Talmud Ansoiu 
has the closely allied name of Johanan, mi i 
charged with the most extravagant ghttosT 
(Derenbonrg, Esmi tw Hitt. et Q4oij., xv., notes 
i and 2). On Ananias generally, see Wiesrier, 
Chron. Ap. Zcil.f.l<i,Ti0Ui1. [E. B. B.] 

2. Ananias, husband of Sapphira. Tie 
second and fuller acconnt of the common foai 
of the Christians at Jerusalem (Acts ir. 33) is 
followed by two fbstances of contributions nadt 
to it : the one in good faith, by Barnabas, who ii 
thus introduced to the reader (Acts iv. 36, 37); 
and the other, frandnlently made, by Anaitiah 
with the connivance of his wife. He kept lack 
part of the price of a possession and offered tk 
other part to the Apostles, as though it bad 
been the whole, St. Peter, being enabled by tbt 
power of the Spirit to see through the fnsd, 
denounced him as having deliberately attempttd 
to deceive the Holy Ghost resident in tbe 
Apostles. On hearing St. Peter's words AnsaiB 
fell down and died. Baur (^Apostei Pml, Pt i- 
c. i.) is perfectly justified in insisting that tbo 
deaths of both Ananias and Sapphira are rtpR- 
sented as miraculously inflicted, against Neaodo 
and Olshansen, who to a certain extent introdoco 
naturalistic explanations. This punitive minck, 
administered through St. Peter, finds no panllel 
in the miracles of Christ (Trench, Miracles, Pwl. 
Essay, ir.), but is to be compared on the one (id« 
with Elisha's infliction of leprosy on Gehaxi, sul 
on the other with the case of Elymas. There is 

• Josephns (Ant. iU. 15, i 3) makes an Ismiel bicb- 
priest in the reign of Claudius, i.e. before a.d. 64. Tbis 
can hardly he Ismael, son of Phabt, successor of Aual'^ 
Wieseler (,Chnn. A. Z. p. 169) guesses this Ismul to be 
Identical vlth Ellonaeus, an earlier high-pilest. TIk 
matter is farther complicated by the mention of another 
Ismael, son of Phsbl, successor of Annas (Jos. .^st 
xvlii. 2, $ 2), whose date would be 16-18 A.i>., long befee 

Digitized by 



DO qoMtun u to the discretion of St. Peter; 
tl« jtpwtle is but the organ and announcer of 
the Dirine justice (Niemeyer, Characteriatik der 
Bid, i. p. buy. It has been supposed that the 
stnrity of the judgment was necessary to 
pRTtnt persons from att«mpting to defraud the 
common fund by establishing a claim to draw 
apoi it, while they still retained private pro- 
perty. But this view presumes a stricter 
community of goods than actually existed, and 
docs not harmonise with St. Peter's words. 
Rererence for the Holy Spirit as God (v. 3, 4) 
wu the principle in danger, and its stern viudi- 
cition wss necessary at a time when the presence 
aui work of the Spirit were so near and mani- 
fest. Cp. our Lard's teaching on sin against the 
Holy Ghost, Watt. lii. 31, and St. Peter's own 
woiils to Simon Magus, Acts viii. 22. [£. R. B.] 

8> A Christian Jew of Damascus (Acts ix. 10- 
19). Xs in the cas« of Cornelius and Peter, so 
hen two visioiu prepared Saul and Ananias for 
their mterriew. The natural fear of Ananias 
was overcome by a revelation of the work for 
which Ssol was chosen by the counsel of God. 
He went as directed, and the laying on of his 
hands wss followed by Saul's recovery of sight 
ind by his Baptism. We cannot safely infer 
from the text thai the power of conferring the 
gift of the Holy Ghost lay in Ananias, and there- 
fort was not confined to the Apostles. The gift 
is iideed said to have been one of the objects of 
his mission, but may have been given without 
his instrumentality. Two other accounts of 
St Paul's conversion, with some further particu- 
lars, are given by the Apostle himself (Acts xxii. 
6-16, and xxvi. 12-18). In the former he 
naturally conciliates his Jewish andience by 
mentioning that Ananias was "a devout mon 
according to the Law, well reported of by all 
the Jews that dwelt there." God Who sent 
Ananias was the " God of our fathers," and Jesus 
"the Kighteons One." The second account 
before Festos and A^ppa abbreviates the story, 
Anaiias disappears altogether, and a part of the 
message sent through him to Saul is directly 
ittribnted to the Lord Himself. Tradition 
represents Ananias as at this time already Bishop 
of ftunascus by the appointment of St. Peter and 
St. Andrew, as martyred luder Lucian the 
F>vemor, and buried at Damascus {Mtnoi. Grace. 
*»if. pp. 79, 80> [E. R. B.] 

4 B. 'AsTcft, A. 'Aryfos ; Ananias. The sons 
of Ananias to the number of 101 (Vnlg. 130) are 
enmserated as having returned with Zorotiabel 
(1 Esd. V. 16). No such name exists in the 
puallel luts of Exra and Nehemiah. 

6. 'Anurias; Vulg. omits. Uanaki No. 3 
(1 Eld. ii. 21 ; cp. Ezra x. 20). 

flL 'Aroflas ; Amamas. Hanadiah No. 9 
(1 Isd. ii. 29 ; q>. Ezra x. 28). 

7. 'Ani^ ; Ananiai. Anaiah No. 1 (1 Esd. 
'»■ 43 ; cp. Neh. viii. 4). 

& A. 'Arcurlas, B. 'Anrias ; Ananiat. Hakan 
Xo. S (1 Esd. ix. 48 ; cp. Neh. viii. 7). 

9. "The great," father of Azarias, 
suae was aasnmed by the Angel, Raphael (Tob. 
'- 12, 13. In Chald. and Heb. [ed. Neubauer] 
Hsnanel takes the place of Ananias ; In Itala, 
intamas). Ananias is accepted by Tobit as one 
»f bis "brethren." 

10. JtA. 'Aravfoi, B. and T,' omit ; in the 
Vnlg. the name corresponding to it in point of 



order is Jamnor, Judith viii. 1. One of the 
ancestors of Judith. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

11. 'Avcwlas; Atuinias.. 'The Hebrew name 
of Shadrach (Hananiak No. 7). Dan. iii. 88 
(Theod., Vulg. ; e. 65, LXX.). [W. A. W.] 

ANAN'IEL (^8Mn [ed. Neubaner], El h 
gracious ; 'Avart^K ; Itala, Ananihel), forefather 
of Tobias (Tob. i. 1). [F.] 

ANA'TH (nW, connected with the name of 
the Phoenician and Cnnaanite goddess 'Anlt 
[_CIO. 95] whose worship passed also into Egypt 
[^Baethgen, Beitrage z. Sem. Seligiomgesck., 
pp. 52, 141] ; Anath), father of Shamgar (Judg. 
iii. 31 [B. Aeiff^x, A. 'AyiiS\, v. 6 [B. 'AriS, 
A. K«K<(9]). [F.] 

ANATH'EMA (irade/to, in LXX., the equi- 
valent for D^n, a thing or person devoted: in 
N. T. generally translated accursed). The more 
usual form is iyiSri/ia (iyarlSrifu'), with the 
sense of an offering suspended in a temple (Luke 
xxi. 5; 2 Mace. ix. 16): the Alexandrine writers 
preferred the short penultimate in this and 
other kindred words (e.g. MStna, airOtiia): 
but occasionally both forms occur in the 
MSS., as in Jud. xvi. 19; 2 Mace. xiii. 15; 
Luke xxi. 5 : no distinction therefore existed 
originally in the mennings of the words, as 
has been supposed by many early writers. The 
Hebrew DIH is derived from a verb signifying 
primarily to shvt up, and hence to (1) detote 
(R. V. text or marg ), and (2) exterminate. 
Any object so devoted to the Lord was irredeem- 
able : if an inanimate object. It was to be given 
to the priests (Num. xviii. 14) ; if a living 
creature or even a man, it was to be slain (T.ev. 
xxvii. 28, 29) ; hence the Idea of extermination 
as connected with denoting. Generally speaking, 
a vow of this description was taken only with 
respect to the idolatrous nations who were 
marked out for destruction by the special decree 
of Jehovah, as in Num. xxi. 2 ; Josh. vi. 17. 
Jehovah (Is. xxxlv. 2) was said to shut up, i.e. 
place tmder a ban, which necessitated the de- 
struction of the nation in order to prevent all 
contact. The extermination being the result of 
a positive command (Ex. xxii. 20), the idea of a 
vow is excluded, although the instances referred 
to show how a vow was occasionally superadded 
to the command. Any breach with respect to 
the " devoted " thing was punished with death 
(Josh. vii. 25). It may be further noticed that 
the degree to which the work of destruction was 
carried out, varied (cp. Dillmann on Lev. xxvii. 
28, 29). Thus it applied to the destruction of 
(1) human life alone (Dent. II. 34); (2) all, 
virgins excepted (Num. xxxi. 17 ; Judg. xxi. 
1 1) ; (3) all living creatures (Deut. xx. 16 ; 
1 Sam. XV. 3) ; the spoil in the former cases 
was reserved for the use of the army (Deut. ii. 
35, XX. 14; Josh. xxii. 8), instead of being 
given over to the priesthood, as was the case 
in the recorded vow of Joshua (Josh. vi. 19). 
Occasionally the town itself was also utterly de- 
stroyed, the site rendered desolate (Josh. vi. 
26), and the name Hormah (_'Ard6*fia, LXX.) 
applied to It (Num. xxi. 3; cp. Judg. 1. 17). 
The herem was also resorted to by the Moabltes 
(cp. the Mesha-Inscrlption, 1. 17 ; cp. also 2 Ch. 
XX. 23), and the same term is used to express 

Digitized by 




the nction of the Assyrians (2 K. xix. 11 ; 
Is. xxivii. 1 1 ; 2 Ch. xxiii. 14). Cp. Riehm, 
IIWB. "Bann"; Ewald, Antiquities, p. 75 sqq. 
We pass on to the Rabbinical sense of D']|n as 
referring to excommunication, premising that an 
approximation to that sense is found in Ezra x. 
8, where forfeiture of goods is coupled with 
separation from the congregation (cp. Baxtorf. 
Lex. Chald. on the words specified ; Weber, Sys- 
tem d. Altsynag, Patast. Theologie, p. 138 ; 
Schiirer, Gesch. d. Judischen Voltes am Zeitalter 
Jesu ChristI,' II. Theil. pp. 362-3). Three kinds 
of excommunication are enumerated (Levy, Chald. 
WOrttrb. s. n. D^^ No. ii.) : — (1) *-1'I3, involving 
various restrictions in civil and ecclesiastical 
matters for the space of thirty days : to this it 
is supposed that the terms iupopt^iiv (Luke vi. 22) 
and iro<rvydyctyos (John ix. 22) refer. (2) A 
repetition of the excommunication for another 
thirty days (or even longer), with increased 
penalties. (3) D"in, a more public and formal 
sentence, accompanied with curses, and involving 
severer restrictions for an indefinite period. The 
term KFISE? is common to these three kinds. 

T - - 

Some expositors refer the terms irtiSl(tiy Kcd 
ixfiiWtiy (Lulce vi. 22) to the second species, 
but a comparison of John ix. 22 with «. 34 shows 
that iKPaWtm is synonymous with irovuvi- 
yajoy woittv, and there appears no reason for 
supposing the latter to be of a severe character. 
The phrase wap<iStS6viu rf Sorovf (1 Cor. v. 5 ; 
1 Tim. i. 20) has been sometimes thought a re- 
flexion of Jewish excommunication natural to the 
Jew St. Paul ; but St. Paul's formula limiting 
his sentence to " the destruction of the flesh " is 
full of a " severe mercy of Divine discipline " 
(Aug.) unknown to the Rabbis (see the notes in 
the Speaker's Commentary, 1. c). 

The word laii8*im frequently occurs in St. 
Paul's writing, and many expositors have re- 
garded his use of it as a technical term for 
judicial excommunication. That the word wus 
so used in the early Church, there can be no 
■loubt (Bingham, Antiq. xvi. 2, § 16) : but nn 
examination of the passages [in each consult the 
Admirable notes of the Spea/ter'a Commentary'} 
in which it occurs shows that, like the cognate 
word lwatfiiar({u (Matt. xxvi. 74; Mark xiv. 71 ; 
Acts xxiii. 12, 21), it had acquired a more 
general sense as expressive either of strong 
feeling (Rom. ix. 3 ; cp. Ex. xxxii. 32), or of 
dislike and condemnation (I Cur. xii. 3, xvi. 22 ; 
Gal. i. 9). [W. L.B.] [F.] 

ANA'THOTH (nin», most probably the pi. 
of the goddess-name 'Anit [Baethgen, p. 53 ; 
see Anath]; 'AyaSiiS; Anathoth). 1. The 
eighth son (in textual order) of Becher, the third 
son of Benjamin (1 Ch. vii. 8), perhaps con- 
nected with the place of the same name. 

a. K. *ayae^, B. Na«<ifl (Neh. x. 19. See • ''"■"«"veeu we nrsi ana secona o. me «.r« 

- - - I sets or four in which the twelve Apostles are 

presented [Apostle]. On the one hand, he i« 
included in the first four. In all the lists his 
name follows St. Peter's, or is only separated 


I of njlf [Akath], by which name the place i> 
I called in the Talmad Joma, 10; 'Amllii;Am- 
I thoth), a city of Benjamin, omitted from the 
I list in Josh, xviii., but a priests' city; with 
" suburbs " (Josh. xxi. 18 ; 1 Ch. vi. 60). Hither, 
to his " fieldis,'' Abiathar was banished liy Solo- 
mon after the failure of his attempt to pat 
Adonijah on the throne (1 K. ii. 26). This wu 
the native place of Abiezer, one of David's thirtr 
captains (2 Sam. xxiii. 27 ; 1 Ch. zi. 28, iiTii. 
12), and of Jehu, another of the mighty mm 
(1 Ch. xii. 3) ; and here, " of the priests tint 
were in Anathoth," Jeremiah was bom (Jer. i. 
1 ; xi. 21, 23: xxix. 27; xxxii. 7-9). 

The "men" ('C3N, not '33, as in moitofth* 
other cases ; compare, however, Netophah, Mich- 
mash, &c.) of A. returned from the Csptirity 
with Zerubbabel (Ezra ii. 23; Neh. vil 27; 
1 Esd. V. 18). 

Anathoth lay on or near the great rosd from 
the north to Jerusalem (Is. z. 30) ; by Jase)^ui 
{Ant. z. 7, § 3) it is placed at twenty stadia from 
the city, by Eusebius at three miles (Oncm.). an! 
by Jerome {turris Anathoth) at the same dis- 
tance contra septentrionem Jerusalem (ad Jereni. 
cap. i.). The traditional site at Kuryet et-'E»ii 
does not fulfil these conditions, being ten mil« 
distant from the city, and nearer W. than X. 
But the real position has no doubt been dis- 
covered by Robinson at 'Anata, on a broad ridp 
2J miles N.N.E. from Jerusalem. The oultira- 
tion of the priests survives in tilled fields ol 
grain, with 6gs and olives. There an tht 
remains of walls and strong foundations, and 
the quarries still supply Jerusalem with Will- 
ing stone (Rob. i. 437, 438 ; P. F. Mem. iil ", 
82). [G.] [ff.l 

ANCHOR. [Ship.] 

ANDREW, ST. C^ySpdat ; Andreas). Tbt 
name is Greek, and occurs first in Hdt. vi. 136. 
It is borne by the physician of Ptolemy Phib- 
delphus, quoted by Athenaeus (iii. p. 115), and 
elsewhere. A Jew of Cyrene named Andreir i> 
mentioned by Dio Cossiua (Irviii. 32) as Un]i$ 
in the time of Trajan. St. Andrew was of 
Bgthsaida (John i. 44), defined as Bethsaidi 
of Galilee (John zii. 21). He was brother to 
Simon Peter (John i. 40), and dwelt in thf 
same house with him (Mark i. 29) at Caper- 
naum (Mark i. 21). He was a disciple of St 
John the Baptist, and, accompanied by ao un- 
named disciple, was the first to follow Jems 
(John i. 35-40). Again, when the same fol- 
lowers were called to a closer allegiance, be 
with Peter received the first summons (Matt, 
iv. 18; Mark i. 16). Hence arose his title of 
irpttriKXtrros, not infrequent in Greek ecclesias- 
tical writers (Stephanas, ed. Uase, s. v.). He is 
a link between the first and second of the three 

Swete's ed. of LXX., from which it will be seen 
how such variations arose). One of the heads 
of the people who signed the covenant in the 
time of Nehemiah : unless the name stands 
for the " men of Anathoth " mentioned in 
Neh. vii. 27. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

ANA'THOTH (rtnjP. nhj?,* probably plur. 

' In A.V. there are Irregnlarlties in the orthography 
or the gentile name *■ Anotbothlte," due to the tran*- 

Iston bavlog reproduced certain modifications of form 
peculiar to the Hebrew, via. Aneihothlte, 2 Sam. iilii. 
21 ; Anetothite, 1 Ch. xxrll. 13 ; Aniotbitev 1 Cb. li. 2S 
zlL 3 ; R.y. In each case " Anatbotblte." - Jenmlah 
of A." (Jer. zzlz. 27) abonld be, as in B. T., -J. tbo 

Digitized by 



irm it bj those of St, James and St. John. 
The solemn and private question as to the time 
if tlie end, which in each of the Synoptists 
leals to the great eschatological discourses, is 
iKciding t« St. Mark the question of the fore- 
Bcrt Apostles only, — SS. Peter, James, John, 
and .Aodrev. On the other hand, St. Andrew 
fc closely connected with the second qnater- 
nioD of disciples through St. Philip, who is 
i'.ms placed at its head, and therefore in two 
lists (Mark iii. 18; Acts i. 13) immediately 
r'ollom St. .\ndrew. There is the local connexion 
ofthesameoriginal home, Bethsaida, although St. 
Andrew had latterly lived at Capernaum. There 
is the slight coincidence that both hare Greek 
nimes. There is the evidence of two incidents, 
the feeding of the 5,000 (John vi. 7, 8) and the 
introdoction of the Greeks to Jesus (John lii. 
i:'),inbothofwhich St. Andrew and St. Philip are 
isj/iciated. In the latter instance Philip seems 
to be unwilling to approach the Lord with an 
unprecedented reqnest without the support of 
one of the first four. Yet our theories of ac- 
knowledged rank and priority in the college 
must be modified by the reflection that Jesus 
Himself gave no countenance to the assumption 
cftiiem(Markix. 34). 

In the Acts of the Apostles, St. Andrew, like 
the majority of his colleagues, falls into the back- 
gronnd, and is nerer mentioned after the list in 
.Ms L The evidence as to his later history is 
conflicting, Origen (quoted by Euseb. iii. 1) 
ifsigniig Scythia as the scene of his labours, 
*bence Rnssta claims him as her patron saint. 
Tliis tradition seems to be followed in the 
npocrrphal account of his sojourn among the 
Anthropophagi (Acta Andrtae et ifatthiae: 
lischendor^ Acta Apocrypha). On the other 
land, there is the evidence of Jerome ^ad Mar- 
(fllam, lii. ed. Migne) and Theodoret (ad Psalm. 
civi.) in &vour of Achaia. At any rate, all 
traditions agree in assigning Patrae in Achaia as 
the fhcx of his martyrdom. Of his martyrdom 
there are two acconnts deserving of notice, and 
differing widely in character. (1.) The third 
h«ik of the ffhtoria Apostolicn of Abdias 
(Fabridus, Cod. Apocr. N. T.) contains the Acts 
of St. Andrew. This history is said to have been 
written in Ilebrew by Abdias, Bishop of Babylon, 
contemporary of the Apostles, and translated 
•nto Utin by Jnlitis Africanus. It is, however, 
a forgery of the 6th or 7th century (see Her- 
»;,££.*s.n. Abdias.) Its interestlies in the fact 
tbtt it represents those earlier Acta Andreae 
which Epiphanius (Haerea. xlvii. 1 ; lii. 1 ; liiii. 
•) mentions as especially valued by the Encra- 
titse, Apc(|olici, and Origeniani (cp. also Euseb. 
B. E. iii. 25). It is probiably a Catholic adap- 
txion in Latin from heretical Greek docamenU, 
oppressing the evident heresy, bnt retaining in 
• modified form much of the teaching which had 
^ valued by the heretics, and now fell in 
*i'h the ascetic tendencies of the age. The 
l^ads related constantly turn upon sins of the 
Oesh, and the relations of married persons. 
^ference to the passages cited from Epiphanius 
'siil (how the connexion between the topics 
treated and the sects which are mentioned by 
'"»• A crucial instance is afforded by the 
■naFtytdom of St. Andrew, which is said in the 
ff-toTM Apostoiica to have been in part oc- 
osioned by his supposed interference between 

WBLt blCT.— VOL. I. 



Aegeas, the Roman governor of Patrae, and his 
wife Maiimilln. (2.) But in the document 
which we have next to consider (Acta Andreae : 
Tischendorf, Acta Apocrypha) the condemnation 
of the Saint follows on his preaching the Cross ; 
the doctrine of reserve to unbelievers comes 
forward as a cause of the special anger of Aegens 
or Aegeates, and a reminiscence of St. Andrew's 
first sight of his Master comes back touchingly 
in his repeated mention of the " Lamb without 
blemish " (cp. John i. 36). These Acta Andreae 
purport to be a letter from the Presbyters and 
Deacons of the Churches of Achaia. It is 
thronghout of a totally different character from 
the work of the pseudo- Abdias ; it bears no 
traces of heretical origin, and probably has some 
historical value (see Tisch. Prolegg. in .<lc<a 
Apocr. xl.-xlii.). A legend related in the Mura- 
torian Fragment makes St. Andrew the recipient 
of a revelation about the composition of St. John's 
Gospel (see Tregelles' edit, note ad loc.). The 
" crux decossata " (X-sbaped cross) assigned to 
St. Andrew haa no early authority (Andrew, 
Festival of. Diet. Chr. Antiq.) ; but all accounts 
agree that he was bound, not nailed to the cross, 
in order to prolong his sufferings. The date of 
his martyrdom given in the Letter (Nov. 30) 
has been observed in the day assigned to him 
in the Calendar of the Church. Consult Lipsius, 
Die Apohryphen Apottelgeschichten u. Apostel- 
legenden, i. p. 543 tq. [E. R. B.] 

ANDRONICUS (^Kvipivucos; Andronicus). 
1. A Christian at Rome saluted by St. Paul 
(Rom. xvi. 7X together with Junias. The two 
are called his kinsmen {(rvfyfytts). The same 
term is applied in tw. 11 and 21 to four other 
persons, two of whom, Jason and Sosipater, may 
probably be identified with Jason of Tbessti- 
lonica and Sopater of Berea. It is improbable 
that these persons belonging to other provinces 
were all blood relations of St. Paul, and it is 
better to understand " kinsmen " as simply 
marking them out as Jews among the Gentiles 
saluted with them. For this use of wyytyttt 
cp. Rom. ix. 3, and Josephus, B. J. ii. 18, 4. 
Also see Godet, note ad loc. Secondly, they are 
called " my fellow-prisoners." Lightfoot (Phil. 
Jntrod. p. 11, and Col. iv. 10, note) suggests that 
the word (vvfaix/utAwrot, not avyS4ffitot) may 
imply a spiritual captivity, — fellow-prisoners, 
as together taken captive by Christ. If a meta- 
phorical interpretation be adopted at all, the 
foregoing explanation would be better than the 
regarding the captivity as the previous bondage 
of Judaism in which they had been shut up. A 
literal interpretation would imply n reference 
to an unrecorded imprisonment (JirraKit Scir^ 
^>op4aea, Clem, ad 1 Cor. v.). Thirdly, Andro- 
nicus and Junias are "of note among the 
Apostles" (see Apostle). Lastly, they were 
believers before St. Paul's own conversion. 
There is no tradition of any value respecting 
them. Acta Sanctorum, May 17, gives scarcely 
any additional circumstances. [E. R. B.] 

2. An oflicer led as viceroy (8ia8cx4M<*v>i 
2 Mace. iv. 31) in Antioch by Antiochus 
Epiphanes during his absence (B.C. 171). Mene- 
laus availed himself of the opportunity to secure 
his good ofHces by offering him some golden 
vessels which he had taken from the Temple. 
When Onias (Onias III.) was certainly assured 


Digitized by 




that the sacrilege had been committed, he sharply 
reproved Menelaus for the crime, having (ire- 
vioosly talcen refuge in the sanctuary of Apollo 
and Artemis at Daphne. At the instigation of 
Menelaus, Andronicus induced Onias to leave 
the sanctuary, and immediately put him to 
death in prison (? wafiixXfurtv, 2 Mace. iv. 34). 
This murder eicited general indignation; and 
on the return of Antiochns, Andronicus was 
publicly degraded and executed (2 Mace. ir. 
30-38). Josephus places the death of Onias 
before the high-priesthood of Jason (Ant. xii. 
5, § 1), and omits all mention of Andronicus ; 
but there is not suiBcicnt reason to doubt the 
truthfulness of the narrative, as Wemsdorf has 
done (Dcfde libr. Mace. pp. 90 f.). [B. F. W.] 

S. Another officer of Antiochus Epiphanes 
n-ho was left by him on Garizim {tv Tap. 
2 Mace. V. 23), probably in occupation of the 
temple there. As the name was common, it 
seems onreasonable to identify this general 
with 2, and so to introduce a contradiction into 
the history (Wemsdorf, /. c; Ewald, Gtsch. d. 
1 olkea Isr. iv. 335 n. ; cp. Grimm and Speaker's 
Comm. on 2 Mace. iv. 38). [B. F. W.] 

A'NEM (DjT ; A. 'Avi/i, B. omits ; Anem), 
a city of Issachar, with "suburbs," belonging 
to the Gershonites, 1 Ch. vi. 73 (Heb. r. 58). 
It is omitted in the lists in Josh. xix. 21 and 
xxi. 29, and instead of it we find £n-gannim. 
Ilobinson (Pal. iii. 385) identifies it with Genin. 
Major Conder (P. F. Mem. ii. 44, 51) proposes 
to identify it with 'Anin, a village 8} miles from 
Jenln, in the hills near Vmmel-Fahm. [G.] [W.] 

A'NER (tiV; B. 'Aitdp, A. 'Eviip; Aner), 
a city of Manasseh, west of Jordan, with " sub- 
urbs" given to the Kohathites (1 Ch. vi. 70). 
Some comparing the passage with Josh. xxi. 25 
consider the name a corrupt reading of Taanach 
(IJl? for 131?n). Major Conder, however, sug- 
gests its identity with 'EUir, a small village in 
the hills S.W. of Esdraelon {P. F. Mem. ii. 
154). [G.] [W.] 

A'NER (Ijr; XD. Kbviv; Aner), one of 
three Hcbronite chiefs who, as "confederates," 
aided Abraham in the pursuit after the four 
invading kings (Gen. xiv. 13, 24). 

[K. W. B.] [F.] 

text has the name twice, (a) B. i 'KvuOflri\i, 
A. ' KvaBieDtlrris ; (6) B. rov 'PiVuBtWov, A. to!! 
' KaitOtlrov; de AnathotK), An appellative of 
Abiezer, an inhabitant of Anathoth of the tribe 
of Benjamin (2 Sam. xxiii. 27). Called also 
Anetotuite and Antothite. [W. A. W.] [F.] 

AKETO'THITE, THE Ortnsrn, same as 
ASETHOTHITE, 1 Ch. xxvii. 12 ; B. J{ 'KyoBiB, 
A. i 'A. ; Anaihothites). Called also Antothtte. 
[W. A. W.] [F.] 

ANGELS (D'3St^; of«yy«Ao<; often with 

the addition of n\n^, or D'lT'S' '" some Books 
[Job T. 1 ; Ps. .lixxi'i. 6, 8; I^. iv. 13, viii. 13] 
the word O'CHp, ol Syioi, is used as an equi- 
valent term). By the word "Angels" (i.«. 
" messengers " of God) we ordinarily understand 
a race of spiritnal beings, of a nature exalted far 


' above that of man, although infinitely removed 
from that of God, whose office is " to do Him 
service in heaven, and by His appomtmeiit to 
succour and defend men on earth." The object 
of the present article is threefold : 1st, to nfcr 
to any other Scriptural raa of this and similar 
words ; 2ndly, to notice the revelations of tie 
natnre of these spiritnal beings given in 
Scripture ; and 3rdly, to derive from the same 
source, a brief description of their ojia towsids 
man. It is to be noticed that its scope is purely 
Biblical, and that, in consequence, it does not 
enter into any extra-scriptural specnUtioss on 
this mysterious subject. 

I. In the first place, there are many pasuges 
in which the expression the " Angel of God," 
" the Angel of Jehovah," is certainly used for a 
manifestation of God Himself. This is especitllji 
the case in the earlier Books of the Old Testa- 
ment, and may be seen at once, by a compariaon j 
of Gen. xxii. 11 with v. 12, and of Ex. iii. 2 with 
cf. 6, 14; where He, Who is called the "Anpl ; 
of God " in one verse, is called " God " and eveii . 
" Jehovah " in those which follow, and accepfe J 
the worship due to God alone. Contrast Ber. 
xix. 10, xxi. 9. See also Gen. iri. 7, 13, mi. 
11, 13, xlviii. 15, 16; Num. xxii. 22, 32,35, 
and comp. Is. Ixiii. 9 with Ex. xixiii. 14, &c ! 
The same mode of expression is used by St. Paul t 
(see Acts xxvii. 23 as compared with xxiii. 11). ' 

It is to be observed also, that, side by side 
with these expressions, we read of God being 
manifested in the form of man ; as to Abrahin 
at Mamre (Gen. xviii, 2, 22 ; ep. xix. 1). to 
Jacob at Penuel (Gen. xxxii. 24, 30), to Joshua 
at Gilgal (Josh. v. 13, 15), &c. It is hardly to 
be doubted, that both sets of passages refer 
to the same kind of manifestation of the Divine 

This being the case, since we know that "no 
man hath seen God " (the Father) " at anv 
time," and that " the only-begotten Son, Which 
is in the bosom of the Father, hath revealel 
Him " (John i. 18), the inevitable inference is 
that by the "Angel of the Lord" in wrf" 
passages is meant He Who is from the beginning 
the " Word," i.*. the Manifester or Revealer of 
God. These manifestations are evidently "fore- 
shadowings of the Incarnation." By these (that 
is) God the Son manifested Himself from time to 
time in that human nature, which He united 
to the Godhead for ever in the Virgin's womb. 

This conclusion is corrobor.ited by the fad. 
that the phrases used as equivalent to the word 
"Angels" in Scripture, viz. the "sons of God"* 

[D'r6KiT»J3, Job ii. 1, xixviii. 7 ; Dan. iii. 25], 
or even in poetry, the " gods " (Elohim), the 
" holy ones," &c., are names which in their full 
and proper sense are applicable only to the 
Lord Jesus Christ. As He is "«A« Son" of God," 
so also is He the " Angel," or " messenger " «l 
the Lord. Accordingly it is to His Incarnation 
that all angelic ministration is distinctly r^ 
ferred, as to a central truth, by which alone its 
nature and meaning can be understood. ^< 
John i. 51, comparing it with Gen. xxviii. ll-l"i 
and especially with v. 13. 

Besides this, which is the highest application 
of the word " Angel," we find the phrase used 
of any messengers of God, such as the PropheU 
(Is. xlii. 19 ; Hag. i. 13; Mai. iii. 1), the priest* 

Digitized by 



(Slal. ii. 7X and the rnlers of the Christian 
Ckorciw (Ber. I 20); much as, even more 
Kcjsrkably, the word " Elohim " is applied, in 
fi. liuiL 6, to those who judge in God's 

TICK onges of the word are not only 
int«r«tiBg io themselres, bat will serve to 
tliniir light oa the nature and the method 
')f th« ministration of those whom we more 
f'^wiallj term " the Angels." 

11. Id passing on to consider what is revealed 
in Scripture as to the angelic nature, we are led 
it once to notice, that the Bible deals with this 
md nih kindreid subjects exclnsiveljr in their 
pnctlcal bearings, only so far (that is) as they 
ciiminn to our knowledge of God and of our- 
ielro, and more particalarly as they are 
•dUMcted with the one great subject of all 
^riptue, the Incarnation of the Son of God. 
Little therefore is said of the nature of Angels 
>s dutmct fiom their office. 

Ther are termed "spirits " (as e.g. in Heb. i. 
14), although this word is applied more com- 
monly. Dot so much to themselves, as to their 
fover dwdlmg in man («.</. 1 Sam. xviii. 10; Matt, 
riii. IS, &C,). The word is the same as that 
uxd of the soul of man, when separate from the 
body («^. Katt. x^T. 26 ; Luke xxiv. 37, 39 ; 
I Pet. iii. 19) ; but, since it properly expresses 
only that snpersensuons and rational element of 
null's nature, which is in him the image of God 
(see John iv. 24), and by which he has com- 
miDioD with God (Rom. viii. 16) ; and since also 
re Me told that there is a " spiritnal body " as 
well sj a " natural Q^n/x"^''} ^>°^7 " 0- Co'- ='''^- 
44), it does not assert that the angelic nature is 
incsiporeal. The contrary seems expressly im- 
y'Jei by the words in which our Lord declares 
that, after the Besurrectim, men shall be " like 
the Angels" (laiyyf^oi, Loke xx. 36); be- 
osose (as is elsewhere said, Phil. iii. 21) their 
indies, as veil as their spirits, shall have been 
made eiitiitly like His. It may also be noticed 
that the glorious appearance ascribed to the 
Angels in Scripture (as in Dan. x. 6) is the 
nme as that which shone oat in our Lord's 
Tnntfiguration, and in which St. John saw Him 
ifctied in heaven (Rer. i. 14-16) ; and more- 
<fer, that, whenever Angels have been made 
nunifst to man, it has always been in human 
lorm (as <.j. in Gen. zviii., xix. ; Luke xxiv. 4; 
iet* i. 10, 4c). The very fact that the titles 
*«»sof God " (Job i. 6, xxiviii. 7 ; Dan. iii. 25 
coToparrt with e. 28*) and " gods " (Ps. viii. 5 ; 
icni. 7), applied to them, are also given to men 
(m Lake iiL 38; Ps. lixxii. 6, and cp. our 
H^l's application of this last passage in John x. 
'4-37)^ points in the same way to a difference 
'»!r (rf degree, and an identity of kind, between 
t^ human and the angelic nature. 

Tie Angels are therefore revealed to as as 
Itiags, such as man might be and will be when 
^« {«Tf r of sin and death is removed, partak- 
^ in their meaanre of the attributes of God, 
Trutli, Purity, and Love, becanse always 
bfWilhig His face (Hatt. xWU. 10), and. there- 
l^rt being " made like Him " (1 John ui. 2). 
'»is. of course, implies finiteneas, and therefore 



' <kt. Tt 2 is omitted here and belor, as being a 
"rtn^imti pwaage ; although manyUSS. of the LXX. 
^^' •• «tY<Jwt Inatead of «t viot here. 

(in' the strict sense) " imperfection " of nature 
and constant progress, both moral and intel- 
lectual, through all eternity. Such imperfec- 
tion, contrasted with the infinity of God, is ex- 
pressly ascribed to them in Job iv. 18; Matt, 
xxiv. 36 ; 1 Pet. i. 12 : and it is this which 
emphatically points them out to us as creatures, 
fellow-servants of man, and therefore incapable 
of usurping the place of gods. 

This finiteness of nature implies capacity of 
temptation (see Butler's Anal. Part i. c. 5); 
and accordingly we hear of "fallen angels." 
Of the nature of their temptation and the cir- 
cumstances of their fall, we know absolutely 
nothiqg. All that is certain is, that they "\eh 
their first estate " (riiv javrAc ipx^'') • """1 fist 
they are now " angels of the devil " (Matt. ixv. 
41 ; Rev. iii. 7, 9), partaking therefore of the 
falsehood, uncleanness, and hatred, which are 
his peculiar characteristics (John viii. 44). All 
that can be conjectured must be based on the 
analogy of man's own temptation and &1I. 

On the other hand, the title especially as- 
signed to the Angels of God, that of the " holy 
ones " (see e.g. Dan. iv. 13, 23, viii. 13; Matt. 
XIV. 31), is precisely that which is given to 
those men who are renewed in Christ's image, 
but which belongs to them in actuality and in 
perfection only hereafter (cp. Heb. ii, 10, v. 9, 
xii. 23). Its use evidently implies that the 
angelic probation is over, and their crown of 
glory won. 

Thus much then is revealed of the angelic 
nature, as may make it to us an ideal of human 
goodness (Matt. vi. lOX or a beacon of warning as 
to the tendency of sin. It is obvious to remark 
that in such revelation is found a partial satis- 
faction of that craving for the knowledge of 
creatures, higher than ourselves and yet fellow- 
servants with us of God, which in its diseased 
form becomes Polytheism.' Its full satisfaction 
is to be sought in the Incarnation alone ; and it 
is to be noticed, that after the Revelation of 
God in the flesh, the angelic ministrations re- 
corded are indeed fewer, bnt the references to the 
Angels are far more freqiient — as though the 
danger of Polytheistic idolatry had, compara- 
tively speaking, passed away. 

111. 'The most important subject, and that 
on which we have the fullest revelation, is the 
office of the Angels. 

Of their office in heaven, we have, of coarse, 
only vague prophetic glimpses (as in 1 E. xxii. 
19; Is. vi. 1-3; Dan. vii. 9, 10; Rev. vi. 11, 
tic), which show us nothing but a never- 
ceasing adoration, proceeding from the vision of 
God, through^ the " perfect love which castetb 
out fear." 

Their office towards man is far more fully 
described to us. They are represented as being, 
in the widest sense, agents of^ God's Providence, 
natural and supernatural, to the body and to 
the soul. Thus the operations of nature are 
spoken of, as under angelic guidance fulfilling 

>> The inordinate subjectivity of Oennan ptailoeophy 
on this Bul^ct (see, e. g., Winer's Eealw.), of course, 
hastens to the conclusion that the belief In Angels is a 
mere consequence of this craving, never (it would seem) 
so entering Into the analogy of Ood's Ftovldence as to 
suppose It possible tbat this Inward craving should cor- 
respond to some outward reality. 

K 2 

Digitized by 




the Will of God. It'ot only is this the case in 
poetical passages, such as Ps. civ. 4 (com- 
mented upon in Heb. i. 7), n-here the powers of 
air and tire are referred to them, but in the 
simplest prose history, as where the pestilences 
which slew the firstborn (Ex. xii. 23 ; Heb. xi. 
28), the disobedient people in the wilderness 
(1 Cor. X. 10), the Israelites in the days of 
David (2 Sam. xxiv. 16 ; 1 Ch. xxi. 16), and 
the army of SeunacHcrib (2 K. lix. 35), as also 
the plague which cat off Herod (Acts xii. 23), 
are plainly spoken of as the work of the " Angel 
of the Lord." Nor can the mysterious declara- 
tions of the Apocalypse, by far the most nume- 
rous of all, be resolved by honest interpretation 
into mere poetical imagery (see especially Rev. 
viii. and ix.). It is evident that angelic agency, 
like that of man, does not exclude the action 
of secondary, or (what are called) " natural " 
causes, or interfere with the directness and uni- 
versality of the Providence of God. The per- 
sonifications of poetry and legends of mytho- 
logy are obscure witnesses of its truth, which, 
however, can rest only on the revelations of 
Scripture itself. 

More particularly, however, Angels arc 
spoken of as ministers of what is commonly 
called the "supernatural," or perhaps, more 
correctly, the " spiritual " Providence of God ; 
as agents in the great scheme of the spiritual 
redemption and saactification of man, of which 
the Bible is the record. The representations of 
them are different in different Books of Scrip- 
ture, in the Old Testament and in the New ; but 
the reasons of the differences are to be found 
in the differences of sco|)e attributable to the 
Books themselves. As different parts of God's 
Providence are brought out, so also arise dif- 
ferent views of His angelic ministers. 

In the Book of Job, which deals with "Na- 
tural Religion," they are spoken of but vaguely, 
as surrounding God's throne above, and rejoicing 
m the completion of His creative work (Job i. 6 ; 
ii. 1 ; xxxviii. 7). No direct and visible appear- 
ance to man is even hinted at. 

In the Book of Genesis, there is no notice of 
angelic appearance till after the call of Abraham, 
Then, as the Book is the history of the choam 
family, so the Angels mingle with and watch 
over its family life, entertained by Abraham 
and by Lot (Gen. xviii., xix.), guiding Abra- 
ham's servant to Padan-aram (xxiv. 7, 40), seen 
by the fugitive Jacob at Bethel (xxviii. 12), and 
welcoming his return at Mahanaim (xxxii. 1). 
Their ministry hallows domestic life, in its trials 
and its blessings alike, and is closer, more fami- 
liar, and less awful than in after-times (contrast 
Gen. xviii. with Judg. vi. 21, 22 j xiii. 16, 22). 

In the subsequent history, that of a chosen 
nation, the Angels are represented more as 
ministers of wrath and mercy, messengers of a 
King, rather than common children of the One 
Father. It is, moreover, to be observed, that 
the records of their appearance belong especially 
to two periods, that of the Judges and that of 
the Captivity, which were transition periods in 
Israelitish history, the former one destitute of 
direct revelation or prophetic guidance, the 
latter one of special trial and contact 
with heathenism. During the lives of Moses 
and Joshua there is no record of the appearance 
of created Angels, and only obscure reference to 


Angels at all. In the Book of Judges Aagds 
appear at once to rebuke idolatry (iL 1-i), to 
call Gideon (vi. 11, &c.), and consecrate Sanisoi 
(xiii. 3, &c.) to the work of deliveraDce. 

The prophetic office begins with Sunoel, ami 
immediately angelic guidance is withheld, eicept 
when needed by the prophets themselves (1 K. 
xix. 5; 2 K. vi. IT). During the iirojihetic ind 
kingly period. Angels are spoken of only (k 
noticed above) as ministers of God in the open- 
tions of nature. Bnt in the Captivity, vhcD the 
Jews were in the presence of foreign natiooi, 
each claiming its tutelary deity, then to the 
Prophets Daniel and Zechariah, Angels >re re- 
vealed in a fresh light, as w.itching. not ooly 
over Jerus.ilem, but also over heathen king- 
doms, under the Providence, and to work out 
the designs, of the Lord (see Zech. piuin, I 
and Dan. iv. 13, 23 ; x. 10, 13, 20, 21, 4c.). la ' 
the whole period, they, as traly as the Prophet" ; 
and kings themselves, are seen as God's mini.'- ■ 
ters, watching over the national life of the sub- 
jects of the Great King. 

The Incarnation marks a new epoch of angelic 
ministration. " The Angel of Jehovah," Ike 
Lord of all created Angeb, having now dcscenJei 
from heaven to earth, it was natural that Hl< 
servants should continue to do Him senlce 
there. Whether to predict and glorify His birtk 
iUelf (Matt. i. 20 ; Luke I ii.), to minister t. 
Him after His temptation and agonv (U>U. 
iv. 11 ; Luke xxii. 43), or to declare His R««r- 
rection and triumphant Ascension(Matt. isriii.-; ] 
John XX. 12 ; Acts i. 10, 11)— they seem no» t« ' 
be indeed " ascending and descending on the Son < 
of Man," almost as though transferring to earth i 
the ministrations of heaven. It is clearly stea, 
that whatever was done by them for men in 
earlier days, was but typical of and flowing ffo , 
their ser^-ice to Him (see Ps. xci. 11 ; cp. M«U- 
iv. 6). 

The New Testament is the history of 'i^' , 
Church of Christ, every member of which i> 
united to Him. Accordingly, the Angels «; 
revealed now, as " ministering spirits " to eacii 
in/litidual member of Christ for his spiritujl 
guidance and aid (Heb. i. 14). The records rl 
their visible appearance are but infrequent 
(Acts V. 19; viii. 26; x. 3; xii. 7; iiviL2S). 
but their presence imd their aid are referred t( 
familiarly, almost as things of course, ever after 
the Incarnation. They are spoken of as watch- 
ing over Christ's little ones' (Matt, xviii I")- 
as rejoicing over a penitent sinner (Luke iv. KO. 
as present in the worship of Christians (1 Cot. 
xi. 10)" and (perhaps) bringing their plaJe^ 
before God (Rev. viii. 3, 4X and as bearing tht 
souls of the redeemed into Paradise (Luke J^;' 
22). In one word they are Christ's ministers "f 
grace now, as they shall be of judgment hen- 
after (Matt. xiii. 39, 41, 49 ; xvi. 27 ; xxiv. 'il- 
&c.). By what method they act we caiin"t 
know of ourselves, nor are we told, perhaps le.^t 

« The notion of special guardian Angels, witchl'f 
over individuals, is consistent with this passage, bnt tmA 
necessarily deduced from it. The belief of it among t!» 
early Christians is shown by Acta xii. 15. 

^ The difficulty of the piassge has led to its btiiK 
questioned, but the wording of the original and tbr 
nwge of the K. T. seem almost decisive on the pciut 
Sec i^iKatcur'i Comm. in loco. 

Digitized by 



ire shonlii n-onhip them, instead of Him, Whose 
s«rraiit3 they aft (see Col. ii. 18 ; Rer. xxii. 9) ; 
bet of course their agency, like that of human 
niiaifters, depends for its efficacy on the aid of 
tlie Holy Spirit. 

Sach is the action of God's Angels on earth, as 
ilisdosed to ns in the rarioas stages of Rerela- 
tioo; that of the evil angels may be better 
.'[oken of elsewhere [Satas] : here it is enough 
to say that it is the direct opposite of their true 
I'rijiial office, but permitted under God's orer- 
roliog Providence to go on until the judgment 

That there are degrees of the angelic nature, 
fillenud unfallen, and special titles and agencies 
belonging to each, is clearly declared by St. Paul 
(Kpb. I 21; Rom. viii. 38); bnt what their 
genenl nature is, it is needless for ns to know, 
ruid therefore useless to speculate. For what 
little is known of this special nature see CuERU- 
Bin, Seraphiii, Michael, Gabriel. [A. B.] 

On the subject generally consult Oehler, 
TSeohga of the Old Testament (index, s. n.) ; 
:«hultx,Xr. Theologie* (index, s. n.); Cremer, 
BM. theol. WSrterinicA d. N. T. Gradtat* s. v. 
irfV^t (S. T. usage); Everling, Die Paulin- 
isclu AHgeiologie u. Bainonologie ; ai-ticle "Angel" 
in IM. of ChriatioH Antiqq., Diet, of Christian 
Dh^raplig, and in Eitto's Cyclopedia'; "Engel " 
in Eiehm's HWB. (Delitzsch), Herzog, BK* 
(Kubtl), Hamburger, ££., Weber, System der 
alUyMjogaUn Palastinischen Theologie (index, 
'.«. The last two writers give also the Rabbinic 
upinions) ; Wetzer u. Welte's Kirch. Lex. (which 
jires the R. C. teaching) ; Martensen, Christian 
Inpiatia, $$ 68-71 ( Clark's For. Theol. Lib.); 
i3i the Excursus on AngeMogy in the Speaier's 
'Momtary on Tobit, p. 171, &c (which brings 
together the development of this subject in the 
0. T., the Apocrypha, pseud-epigraphic writings, 
liter Jewish writings, and Assyrian documents). 
Consolt also the list of works in D. B., Amer. 
edit. [K.] 

AXGLKG. [Fbhino.] 

ASI'AM (Dr^JK, Ges. = lamentation of the 
I'-'Tfie ; A. 'Avut^ B. 'AXtoKtl/x ; Aniam"), name 
'f 3 Manascite, and son of Shemidah (1 Ch. vii. 
IS). [F.] 

ATOM (D'31?, perhaps springs or foimUxins 
^C:^'; A. 'Awi/i, B. \laiii; Anim), a city 
■u the mountains of Jndah, named with Esbte- 
"«li ia-Semi'a) and Goshen (Josh. xv. 50). 
iwbius and Jerome (05.' pp. 129. 18, 240. 19, 
AfMS Anim) mention a place of this name in j 
"•nma, nine miles south of Hebron (cp. also 
^ino, a V. Anab). It is now possibly Ohwcein, 
•wot eleven miles south of Hebron and not far 
•^m o-Sma'a (Knobel ; P. F. Mem. iii. 40,3 ; 
^'^ Lands of the Bil>U,\.ZU). [G.] [W.] 

ANISE [3 syll.] (S^jflor; cmethum). This 
""(1 wears only in Matt, xxiii. 23, " Woe unto 
f'H, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites ! for ye pay 
'ith( of mint and anise and cummin." 't^vriBoy 
'Joold probably be translated " dill " {Anethwn 
•'■Twfew); io R. V. margin — a common gnrden 
wb of the order Umbetliferae, which is found 
^■«;i wild and cultiratsd in Palestine. Another 

■ Though this would normally be r\\3^D- 



claimant is the Anise (Pimpinella anistmi), be- 
longing to the same order, and also found in the 
country wild, though not so generally cultivated. 
They are inconspicuous plants, resembling the 
caraway, and are much alikein external character; 
the seeds of both, moreover, are and have been 
long employed in medicine and cookery, as con- 
diments and carminatives. Celsius (_Hierob. i. 
494 sq.y quotes several passages from ancient 
writers to show that the dill was commonly so 
used. Pliny uses the term anisum to expres,i 
the Pimpinella anisum, and anethum to represent 
the common dill ; he enumerates as many as 
sixty-one diseases that the anisvun is able to 

PImptiMlU saiiam. 

cure, and says that on this account it is some- 
times called anicctum.'' The best anise, he adds, 
comes from Crete ; and next to it that of Egypt 
is preferred (Plin. If. X. xi. 17). Forskil 
{Descript. Plant. 154) includes the anise 
(Janlsun, Arabic*) in the Materia Medica ot 
Egypt. Dr. Royle is decidedly in favour of the 
dill* being the proper translation, and -says that 
the anethum' is more especially a genus of 
Eastern cultivation than the other plant. The 
strongest argument in favour of the dill is the 
fact that the Talmud (Tract Masaroth, c. iv. 

^ From a, nott and ftxaw, to conquer. It should be 
noted that Dtuscorldea usee iriiarrov, for dill, and not 


anisum, v. Ool. jlroJ. I«c. s. v. 

* Bill, so called from the old >fo™e word, the nurse's 
lullaby, (<i(ii7' o Kothe. Hence the name of the car- 
uiinstivc plant. n<. dUling op toothing herb (Me Wedgw. 
Did. Engl. Elijmnt.). 

• ifteov: according to an ab^nid etymology, iro^ to 
a«u $eit', fica rriv iv raxti ovfiraLc (Btym. Mag, ed. 

Digitized by 





§ 5) uses the word ahabdth to express the dill, 
'* The seeds, the leares, and the stem of dill 
are, according to Itabbi Eliezer, subject to 
tithe ;" and in connexion with this it should be 

Oonmon Dill (Atuthnm aravtalev). 

stated, that Forsk&l several times alludes to the 
Ancthum graveolem as growing both in a culti- 
Tated and a wild state in Egypt, and he uses the 
Arabic name for this plant, which is identical 
with the Hebrew word, viz. Sjotbet, or Schiht 
(Descr. Plant. 65, 109). 

CeUius remarks upon the difference of opinion 
amongst the old authors who have noticed this 
plant, some maintaining that it has an agreeable 
taste and odour, others quite the opposite ; the 
solution of the difficulty is clearly that the 
matter is simply one of opinion. 

There is another plant very dissimilar in ex- 
ternal character to the two named above, the 
leaves and capsules of which are powerfully car- 
minative. This is the aniaeed-tree (Illicium ani- 
setiim), which belongs to the natural order 
Maiinvllaccae. In China this is frequently used 
for seasoning dishes, &c. ; but the species of this 
genus are not natives of the Bible lands, and 
must not be confused with the Umbelliferous 
plants noticed in this article. [W.H.] [H.B.T.] 

AXKLET (irtpurKf\l8fs, w4Scu irtpia^ipiot, 
Clem. Alex.). This word only occurs in Is. iii. 
18, D'D3i;, A. V. " tinkling ornaments," R. V. 
" anklets " (and as a proper name, Josh. liii. 
16); unless such ornaments are included in 
n^yy^. Num. xixi. 50, which word etymo- 
logically would mean rather an anklet than a 
bracelet. Indeed, the same word is used in 
is. iii. 20 (without the Aleph prosthetic) for 
the " stepping-chains worn by Oriental women, 
fastened to the ankle-band of each leg, so that 
they were forced to walk elegantly with short 
steps " (Gesen. s. t-.). They were as common as 
bracelets and armlets, and made of much the 
same materials; the pleasaut jingling and 
tinkling which they made as they knocked 
against each other, was no doubt one of the 

reasons why they were admired (la. iii. 16, 1'*, 
"the .bravery of their tinkling omaments"). 
To increase this pleasant sound pebbles utrr 
sometimes enclosed in them (Calmet, s. r. Pci />■ 
celis and Bella). The Arabic name " klu.i- 
khal " seems to be onomatopoesn, an I 
Lane (^ifod. Egypt. App. A) quotes frcii' 
a song, in allusion to the pleasure oiuse i 
by their sound, "the ringing of thin* 
anklets has deprived me of ressoo." 
Hence Mohammed forbade them in \w- 
lic : " Let them not make a noise <in 
their feet, that their omameots whki 
they hide may [thereby] be discovwod ■" 
(Koran, xxiv. 31, quoted by Lane). Xo 
doubt TertuUian discountenances thru: 
for similar reasons : " Nescio an crui J; 
periscelio in nervum se patiatur .ircuri. 
. . . Pedes domi figite et pins quam in 
auro placebunt " (3e cult, ft-rnin. ii. 13). 
Clemens Alexandrinus further objects i ■ 
anklets because amatory inscriptioDs, ii. 
were sometimes engraved on them (Pit '. 
ii. 11). 

They were sometimes of great vain:. 

Lane speaks of them (although theTif" 

getting uncommon) as "made of fiii 

gold or silver" {Mod. E<j<iit. L c.); b-il 

he says that the poorer village chiUM 

wear them of iron. For their use am' r:; 

the ancient Egyptians, sec Wilkinitn, ii. 

339 (1878); and among the ancient Grefts 

and Romans, Plin. H. N. xxxiii. 12, Did, or O'i 

and Horn. Ant. art. Pmacelis. They Jo not, se 

believe, occur in the Nineveh sculptures. 

Modem Igrpdaa i nMrta i m e-fonrth of Uw reil da- 

Livingstone writes of the favourite wife oisn 
African chief, " She wore a profusion of iyoa 
rings on her ankles, to which were .nttacie-l 
little pieces of sheet iron to enable her to make 
a tinkling as she walked in her miucing Afriou 
style" (p. 273). On the weight and inwi- 
venience of the copper rings worn by the chin* 
themselves, and the odd walk it causes them t>' 
adopt, see id. p. 276. 

Consult Ges. Theaaur. s. v. D?l? : ScbroJer.ft 
Vest. p. 1 27 ; Rosenmitller, Z>(« aUe u.h. .Vori^n". 
iv. 212 ; id. Scluilia in lesaiaiii, iii. 16 ; Bynjeo:i 
<fc Calceia Ilcbracontm, i, c. viii. [F. W. F] 

AN'NA (nan, grace; 'Awo; Anm). The 
name occurs in Punic as the sister of PiJ<'> 
1. The mother of Samuel (I K. i. 2 sq.). [Has- 
NAH.] 2. The wife of Tobit (Tob. i. 9 s^'). 
8. The wife of Raguel (Tob. vii. 2.5q.; n:!!: 
Heb. and Chald. [ed. Neubauer] ; 'ESri ; Hal*, 
Anna). 4. A " prophetess " in Jerusalem it the 
time of our Lord's birth (Luke ii. 36). [B. F. W.] 

Digitized by 



AUTiAJiS (A. 3ardas, B. iaiui; Anaai), 
1 £«d. r. 23. [Si2fAAH.] 

AN'NAS. 1. 'Ayyas or 'Afros, shortened 
rorm of the faller'Aywos employed by Josepha3 ; 
Heb. 1^11, merdful, some name as Hanan. 
He waa the son of Seth, and was appointed 
Ugh-priest by Quirinios (Ctrenivs), a.d. 6 
(Joieph. Ant. xriii. 2, 1). He was displaced by 
Vilerias Gratiu at the beginning of the reign 
ti nbentu, about A.O. 15, and Ismael, son of 
Phabi, was appointed in his stead (Joseph. AnU 
iriii. 2, 1). Daring this period the Romans ap- 
pointed and removed the high-priests, either 
ilinctly as was done by Qnirinius and Gratus, or 
by delegation of their power to a native prince. 
Annas was considered " very fortunate " in that 
he bad lire sons, all * of whom filled the 
hjgh-priestly office (Joseph. Ant, ix. 9, 1). They 
vtit (1) Eleazar, A.O. 16-17; (2) Jonathan, 
U). 36-37; (3) Theophilus, A.D. 37; (4) 
Matthias, three or four years later ; and lastly, 
(o) Anasas, A.D. 62, who only retained office for 
three months. The office was also held by his 
soD-u-Iav, Joseph Caiaphas, A.D. 18-36 (John 
iviii. 13). The notices of Annas in the Mew 
Testament by (1) St. Lake, (2) St. John, present 
Mat difficulty. (1) St. Luke (Luke iii. 2, and 
Acts iv. 6) gives him the title of high-priest 
(ifXitftit) at periods both of which fall after his 
mnonl from office ; and in the earlier passage 
the year ii dated as that of his high-priesthood 
ia conjunction with Caiaphas, though the 
Illogical form of expression (^tI iLpx^'P^"^ 'Kyya 
ui Kouifa) is such »s to give the notion that 
there were two conflicting ideas in the writer's 
mind ; namely, one actual officiating high-priest, 
sad two men exercising conjointly the iuUuence 
of the office. (3) St. John, though not quite 
certainly describing Annas as high-priest (John 
xriii. \i, 19), yet assigns to him the first exa- 
minatioa of Christ after His arrest (John xriii. 
13. On the place and division of the examina- 
tions, see Westoott's Commentary, ad loc. ; and 
for another view, Gdersheim's Life and Times of 
the Meaiah, Bk. V. xiii.). The part aiisignod by 
^ John to Annas is held by objectors (Keim, 
Jetu of Sazard) to be inconsistent with the 
historical fact of the high-priesthood of Caiaphas, 
and with the narratives of the Synoptists which 
omit Annas entirely. The difficnlties arising 
Iran St Luke (the title of high-priest) and from 
St John (the part taken by Annas) will be best 
tnated separately. (1) The title ipx"P*^' — 
oaly once (Lev. ir. 3) in LXX., excluding the 
Apocrypha-— is ambiguous in Josephus. It may 
■atao the acting high-priest, or it may mean 
•»» of that body collectively called " the chief 
priests" (ot ipx><p<<s) both in Josephus and 
ihe X. T. passim (bat see especially Mark xiv. 
•>■% where sing, and plur. occur in the same 
Tene). It was a large body (woAAoitj twk 
VxKp^v, Joseph. Vit. 'M), and rank was pro- 
inWy taken in it by age {£. J. iv. 4, 3). Thus 
JoMphns mentions together as " high-priests," 



* Tbe frequent changes may bare been partly due to 
tW tKt tbat the office Inrolred tbe practice of austerities 
vhicli rich and ariAtocratic persons did not caro to un- 
<>en>ke far more than a year (see Derenbourg, St$ai 
•>r etMairt el la aeoffrttphii de la Paltttint, zUl. 

or rather " chief priests," one who had filled the 
office (Jonathan), and was then an infiuentinl 
member of " the chief priests," and Ananias, the 
high-priest actually in office at the time (roui 
ifx>*P"^ 'laydStiy ical 'Ayariay, B. J. ii. 12, 6). 
He assigns the first place not to the actual high- 
priest, but to the (probably) elder man. We 
hare here an exact parallel to "Annas and 
Caiaphas" (Luke iii. 2). Another probabli; 
instance occurs (Joseph. Vit. 38). Annas is calleil 
chief priest (ipx'ep*") ** o"* "f the chief priests 
(&f>X'<P<^<)> ""^ "*>' simply as a past high-priest, 
though that alone would be sufficient explana- ' 
tion. The qualifications for being reckoned one 
of the iipxuptis cannot be discussed here, but 
see Schilrer, Neatest. Zeitgeschichte, pp. 420-3 ; 
id. Getck. d. JOdiachen Volket,^ ii. pp. 166-174. 
(2) The part taken by Annas (John xviii.) in the 
trial of Christ was due to his dominant influence 
in the aristocratic (Jos. Ant. xx. 10) Jewish 
constitution. This influence was not given him 
by the advancement of his sons as described 
above, but was the cause of their advancement. 
Schiirer instances three other past high-priests 
who continued after their removal to exercise an 
influence like that of Annas ; namely, Jonathan, 
Ananias, and Ananus (see hia reff. to Josephus). 
Hence there is no occasion with Wieseler 
(Herzog, £E,* a. v, Annas) to contend for a 
president of the Sanhedrin other than the high- 
priest, to assign this office to Annas, and to Iwse 
on this his claim to the title of ipxuptis, and 
to the first examination of Christ. 

On the booths of the sons of Annas, their 
situation, and their identification with the 
Temple Market, see Edersheim, Life and Times 
of the Messiah, Bk. 111. r. On the general 
question, see Schiirer, Neutest. Zeitgeschichte, 
§ 23, whose view has on the whole been adopted 
above, and comp. art. CAlAPHAa. See for Wiese- 
ler's view art. Annas in Herzog, RE.* [E. R. B.] 

2. B. 'Ajviy, A. 'Avris ; Nuas. In the parallel 
lists called Habim (1 £sd. ix. 32 ; cp. Ezra x. 31). 

ANNU'US (B. [v. 47] omits, A.'Awowoj; 
Amin [v. 49], 1 Esd. riii. 48). Probably a mis- 
reading of ^FIK (A.V. "with him") in Ezra 
viii. 19. The translator may hare read )3M- 
[W.A. W.] [F.] 

ANOINT (TV^, or "JfiO; xp'". iA«'^; 
ungo). Of the two Hebrew words the former is 
used chiefly, though not eiclusirely (e.g. Amos 
vi. 6), of religious or official anointings, whereas 
the latter appears to be confined to the ordinary 
anointing of the body. The LXX. use xf^a and 
&\«l^w as tbe rendering of both Hebrew words, 
though they more frequently render fli^ by 
Xpla and Ij^D by iXtlipa. In the N. T. xp'w 
and its derivatives (xptirfia, xP'T^t) are used 
exclnsirely in a metaphorical or spiritual sense, 
iXel^o being reserred for material unction. 
Once (Mark xir. 8) luipiia is used. In Ps. xxiii. 
5, "Thou anointest my head with oil," the 
Hebrew is BJ?''?, " Thou hast made fat ;" LXX., 
i\litatras; Vulg., impinguasti. In Ps. xcii. 10 

(Heb. tj. 11) it U »rt;>3, lit. "I am drenched" 
(Kay : R. V. " anointed ") ; the word being 
elsewhere rendered " mingled " (Ler. ii. 4, 5 } 
Num. rii. 13, 19). 
The word " anoint " is used in Holy Scripture, 

Digitized by 




I. Of a personal and social custom ; II. Of a re- 
ligious or inaugural rite; and III. In a meta- 
phorical or spiritual sense. 

I. A personal and social custom. — Amongst 
the Jews, as amongst other ancient nations, the 
practice of anointing the body by rubbing in oil 
or other unguents prevailed commonly (Deut. 
xxviii. 40; Ruth iii. 3; Mic. vi. 15). Such 
anointing appears to have been regarded, not 
only as contributing to health and comfort, and 
invigorating the body (comp. the use of oil in 
the gymnasium by the Greelts, Thucyd. i. 6; 
and the names t iXtbmis, the trainer, oi 
a\ci^^jii«'oi, the gymnasts), but as conducing to 
personal comeliness : " to maltc the face to shine 
with oil " (Ps. civ. 15. Cp. Prov. xivii. 9). 

1. Festal. — Hence the practice came to have 
a festal character, and to talce its place among 
the rites of hospitality. With the Egyptians, 
though " it is probable that like the Greeks they 
anointed themselves before they left home, yet 
still it was customary for a servant to attend 
every guest, as he seated himself, and to anoint 
his head ; and this was one of the principal 
toicens of welcome " (Wilkinson, Ancient Egyp- 
tians, i. 77, 78 [1878], who adds that the 
ointment was " sweet-scented," and " was con- 
tained sometimes in an alabaster, sometimes in 
an elegant porcelain vase "). In like manner 
with the Jews, anointing the bead with oil or 
ointment was a mark of respect and welcome 
paid by a host to his guests (Ps. xxiii. 5 ; 
Matt. xxvi. 7 ; John xi. 2, xii. 3). The de- 
signed omission of this customary attention by 
the Pharisee, whose guest He was, is noticed by 
our Lord (Luke vii. 46), From this festal and 
luxurious usage, to be anointed with oil came to 
signify metaphorically to be in the enjoyment 
of success or prosperity (Ps. xcii. 10[Heb. v. 11]. 
Op. Eccles. ix. 8 ; Wisd. ii. 7). On the other hand, 
tlie festal character of anointing is shown by 
the discontinuance of it being looked upon as 
a sign of mourning (2 Sam. xii. 20, xiv. 2 ; 
Dan. X. 3 ; Matt. vi. 17). 

2. funereal. — ^The use of anointing as a mark 
of honour and respect, together with the desire 
to preserve the body from corruption, led to the 
practice of anointing a corpse with ointment, as 
well as to strewing with spices the folds of linen 
in which the limbs were wound. Both these 
)>rocesses are spoken of as " anointing " in con- 
nexion with the burial of our Lord. When the 
woman poured the precious ointment upon His 
head. He said, " In that she poured this oint- 
ment Mfon My body, she did it to prepare Me 
fur burial " (Matt. xxvi. 12, R.V.). Of the holy 
women who came to the sepulchre we read 
that they "prepared spices and ointments" 
(l.uke xxiii. .56), and that they '* bought spices 
tliat they might come and anoint Him " (Mark 
xvi. 1). 

3. Medicinal. — The beneficial effect of anoint- 
ing with oil or ointment was not restricted to 
the body in health. Oil wi>s universally be- 
lieved to have curative properties in or 
sickness [Oil,]. And the Jews did not differ 
from otiier nations in this particular. Thus 
Isaiah speaks of wounds and sores which have 
not been " mollified with oil " (i. 6), and the 
Good Samaritan pours "oil and wine" (the 
approved remedies of both Greek and Roman 
physiciaas) into the wounds of him who had 


fallen among robbers (Luke x. 34). There was 
consequently a certain appropriateness, thongl 
we cannot suppose that there v.-u any virtue, 
inasmuch as the cure was entirely supernatural, 
in the symbol chosen by our Lord and Hit 
Apostles, when they anointed the blind villi 
clay (John ii. 6, 1 1), or the sick with oil (Mark 
vi. 13), and by St. James in his well-knowa 
direction to the elders of the Church (r. U). 

4. Anointing the shield. — Before going iuto 
battle it was customary to rub oil or grease intn 
the leather or hide which was stretched over 
the framework of the shield, in order to mal:e it 
supple, and that the strokes which fell upon it 
might the more readily glide off. If the shield 
were of metal, it was anointed to cleanse ami 
furbish it. Op. Virg. Aen. vii. 626, 027 : 
" Purs leves clypece et spicuU ludda tergunt 
Arvtna plngui.'* 
To this custom Isaiah refers, in describing tbe 
sudden call to arms, in the midst of feasting, 
when Babylon was taken : " Rise up, ye priaces, 
anoint the shield " (xif. 5 ; LXX. 4T0i/iiircr< 
Buptois ; Vulg., arripite ditpeum). -Wtlier 
allusion to it is to b« found in 2 Sam. i. -1. 
where the words " not anointed with oil " «e 
taken by modem commentators to refer not t» 
Saul but to his shield, which was '* east awsT, 
not anointed with oil " [so R. V.], ue. left stained 
and polluted with the blood of its owner (cp. 
Speaker's Comm. or Keil), no longer polisliel 
and ready to be worn, but lying neglected upon 
the mountains. 

II. Reliijious or inaugural. — The earliest es- 
ample in the Bible of consecration by anointing 
is when Jacob, awaking from his dream >t 
Bethel, " took the stone that he had put for his 
pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured 
oil upon the top of it " (Gen. xsnii. 18. Cp. 
ixxv. 14). "In all ages of primitive history, 
such monuments are, if we may so call them, 
the earliest ecclesiastical edifices. In Greece- 
there were rude stones at Delphi, still visible in 
the second century, anterior to any temple, and, 
like the rock of Bethel, anointed (Pans. vii. 2'2,- 
X. 24) with oil by the pilgrinns who came 
thither. In Northern Africa, Arnobins, after 
his conversion, describes the kind of fascination 
which had drawn him towards one of those aged 
stones, streaming and shining with the sacred oil 
which had been poured upon it " (.^mcbius adr. 
Gent. i. 39. Cp. Stanley, Jeicish Church, i. 60). 
At the introduction of the Mosaic economy, the 
Tabernacle and all its furniture were dedicated 
to the service of Almiehty God by being 
anointed with an " oil of holy ointment," for 
the composition of which special directions were 
given (Eiod. ixi. 22-29), and the employment 
of which for any secular purpose was to be- 
visited with the penalty of death (ep. 3 1-311). 
No mention is made of any such anointing in 
the case either of the first or second Temple: 
but as the " atnointing oil " was reckoned a part 
of the standing furniture of the Tatemacle 
(Exod. xxxix. 38), and was given perpetually ia 
charge to the high-priest; and as moreover it 
was in the Tabernacle in the time of Solomon 
(1 K. i. 39), and was " made " by '• some of the 
sons of the priests " (1 Ch. ix. 30) after the 
Captivity, it would seem probable that the cere- 
mony was not omitted. It is, however, in the 
official consecration of persons that the act of 

Digitized by 



uMiotiiig atUins its highest eigoificance in the 
4. T. foisting with oil was a rite of inauga- 

ntioa into each of the three typical otiicea of 
tile Jewish Commonwealth. As anointed, the 
touts of thoK .offices were types of the 
AajJDted One (H'^'^, xpuTrfi). 

1. Pri«t».— The holy oil, which was specially 
woponnded and used for the dedication of the 
Tiknucle and its furnitare, was also employed 
is the consecration of Aaron and his sons to the 
printbood (Ciod. xix. 30). At the first insti- 
tution of the office, all the priests were in some 
SCUM anointed (Eiod. xxriii. 41, xl. 15; Num. 
iii. 3), though, according to the best Hebrew 
uthorities, the high-priest alone had the oil 
paini on bis head (see Ler. ir. 3) ; and his sons 
vtn only anointed with the oil applied by the 
tinier m the forehead (see Reland, AtUig. ii. 
1, ; SeUen, de Success. Pontif. ii. 2 ; Keil, 
p. 56 ; Wordsworth on Lev. viii. 13). This dis- 
tinction between the original anointing of Aaron 
sod of his sons appears to be borne out by the 
nimtite in Lev. riii., where the oil is said to 
hire been poured upon the head of Aaron only 
(f. 12), whereas in the second and different 
miction of sprinkling it upon the person and the 
ginnentt (c. 30) his sons are iucloded. That 
«uh succeeding high-priest was anointed to his 
vlfice is undonbted (Lev. xvi. 32), but it has 
been questioned whether, after the first inaugu- 
ntioo, the ceremony was repeated in the case of 
ordissry priests. The title " the priest that is 
minted " (ri'^iDn \ri3n ; LXX., i ifXUftis, 
i nxpta/tfros), by which the high-priest is dis- 
tinguished (l«T. iv. 3, 5, 16 ; vi. 22 [Heb. r. 15]), 
vaj belong to him either as the sole anointed 
priest, or (ss seems more probable from its 
being osed at a time when we know that the 
coanvm priests were anointed) in consequence 
of the additional anointing which we have seen 
that he received. 

2. £n^. — We learn from Jotham's parable 
that the Jews were familiar with the idea of 
making a king by anointing, before the estab- 
lisiment of their own monarchy (Jndg. ix. 8, 
'•>! cp. 1 Sam. ii. 10). Their sojourn in 
%ypt wonld have taught them, that in that 
cniintrT, " one of the principal ceremonies con- 
oectcd with the coronation was the anointing of 
'.be kin;:, and his receiving the emblems of 
BijestT from the gods." The sculptures repre- 
•ent the gods themselves as anointing the king, 
lint it was no doubt done by the high-priest, 
clad in his official robe, a leopard skin, who thus 
conferred upon the king the title of "The 
uomted of the gods" (cp. "The anointed 
'f Jehovah," 1 Sam. ixiv. 6. Wilkinson, j4nc. 
^WX. i. 275 [1878]). The first king of Israel 
ou anointed to his office by the express com- 
^ of God (1 Sam. ix. 16; x. 1). On 
l^vid, his immediate successor, the ceremony 
*« thiice performed : first, privately by 

' iiMixr point of contact with the Jewish ordinance 
»l*b Wilkinson points ont is, that "as the Jewish law- 
^^ inentioDS the ceremony of pouring oil upon the 
l»«l of the hlgh-prlest, a/ttr he had put on bis entire 
*"»• with the mitre and crown (Exod. xzlx. 6, 1), ao 
t^ S^rptiAns r ep rese n t the anointing of their priests 
■M uii(B o/ter they were attired in their (nil robes, 
*1U the ctp and down npon their bead " (cp. 3 Kings 



Samuel, before the death of Saul, by way 
of conferring on him a right to the throne 
(1 Sam. xvi. 1, 13); again, as king over JudaK 
at Hebron (2 Sam. ii. 4) ; and finally, as king 
over the whole nation (2 Sam. v. 3). Whether 
anointing was practised on the accession of each 
new king has been doubted. Besides Saul and 
David, Solomon, Jehu, and Joash (1 K. i. 39 ; 
2 K. ix. 6, xi. 12) are distinctly said to have 
been anointed. But in these cases it is con- 
tended that disputed title to the throne, or 
change of dynasty, may account for the fact 
(Jabn, Archacol. Sibl. 223). Even, however, if 
we admit, in accordance with Jewish tradition, 
that after the separation into two kingdoms 
the kings of Israel were not ordinarily anointed, 
for lack of the sacred oil which was kept in the 
Temple at Jerusalem, it seems much more pro- 
bable that the custom still obtained with the 
kings of Judah. The designation of the king 
as " The Lord's anointed," which began with the 
institution of the monarchy (1 Sam. xii. 3, 5, 
xvi. 6, xxiv. 6, 10; 2 Sam. i. 14, xix. 21), was 
maintained, as it scarcely would have been it' 
the practice of anointing had been discontinued, 
even to the time of the Babylonian Captivitv 
(Ps. lixiix. 38, 51; Lam. iv. 20). Besides 
Jewish kings, Hazael was to be anointed king 
over Syria (1 K. xix. 15), i.e. not necessarily by 
performance of the outward rite, but by the 
declared will of Jehovah (2 K. viii. 13). Simi- 
larly, Cyrus is called the Lord's "anointed," ns 
having been raised by God to the throne for the 
special purpose of delivering the Jews out of 
Captivity (Is. xlv. 1). 

3. Prophets. — ^To the remaining typical order 
among t)>e Jews, that of Prophets, admission by 
anointing is not so clearly defined. Only one 
instance, that of Elisha, occurs in which it i» 
distinctly spoken of (1 K. xix. 16); and even 
there the expression may perhaps be used meta- 
phorically. Casting his mantle upon him 
(i>. 19) is the only action which Elijah is stated 
to have performed, in appointing Elisha to be 
his successor. Elsewhere the phrase, "Mine 
anointed," is found in the parallelism of Hebrew 
poetry, as the equivalent of "My Prophets" 
(Ps. cv. 15 ; 1 Ch. xvi. 22. Cp. Gen. xx. 7). 

III. Metaphorical or aptritual sense. — A fit 
emblem in itself of spiritual influences, both by 
its invigorating and exhilarating effects, and by 
its gentle and penetrating action, anointing with 
oil became intimately associated with such 
influences, through its constant and divinely 
appointed use, as the symbol of consecration and 
equipment for the service of God. Thus the 
N. T. writers found the term ready to their 
hand when they came to speak of the bestowal 
of the Holy Spirit, either (1) upon Christ, or 
(2) upon Christians. 

1. As regards our Lord Himself, He was both 
foretold (Dan. ix. 25, 26) and recognised (John 
i. 41) as the Messiah, or Christ, or Anointed. 
In many cases the 0. T. prophecy which so 
describes Him is quoted and applied to Him by 
the writers of the N. T. (cp. Ps. ii. 2 with Acts 
iv. 26, 27 ; Ps. xlv. 7 [Heb. r. 8] with Heb. i. 
9 ; Is. Ixi. 1 with Luke iv. 18). The historical 
fact that the Holy Ghost came upon Him is 
asserted (Matt. iii.'l6. Cp. John iii. 34), and is 
interpreted to mean that God "anointed" Him 
1 "with the Holy Ghost and with power" (Acts 

Digitized by 




1. 38). To prove that Jesus is Christ w«s a 
chief aim of the first preachers of Christianity 
when they dealt with Jews (Acts ix. 22; ivii. 

2, 3; xviii. 5, 28). By His official name of 
Christ or Anointed our Lord claimed for and 
gathered up into Himself, as their rightful owner 
and true exponent, all those typical oiBces of 
the earlier dispensation to which their occupants 
had been admitted by the ceremony of anointing. 

2. To Christians the same spiritual anointing 
descends from and is imparted by Him, the 
Head. The Psalmist already anticipates the 
truth, when he lilcens the spirit of unity among 
brethren to " the precious oil upon the head, 
that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's 
beard ; that came down upon the skirt of his gar- 
ments " (Ps. cxxxiii. 2, R. V.). The followers of 
Christ are said to be " anointed " by God (2 Cor. 
i. 21), and to " have an unction," or " anointing," 
" from the Holy One " (xpl^fh 1 John ii. 2o, 
27). With a reference to the medicinal proper- 
ties of oil or ointment, those who lack spiritual 
perception are exhorted to "anoint their eyes 
with eye-salve " ^KoXAoiptor iy-Xftaai rohs 
i^9a\iu)is, Rev. iii. 18). The actual use of 
anointing with oil as a material symbol of 
spiritual gifts, by the Christian Church at Bap- 
tism, or confirmation, or in " extreme unction," 
does not fall within the scope of this article. 
The reader is referred to the several articles in 
the Diet, of Christ. Antiq. and to Bingham's 
Origines Eccleaiast. [T. T. P.] 

A'NOS ("Ayvt ; Jonat). One of the sons of 
Maani, who had taken " strange wives," and put 
them away (1 Esd. ix. 34). [Vahiah.] [F.] 

ANT (n7DJ, nemdloA; ^p/ii){; formica'''). 
The ant is twice mentioned in the Book of 
Proverbs. In one passage it is held forth as a 
pattern of industry, in the other as a model of 
wisdom. As a pattern of industry, " Go to the 
ant, thou sluggard ; consider her ways, and be 
wise : which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, 
provideth her meat in the summer, and 
gathereth her food in the harvest " (Prov. vi. 
6-8). As a model of wisdom : " There be four 
things which are little upon the earth, but they 
are exceeding wise : the ants are a people not 
strong, yet they prepare their meat in the 
summer " (xxx. 24, 25). The natural interpre- 

• From 7l5J. o!»cimiij (Simon. Lex. Beb. cd. Winer). 
The derivation oftbe word Is nncertolQ. acacaius(rAcs.) 

ktncUned to derive It from the Arabic I '>."con8cendit. 

pec. prorcptando arborem reptandi vim babuisse vtde- 
tnr, node obtrectandl potestas profecta est." Vid. Qol. 
Arab. Lex. s. v. V. coqj. ** moti Inter sese pcrmisttquc 
flicat formicarun reptantium more." Cf. Mlchoelis. 
^j>. Lex. Beb. U. 1644, and Roeemnail. not. ad Bochart, 
iU.4«0. Is It not probable that the name n<m<UdA(trom 
75 J, •■ to cut ") was given to the ant from Its extreme 

tenuity at the Junction of the thorax and abdomen ? If 
the term insect Is applicable to any one living creature 
more than to another. It certainly U to the ant. JVemiJ- 
Idh Is the exact equivalent to itufct. Parkburst— i . v. 

70 (Iv.)— gives a slmlUr derivation. Another may be 
seen In Delltzsch on Prov. vl, 6. The English wonl ant 
appears to be an abbreviation of the form tmmet (Sax. 


tation of both these passages is that the ut 
proves her industry and wisdom by etonn; sp 
in summer a supply for winter use. It is atil 
known that not only the Jews, but the ancient 
Greeks and Romans, were acquainted vitli the 
habit of certain anta of storing up food, which it 
collected in the summer, for the winter's con- 

The earliest classical writers speak of the 
storing habits of the outs. Thus Uesiod (Z)a>s 
1, 14) writes, Kre t" ISpij tripoy dfiaToi, " when 
the provident collects its heap." Horace aUu(i« 
to its foresight (Sat. i. 1, 33-35).' So Aewp, in 
his familiar fable of the Ant and the Grasshopper. 
Plautus {Triit. ii. 4) speaks of money vtuiihln^- 
in a twinkling, like pappy-»eds throws to the 
ants. Virgil, in a familiar passage (Aea. n. 
402-407), compares the Trojaus hurrying their 
departure to the busy trains of harvesting anii. 
In fact, "As provident as an ant" was .is 
familiar a proverb as with us ".U btuy as> 
bee." Aelian, a writer on natural history in the 
time of Hadrian, gives a very full and detailej 
account of the habits of the ant (de Sat. iwH. 
ii. 25, and vi. 43), describing, among other (U- 
ticulars, two very curious examples of piondent 
instinct, which have been verified by receni 
observation, viz. the biting off the radicle "i 
the root of the seed when it begins to gemi- 
nate ; and also the fact of some of the ants, 
when harvesting, climbing up the stalb anJ 
nibbling off the seed capsules, which fall amnnf! 
the workers below, who then detach the hoik 
or chaff, before carrying off the grain an>l 
storing it in their subterranean granaries. 

But to the Bible student the most interesting 
evidence of the observed habits of ants among 
ancient writers is to be found in the Mishia, 
compiled by Hillel, the Jewish Rabbi, aJKot 
the time of our Saviour, and which is valnaUe 
as a record of a multitude of very ancient 
customs and observances, which, but for it, 
would probably have been long ago forgotten. 
The first section, called Zcraim, is occnpie'l 
about seeds and crops. In the chapter "i< 
Angulo " in the Latin Vei-sion, which trests ol 
the comer of the fields bearing crops, which 
should be set aside for the poor, and of the 
rights of the gleaners, we are told that the 
granaries of ants (formicaram cavemulae) which 
may be found in the midst of a growing crop if 
corn, shall belong to the owner of the crop; 
but if these granaries are found aAer tit 
reapers have passed, the upper part of wli 
heap shall go to the poor, and the lower part t j 
the owner. It is added that Rabbi Meir «a^ 'i' 
opinion that the whole should go to the Y*>'- 
because whenever any doubt arose about '> 
question of gleaning, the decision should he in 
favour of the gleaner. The reason for thi* 
quaint piece of legislation seems to have be*" 
this : If the stores were found among the sting- 
ing corn or while the reapers were at work, the 
owner might undoubtedly claim them ; but if 
they were discovered after the reapers h*' 

» " Parviila (nam cxempio est) magnl fonnlca Isborb 
Ore trahlt quodcunque potest, stqne addlt aoecto 
Quern fltruit, liaud Ignara ac non incauta fnttui" 
Hot. Sol. L 1. 1 
Cp. also Ovid, Met. vil. 6J4; Vlrg. Georg. 1. 186, i»- '• 
402; PUn. xl. 30 ; Aelian, H. A. II. 2S. vi. 43, te. 

Digitized by 



fustd, it was presnmable that the ants, who 
hail oerer ceased their labours, might have 
collected some grains of fallen com, which 
vonld pertain of right to the gleaners. These 
grains would be the last gathered, and there- 
fore woald lie on the top of the store. The 
regslation is not only interesting as an illnstra- 
tiim of the microscopic habit of mind of those 
who "tithed mint and anise and cummin," but 
ti proring that the harvesting ants of Syria had 
unwil a place among these lavrs by amassing 
stores of sufficient size and so deposited as to 
make them worth collecting. 

Bit why has there been any difficulty on the 
robject ? The language of the wise man is in 
accordance not only with the universal belief of 
li!i time, but with the accurately ascertained 
futs of natural history. Much is due to the 
lite Hr. J. T. Moggridge, who studied and 
elucidated the habits of the harvesting ants in 
his interesting volumes Harvesting Ants and 
Trapdoor Spiers, London, 1873-4. Kirby and 
Spenoe stated accurately enough that none of 
the aofiitm European ants made any hoard or 
nuguise of grmn for winter un. All the 
English, French, and German naturalists have 
repeated the statement without question, of all 
European snts. Latreille, Huber, and others 
sdded the weight of their authority, drawn only 
from northern experiences; and subsequent 
compilers like Blanchard, and commonplace 
oi>)ectors to the accuracy of Holy Writ, have 
caught it up and generalized upon it. The 
resnlt of further investigation has shown with 
vhst care the gmeraluatiom of even the ablest 
oiiwrTers are to be received, and how often they 
dogmatize from insufficient data, while, as has 
often happened in other cases, the accuracy of 
Scripture and of ancient authorities has been in 
the end triumphantly vindicated. It is true 
that of the 104 species known to inhabit Europe, 
only three — Atta barbara, Atta structor, and 
PieiMe megacephala — are known to lay up 
stores for winter. How then, it may be asked, 
does it come that the ancients were familiar 
with the storing habits of the ant, while the 
modenu remained in ignorance of them ? Simply 
becsDse these species are commonest on the 
Mediterranean shores, and have not been noticed 
ia the north of Europe. The long trains of 
hsrresten remain conspicuous in the fields in 
the south for hours together, while Atta structor 
is in the habit of frequenting the neighbourhood 
ud even the interior of towns, and is a familiar 
object to everyone on the Mediterranean coasts. 
Contrary to their habits in colder climates, the 
ants are not there dormant in winter, and among 
the tamarisk trees by the Dead Sea they may i>e 
Men in January actively engaged in collecting 
i>(>'>ides and saccharine exudations, in long file 
passing and repassing up and down the branches. 
B<it it is said the ants are not graminivorous, 
lat snimai feeders. True of the great family 
Pirmca, with the species of which we are 
Miliar here, but the most common species of 
the Holy Land, Atta barbara and Atta structor, 
sre (tiictly seed-feeders, and in summer lay up 
IsTge stores of grain for winter use. Even 
reesntly M. G. de St. Pierre (Ants and Spiders, 
^ 29) mentions the depredations made among 
the com crop* at Hyires by these ants. Col. 
Sjkes (Trans. EtU. Soc. Land. ii. 103) records 



the harvesting habits of an Indian species, Atta 
providens, and gives a detailed account of his 
observations, being, as be states, the more care- 
ful in his notes, from the denial of this habit by 
European naturalists. Dr. Jerdon, too, describes 
(^Madras Jour. Lit. and Sci. 1851) similar storing 
habits in Atta rafa and Oeoodoma diffusa. Mr. 
C. Home (Science Gossip, 1872, p. 109) gives 
similar details of another Indian species, and Dr. 
Buchanan White corroborates Mr. Moggridge's 
account of the Italian ants {Trans. Ent. Soc. 
Land. 1872, p. b). The writer has been re- 
peatedly an eye-witness of this habit in Syria. 

Beyond the providence of the ant, modern 
research has proved its wisdom and instinct to 
be far in advance of that of any other known 
insect, not even excepting the bee. Its skill in 
architecture is wonderful nnd varied. Some 
species build their labyrinths of pellets of 
kneaded clay, arched and fitted like the most 
skilful masonry; others employ rafters and 
beams for their roofs, others cut leaves into neat 
circular tiles and thatch their roofs with this 
shingling (Bates, Amazon, 1-3), others excavate 
the trunks of trees. They fortify their passages 
against rain and enemies, closing them every 
night and opening them in the morning. Like 
the bees and wasps, their communities are com- 
posed of males, females, and neuters, the latter 
being both the workers and the rulers. These 
receive the eggs, watch over them with un- 
ceasing care, bring the larvae to enjoy the sun's 
warmth, and in the evening carry them back to 
their chambers. They gather food for them, 
and supply them incessantly ; they tear the 
cases away from the cocoons when the imago is 
ready to emerge ; they spread and dry the 
wings, which the males and females alone 
possess ; they afterwards tend the females, feed 
them, wash them, and keep continual guard. 
They rear myriads of aphides or small plant 
parasites from the egg to supply food fbr the 
young, and keep them like cows. Some species, 
as the Amazon ants, organise regular marauding 
expeditions, attack the colonies of other ants, 
and carry off the larvae to be their slaves. In fact, 
had not the habits of the ants been verified by 
the observations of the most careful and truth- 
ful naturalists, they would have been incredible. 
Truly, indeed, did Agur pronounce them to be 
" exceeding wise." 

Modern observers have recorded the extra- 
ordinary habit of the harvesting ants, of 
occasionally bringing their stores to the surface, 
and then burying them again. Many ancient 
writers have noticed this habit, Aelian, Plutarch, 
Epiphanius, and others, as well as Arabic 
authorities, quoted at length by Bochart 
(iftn-OT. iii. 596). Whether this be to check 
germination, or merely to dry and preserve the 
seeds, is not yet ascertained. But it has been 
proved that the seeds do not germinate in an 
ant's granary ; although if the place be deserted 
by the insects they will immediately begin to 
sprout. The ants have been often noticed to 
bite off the radicle of a sprouting seed. The 
observations of Mr, Moggridge led him to con- 
clude that the ants, by this treatment, and by 
the exposure of the grain, actually malt it 
before eating it ; waiting till the sprouting seed 
is ready to grow and has developed the saccha- 
rine matter so grateful to the tribe ; not merely 

Digitized by 




keeping it till the seed has become soft and more 
accessible to their mandibles. 

A small cricket, Grylhts myrmecophilus, in- 
habits the nests of harvesting ants, who carry 
it about with them in their migrations (Sari, 
Jiibliot. Ital. tom. xv. p. 217). 

.\nts are bymenopterous insects of the family 
t'ormicariae, of which there are two great divi- 
sions, formica, stingless, and Myrmica, armed 
with a sting. Of each sub-family there are many 
genera. Most of the European species belong to 
J'onnica. Formica riifa affords the formic acid, 
.1 peculiar secretion from the glands of the 
nbdomen. Atta and Phe'ulole, to which genera 
most of the harvesting ants belong, come under 
the sub-family Myrmka. 

The Arabians held the wisdom of the ant in 
such estimation, that they used to place one of 
these insects in the hands of a newlr-bom infant, 
repeating these words, " May the boy turn out 
clever and skilful." Hence in Arabic, with the 
noun nemleh, " an ant," is connected the adjec- 
tive nemil, "quick," " clever " (Bochart, Hieroz. 
iii. 494). In Rajputana to this day, the Hindoos 
scatter ceremonially dry rice and sugar for the 
ants. The Talmudists, too, attributed great 
wisdom to this insect. It was, tbey say, fVom 
beholding the wonderful ways of the ant that 
the following expression originated : " Thy jus- 
tice, God, reaches to the heavens " {Chuiin, 63. 
See a collection of Jewish sayings on the ant in 
PSBA. iii. 68, &c.). [H. B. T.] 

ANTELOPE, in R. V. (Deut. xiv. 5; Is. 
li. 20) ; in A. V. " wild ox " (Deut.) and " wild 
bull " (Is.). [See BCLL, Wild.] 

ANTICHRIST (6 ayrlxpurros). The word 
Antichrist is used by St. John in his first and 
second Epistles, and by him alone. Elsewhere 
it does not occur in Scripture. Nevertheless, 
by general consent, the term has been applied to 
the Man of Sin of whom St. Paul spe.iks in the 
Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, to the Little 
Horn and to the fierce-countenanced King of 
whom Daniel prophesies, and to the two Beasts 
of the Apocalypse, as well ns to the false Christs 
whose appearance our Lord predicts in His pro- 
phetic discour^ on the Mount of Olives. Before 
we can arrive at any clear and intelligent view 
of what Scripture teaches us on the subject of 
Antichrist, we must decide whether this exten- 
.sioD of the term is properly made; whether 
the characteristics of the Antichrist are those 
alone with which St. John makes us acquainted 
in bis Epistles, or whether it is his portrait 
which is drawn, darker, fuller, and larger, in 
some or all of the other passages to which we 
have referred. 

(A.) The following are the passages in Scrip- 
ture which ought to be carefully compared for 
the elucidation of our subject : — I. Matt. ixiv. 
3-31. II. 1 John ii. 18-23, iv. 1-3; 2 John 
5, 7. in. 2 Thess. ii. 1-12; 1 Tim. iv. :-3; 
2 Tim. iii. 1-13. IV. Dan. viii. 8-25; xi. 
36-39. V. Dan. vii. 7-27. VI. Rev. xiii. 1-8 ; 
xvij. 1-18. VII. Rev. xiii. 11-18; xix. 11-21. 
The first of these passages contains the account 
of the false Christs and false prophets predicted 
by our Lord ; the second, of the Antichrist as 
depicted by St. John ; the third, of the Adver- 
sary of God as portrayed by St. Paul; the 
fourth and fifth, of the fierce-countenanced 


King and of the Little Horn foretold by Duiel ; 
the sixth and seventh, of the Beast ud the 
False Prophet of the Revelation. 

I. The False Christs and False Pnpliets o; 
Matt. xiiv. — ^The purpose of our Lotd in Hit 
prophetic discourse on the Mount of Olives vk 
at once to predict to His disciples the ev«it< 
which would take place before the oipturt uf 
Jerusalem, and those which would pr««de thf 
final destruction of the world, of n-liich the fall 
of Jerusalem was the type and symbol. Accor- 
dingly, His teaching on the point before us 
amounts to this, that (1) in the latter days of 
Jerusalem there sbonld be sore distrest, anl 
that in the midst of it there should ariw im- 
|K>stors who would claim to be the promiuJ 
Messiah, and would lead away many of thrir 
countrymen after them ; and that (2) in the Us! 
days of the world there should be a ptU 
tribulation and pcrsecutiou of the saints, aci 
that there should arise at the same tine talsc 
Christs and false prophets, with an nnpuaUeld! 
power of leading astray. In type, therefore, mir 
Lord predicted the rise of the several impost'it 
who excited- the fanaticism of the Jews beij:e 
their fall. In antitype He predicted the fatiut 
rise of impostors in the last days, who should 
beguile all but the elect into the belief of their 
being God's prophets, or even His Christs. Wt 
find no direct reference here to the .^ntichrisi 
Our Lord is not speaking of any one in(iiTiJujl 
(or polity), but rather of those forcrannen of 
the Antichrist who are his servants and ictuat>l 
by his spirit. They are ifxuSttxpiaroi, sJ"! "^ 
deceive almost the elect, but they are not 
i iiinlxfurros ; they are i^fuSoirfW^qToi, and cm 
show great signs and wonders, but they are not 
i <fitvSaxpop4rnis (Rev. xvi. 14). Howerer 
valuable, therefore, the prophecy on Mouit 
Olivet is, as helping as to picture to ouraelre' 
the events of the last days, it does not eincidstr 
for ns the characteristics of the Antichrist, ul 
must not be allowed to mislead us, as tboogh it 
gave information which it doe* not profess to 

II. The Antichrist of St. John's Epistla.- 
The first teaching with regard to the .Antichrist 
and to the antagonist of God (whether these in 
the same or different we leave as yet nncertsin) 
was oral. " IV heard that the Antichrist 
Cometh," says St. John (1 Ep. ii. 18, R. V.) ; ami 
again,"Thisisthe8pirit of the Antichrist icA^raj 
ye have heard that it should come " (1 Ep. i^- 
3, R. v.). Similarly St. Paul, " Remember ye not 
that when I was yet with you / ioid you tSe^ 
things 1 " (2 Thess. ii. 5, R. V.). We must not 
therefore look for a full statement of the "doc- 
trine of the Antichrist " in the Apostolic Epistle> 
but rather for allusions to something already 
known. The whole of the teaching of St. John's 
Epistle with regard to the Antichrist himself 
seems to be confined to the words " Ye heard," 
or " Ye have heard that the Antichrist cometh." 
The verb (fxtrai here employed has a special 
reference, as used in Scripture, to the first sod 
second Advents of oar Lord. Those whom St. 
John was addressing had been taught that, as 
Christ was to come (Jlpx"ai), so the -Antichrist 
was to come likewise. The rest of the passage 
in St. John appears to be rather a practical 
application of the doctrine of the Antichrist 
than a formal statement of it. He warns hs 

Digitized by 





i»*iers that the spirit of the Antichrist could 
«:ist even then, though the coming of the Anti- 
«brUt himself was future, and that all who 
imd the Messiahship and Sonship of Jesus 
were Antichrists, as being types of the final 
.Antichrist who was to come. The teaching of 
St. John's Epistles therefore amounts to tiiis, 
tkt w type, Cerinthus, Basilides, Simon Magus, 
and those Gnostics who denied Christ's Sonship, 
and all subsequent heretics who should deny it, 
mn Antichrists, as being wanting in that 
"liTine principle of love which he has declared to 
be the essence of Christianity ; and he points on 
to the final appearance of the Antichrist that 
ms" to come" in the last times, according as 
tl)»y had been orally taught, who would be the 
mUitype of these his forerunners and serrnnts. 

UL I%e Adrersary of God of St. PauTa 
Ipiitles. — St. Paul does not employ the term 
.^Etichrist, but there can be no hesitation in iden- 
ttfving the Adversary (i iyruefifiivos, 2 Thess. ii. 
4) of God with the Antichrist who was " to come." 
like St. John, he refers to his oral teaching on 
the subject ; but as the Thessaloniana appeared 
t« hare forgotten it and to hare been misled by 
some passages in his previous Epistle to them, 
he recapitulates what he had taught them. 
Uki St John, he tells them that the spirit of 
-Utichiist or Antichristianisro, called by him 
"the mystery of iniquity," was already work- 
inSi but Antichrist himself he characterizes as 
'the Han of Sin," "the Son of Perdition," 
'the Adrersary to all that is called God," " the 
oae who lifts himself abore all objects of wor- 
ship :" and assures them that he should not be 
i^Tealed in person until some present obstacle to 
his appearance should hare been taken away, 
sod until there should have occurred an 

From St. John and St. Paul together we learn 
(1) that the Antichrist should come : (2) that 
he should not come nntil a certain obstacle to 
his nming was removed : (3) nor till after the 
"oruntnce of the inrixrraaia: (4) that his 
thiracttristics would be (o) open opposition to 
<>«<j aad religion ; (fi") a claim to the incommu- 
niable attributes of God ; (y) iniquity, sin, and 
isvlessness ; (J) a power of working lying 
"uncles; («) marvellous capacity of beguiling 
srnls: (5) that he would be actuated by Satan: 
('i) that his spirit was already at work manifest- 
ing itself partially, incompletely, and typically, 
in the teachers of infidelity and immorality 
rirody abounding in the Church. 

IV. The Jiaxe-countenanced King of Daniel. — 
T.iis passage is nniversnlly acknowledged to be 
Irimsrily applicable to Antiochns Epiphanes. 
Antiochus Epiphanes is recognised as the chief 
fTotctype of the Antichrist. The prophecy may 
tuCTtfore be regarded as descriptive of the 
Antichrist. The point is fairly argued by St. 
ifrmt:—" Down to this point (Dan. xi. 21) 
fit historical order is preserved, and there is no 
Terence between Porphyry and our own inter- 
Pf^rs. But all that follows down to the end 
"f the book he applies personally to Antiochus 
lipiphanea, brother of Seleucus, and son of 
inticchui the Great; for, after Seleucus, he 
«iSii«4 eleven years in Syria, and possessed 
-'odaea; and in his reign there occurred the 
P"»cntion about the Law of God, and the wars 
* tae llaccabees. But our people consider all 

these things to be spoken of Antichrist, who is 
to come in the last time. ... It is the custom of 
Holy Scripture to anticipate in types the reality 
of things to come. For in the same way our 
Lord and Saviour is spoken of in the 72nd Psalm, 
which is entitled a Psalm of Solomon, and yet 
all that is there said cannot be applied to Solo- 
mon. But in part, and as in a shadow and 
image of the truth, these thiugs are foretold of 
Solomon, to be more perfectly fulfilled in our 
Lord and Saviour. As, then, in Solomon and 
other saints the Saviour has types of His coming, 
so Antichrist is rightly believed to have for his 
type that wicked king Antiochus, who perse- 
cuted the saints and defiled the Temple " (.S. 
Hieron. Op. tom. i. p. 523, Col. Agr. 161t! ; 
tom. iii. p. 1127, Paris, 1704). 

V. TTie Little Horn of /)anW.— Hitherto we 
have been dealing with a person, not a kingdom 
or a polity. This is evident from St. John's 
words, and still more evident from the Epistle 
to the Thessalonians. The words used by St. 
Paul could not well have been more emphatic, 
had he studiously made use of them in order to 
exclude the idea of a polity. "The Man of 
Sin," "the Son of Perdition," "the' one who 
opposeth himself to God," " the one who exaltetli 
himself above (R. V. ' against ') God," the one 
"setting himself forth as God" (R. V.), "the 
lawless one . . . whose coming is according to th<' 
working of Satan with all power and signs ami 
lying wonders " (R. V.) : if words have a mean- 
ing, these words designate an individual. But 
when we come to Daniel's prophecy of the Little 
Horn this is all changed. We there read of four 
beasts, which are explained as four kings, by 
which expression is meant four kingdoms or 
empires. These kingdoms, represented by the 
four beasts, are [according to the traditional 
opinion] the Assyrian empire, the Persian empire, 
the Grecian empire, and the Roman empire. 
The Roman empire is described as breaking 
up into ten kingdoms, amongst which there 
grows up another kingdom which gets the 
mastery over nearly a third of them (three out 
of ten). This kingdom, or polity, is the little 
horn of the fourth beast, before which three of 
the first ten horns are pincked up. If the four 
"kings" (vii. 17) represented by the four beasts 
arc really empires, if the ten " kings " (vii. 24) 
are monarchies or nationalities, then the other 
"king" who rises after them is, in like manner, 
not an individual but a polity. It follows that 
the " Little Horn " of Daniel cannot be identified 
with the Antichrist of St. John and St. Paul. 
The former is a polity, the latter is an indi- 

VI. The Apocalyptic Beast of St. John.—\ 
further consequence follows. For the first Beast 
of the Apocalypse is clearly identical with the 
Little Horn of Daniel. The Beast whose power 
is absorbed into the Little Horn has ten horns 
(Dan. vii. 7) and rises from the sea (Dan. vii. 3): 
the Apocalyptic Beast has ten horns (Rev. xiii. 
1) and rises from the sea (ibid.). The Little 
Horn has a mouth speaking great things (Dau. 
vii. 8, 11, 20): the Apocalyptic Beast has a 
mouth speaking great things (Rev. xiii. 5). The 
Little Horn makes war with the saints, and 
prevails (Dan. vii. 21): the Apocalyptic Beast 
makes war with the saints, and overcomes them 
(Rev. xiii. 7). The Little Horn speaks great 

Digitized by 




words against the Most High (Dan. vii. 25) : the 
Apocalyptic Beast opens his mouth in blasphemy 
against God (Rev. jtiii. 6). The Little Horn 
wears out the saints of the Most High (L)an. rii. 
25) : the woman who rides on, ij>. directs, the 
Apocalyptic Beast, is drunken with the blood of 
saints (KeT. xvii. 6). The persecution of the 
Little Horn is to last a time and times and a 
dividing of times, i.e. three and a half times or 
years (Dan. vii. 25): power is given to the 
Apocalyptic Beast for forty-two months, i'.*. 
three and a half times or years (Rev. xiii. 5). 
These and other parallelisms cannot be acci- 
dental. Whatever was meant by Daniel's Little 
Horn most also be meant by St. John's Beast. 
Therefore St. John's First Beast is not the Anti- 
christ. It is not an individual like the Anti- 
christ of St. John's and St. Paul's Epistles, but 
a polity like the Little Horn of Daniel. 

But, though not identical, it is quite evident, 
and it has been always recognised, that the 
Antichrist of the Epistles and the Beast of the 
Apocalypse have some relation to each other. 
What is this relation ? and in what relation to 
both does the second Apocalyptic Beast, called the 
False Prophet, stand ? To answer this question 
we must examine the imagery of the Apocalypse. 
Shortly stated, it is, so far as concerns our 
present purpose, as follows. The Church is 
represented (Rev, xii. 5) as a woman bringing 
forth "a son, a man-child," who is "caught up 
unto God and unto His throne " from the dragon 
that had desired to devour him. Repelled by 
Christ's angelic guards (ro. 7-10), the dragon 
persecutes the woman, so that she is compelled 
to fly from him into the wilderness, where she 
remains for 1260 days, or three and a half times 
(yv. 13, 14). Foiled in his attempt to destroy 
the woman, as he had been foiled in his at- 
tempt against Christ, the dragon sets himself 
to make war with " the rest of her seed," 
that is, the brethren of Christ, " which 
keep the commandments of God and hold the 
testimony of Jesus" (d. 17, R. V.). At this 
time the Beast arises from the sea, and Satan 
gives to him his power, and his seat, and great 
authority. The length of time during which 
the Beast prevails is three and a half times, the 
same period as that during which the sufferings 
and trials of the woman last. During a certain 
part of this three and a half times the Beast 
takes upon its back, as its guide and ruler, a 
woman named " Mystery, Babylon the great, 
the mother of the harlots and of the abomi- 
nations of the earth," by whom, as it is ex- 
plained, is figured "that great city which 
reigneth over the kings of the earth " (xvii. 18, 
R. V.) from her seven hills (xvii. 9). After 
a time Babylon the great falls (ch. xviii.), but 
the Beast on whom she hod ridden still survives, 
joins with the kings of the earth in a final 
desperate conflict with Christ, and, being taken, 
is cast into the lake of fire (xix. 19-21). 

Can we harmonize this picture with the pre- 
diction of St. Paul, always recollecting that his 
Man of Sin is an individual, and that the Apoca- 
lyptic Beast is a polity ? 

As we have here reached that which consti- 
tutes the great difficulty in mastering the con- 
ception of the Antichrist as revealed by the 
inspired writers, we shall now turn from the 
text of Scripture to the comments of annotators 


and essayists to see what assistance we can 
derive from them. We shall then resume tie 
consideration of the Bcriptnrnl passages at the 
point at which we now leave them. We shall 
classify the opinions which have been held en 
the Antichrist according as he is regarded as as 
individual, or as a polity, or ns a principle. Tiie 
individualists, again, must be subdivided, iccord- 
ing as they represent him as one to come or as 
one already come. We have, therefore, four 
classes of writers on the Antichrist : — (I) those 
who regard him as an individual yet futuie; 
(2) those who regard him as a poUty now 
present ; (3) those who regard him as an indi- 
vidual already passed away ; (4) those who con- 
sider that nothing is meant beyond antichriitian 
and lawless principle, not embodied either in an 
individual or in a special polity. 

1. The first opinion held in the Church wis 
that the Antichrist was a real person wbo 
would appear in the world when the time of his 
appearance was come. The only point on vhich 
any question arose was, whether he sbosld he a 
man armed with Satanic powers or Satan him- 
self. That be would be a man armed with 
Satanic powers was the opinion of Justin Martyr, 
A.D. 108 {Dial. 371, 20, 21 ; Thirlbii, 1722); of 
Irenaeus, A.i>. 140 (Op. v. 25, 437; GraUi, 
1702) ; of Tertullian, A.D. 150 (i); Bei. On. 
c. 24 ; ApoL c. 32) ; of Origen, A.D. 184 (Of. i. 
667; Delarue, 1733); of his contemponn, 
Hippolytus (if the treatise De Antichriiio be his; 
Hamburgi, 1716) ; of Cyprian, A.D. 250 (Ep. 58; 
Op. 120, Oion. 1682) ; of Viotorinus, A.D. 270 
(Si*/. Patr. Magna, iii. p. 136; Col. Agiip. 
1618) ; of Lactantius, a.d. 300 (Dixi. InsL ■m. 
17); of Cyril of Jerusalem, a.d. 315 (CaUck. 
XV. 4) ; of Jerome, a.d. 330 (Op. iv. pars L 209; 
Parisiis, 1693); of Chrysostom, A.D. 347 (Cbn". 
»n 2 Thess.) ; of Hilary of Poitiers, A.a 350 
(_Comm. in ifatt.) ; of Augustine, A.D. 354 (ft 
Civit. Dei, XX. 19); of Ambrose, A.D. 3*) 
(CoRim. in Luc.). The authors of the Sibylliae 
Oracles, a.d. 150, and of the Apostolical Consti- 
tutions, Celsus (see Orig. c. Celt. lib. vi-X 
Ephrem Syrus, A.D. 370, Theodoret, A.D, 430, 
and a few other writers seem to have regaided 
the Antichrist as Sntan himself rather than as 
his minister or an emanation from him. But 
they may, perhaps, nave meant no more than to 
express the identity of his character and hit 
power with that of Satan. Each of the writeis 
to whom we have referred gives his own jndg- 
meut with respect to some particulars which 
may be expected in the Antichrist, whilst they all 
agree in representing him as a person about to 
come shortly before the glorious appearance of 
Christ, uid to be destroyed by His Presence- 
Justin Martyr speaks of him as the man of the 
apostasy, and dwells chiefly on the persecntioni 
which he would cause. Irenaeus describes him 
as summing up the apostasy in himself; » 
having his seat at Jerusalem ; as identical with 
the Apocalyptic Beast (c. 28) ; as foreshadowed 
by the unjust judge; as being the man who 
" should come in his own name ; " and as belong- 
ing to the tribe of Dan (c. 30). Tertnllian 
identifies him with the Beast, and supposes him 
to be about to arise on the fall of the Eoman 
Empire (De Sea. Cam. c 25). Origen describes 
him in Eastern phrase as the child of the Pevil 
and the counterpart of Christ. Hippolytn* 

Digitized by 





tnJnTtands the Roman empire to be represented 
bT the Apocaljptic Beast, and the Antichrist by 
tb« False Prophet who woald restore the 
uDinded Beast by his craft and by the wisdom 
of his laws. Cyprian sees him typified in 
Aatiochus Epiphanes {Exhort, ad Mart, c 11). 
Wtorinos, with several others — ^misnnderstand- 
io; St. Paol's expression that the mystery of 
iiiqaity was in his day working— supposes that 
(he Antichrist will be a revi rifled Nero — an 
i\a taken np and enlarged upon in modem 
times; Lactantins^ that he will be a king of 
t<rna, bora of an eril spirit ; Cyril, that he will 
U a magician, who by his arts will get the 
mastery of the Roman empire. Jerome describes 
him as the son of the Devil sitting in the 
'^nrch at thoogh he were the Son of God ; 
Cbrrsoctom, as iarriOfit ris sittiag in the 
Temple of God, that is, in all the Churches, not 
irerely in the Temple at Jerusalem ; St. Au- 
gustine, as the adversary holding power for 
three and a half years — the Beast, perhaps, re- 
presenting Satan 8 empire. The primitive belief 
may be summed np in the words of St. Jerome, 
la his Cmnmentary on Daniel he writes : " Let 
u.-! say thxt which all ecclesiastical writers have 
handed down, viz. that at the end of the world, 
vhen the Roman empire is to be destroyed, 
there will be ten kings who will divide the 
Itoman world amongst them; and there will 
arise as eleventh little king, who will snbdue 
three of the ten kings, that is, the king of 
Egypt, of Africa, and of Ethiopia, as we shall 
herofter show. And on these having been 
biain, the seven other kings will also submit. 
' And behold,' he says, ' in the ram were the 
eres of a nun.' This is that we may not sup- 
pose him to be a devil or a demon, as some have 
thought, but a man ia whom Satan will dwell 
utterly and bodily. 'And a mouth speaking 
Ip-eat things,' for he is ' the man of sin, the son 
of perdition, who sitteth iu the Temple of God, 
raakisg himself as God'" (Op. vol. iv. p. 511 ; 
Col. Agrip. 1616). In his Comment, on Dan. 
II., and in his reply to Algasia's eleventh ques- 
tion, he works out the same view in greater 
'letaiL The same line of interpretation con- 
tiDued. Andreas of Caesarea, A.D. 550, explains 
him to be a king actuated by Satan, who will 
muite the old Roman empire and reign at 
Jerusalem (m Apoc. c. xiii.) ; Arethas, A.D. 650, 
u a king of the Romans who will reign over 
the Saracens in Bagdad (m Apoc. c xiii.) ; John 
Uimasoene, A.D. 800, repeats the primitive 
belief {Orth. Fid. 1. iv. c. 26) ; Adso, A.D. 950, 
says tlut a Frank king will reunite the Roman 
empire, and that he will abdicate on Mount 
OUret, and that, on the dissolution of his king- 
•iinii, the Antichrist will be revealed. The same 
vriter supposes that he will be born in Babylon, 
that he will be educated at Bethsaida and 
Chorazin, and that he will proclaim himself the 
'Sen of God at Jerusalem (Thief, in Antichr. 
"ead AngvtL Opera, torn. ii. p. 454 ; Paris, 
1«3T> Theophylact, A.D. 1070, speaks of him 
>i a nun who will carry Satan about with him. 
.Ubert the Great, Cardinal Hugo, and Alexander 
^ Hales repeat the received tradition in the 
13th catnry. So also Thomas Aquinas, a.d. 
1360, who rectirs to the tradition with regard 
t'> the birth of Antichrist at Babylon, saying 
thtt he will be instructed in the Magian philo- 

j soph}', and that his doctrine and miracles will 
1 be a parody on those of the Lamb. The re- 
; ceived opinion of the 12th century is brought 
I before us in a striking and dramatic manner at 
the interview between King Richard I. and the 
Abbot Joachim nt Messina, as the king was on 
his way to the Holy Land. " I thought," said 
the king, " that Antichrist would be bom in 
Antioch or in Babylon, and of the tribe of Dan ; 
and would reign in the Temple of the Ix>rd in 
Jemsalem ; and would walk in that land in 
which Christ walked ; and would reign in it for 
three years and a half; and would dispute 
against Elijah and Enoch, and would kill them ; 
aud would afterwards die ; and that after his 
death God would give sixty days of repentance, 
in which those might i-epent which should 
have erred from the way of truth, and have 
been seduced by the preaching of Antichrist and 
his false prophets." This seems to hare been 
the view defended by the archbishops of Kouen 
and Anxerre and by the bishop oi Bayonne, 
who were present at the interview : but it was 
not Joachim's opinion. He maintained the 
seven heads of the Beast to be Herod, Nero, 
Constantius, Mahomet, Melsemut, who were 
past ; Saladin, who was then living ; and Anti- 
christ, who was shortly to come, being already 
born in the city of Rome, and about to be 
elevated to the Apostolic See (Roger de Hove- 
den in Sichard I., anno 1190).* In his own 
work on the Apocalypse Joachim speaks of the 
second Apocalyptic beast as being governed by 
"some great prelate who will be like Simon 
Magus, and as it were universal pontiff through- 
out the world, and be that very Antichrist of 
whom St. Paul speaks." These are very notice- 
able words. Gregory I. bad long since (A.D. 
590) declared that any man who held the 
power which the popes of Rome soon after 
his time began to arrogate to themselves as 
Universal Bishops of the Church, would be the 
precursor of Antichrist. Amnlphns, bishop of 
Orleans (or perhaps Gerbert), in an invective 
against John XV. at the Council of Rheims, A.P. 
991, had declared that if the Roman pontiff was 
destitute of charity and puffed up with know- 
ledge, he was Antichrist — ^if destitute both of 
charity and of knowledge, he was a lifeless 
stone (Mansi, tom. ix. p. 132 ; Ven. 1774) ; but 
Joachim is the first to suggest, not that such 
and such a pontiff was Antichrist, but that the 
Antichrist wonld be a Utuversalia Ponti/ex, and 
that he wonld occupy the Apostolic See. Still, 
however, we have no hint of an order or succes- 
sion of men being the Antichrist. It is an 
actual living individual man that Joachim con- 

The master had said that a Pope would be 
the Antichrist ; his followers began to whisper 
that it was the Pope. Amalric, professor of 
logic and theology at Paris at the end of the 
12th century, appears to have been the first to 
have put forth the idea. It was taken up by 
three different classes : by the moralists, who 
were scandalized at the laxity of the Papal 
Court ; by the Imperialists, in their temporal 

• The BolUmdlsto regard the story of this Interview 
as an tavention. " But this," says Bishop Stubbe, " Is 
extremely improbable." See Chronicle of Roger de 
Horxdm, vol. Ul. p. T6, ed. Master of the Rolls. 

Digitized by 





struggle with the Papacy ; and, perhaps inde- 
pendently, by the Waldenses and their followers 
in their spiritual struggle. Of the first class 
we may find examples in the Franciscan enthu- 
siasts Peter John of Olivi, Telesphorus, Uber- 
tinus, and John of Paris, who saw a mystic 
Antichrist at Rome, and looked forward to a 
lenl Antichrist in the future ; and again in such 
men as GrossetSte, whom we find asking, as in 
despair, whether the name of Antichrist has not 
heen earned by the Pope (Matt. Par. in An. 
1253, p. 871, 1640). Of the second class we 
may take F.berhard, archbishop of Salzburg, as 
» specimen, who denounces Hildebrand as 
" having, in the name of religion, laid the 
foundation of the kingdom of Antichrist 170 
years ago." He can even name the ten horns. 
They are the " Turks, Greeks, Egyptians, Afri- 
cans, Spaniards, French, English, Germans, 
Sicilians, and Italians, who now occupy the 
provinces of Rome ; and a little horn has grown 
np with eyes and mouth, speaking great things, 
which is reducing three of these kingdoms — 
i.e. Sicily, Italy, and Germany — to subserviency, 
is persecuting the people of Christ and the saints 
of God with intolerable opposition, is confound- 
ing things human and divine, and is attempt- 
ing things unutterable, execrable " (Aventinns, 
Annal. Boioram, p. 651 ; Lips. 1710). The Wal- 
denses eagerly grasped at the same notion, and 
from that time it has never been lost sight of. 
Thus we slide from the individualist view, 
which was held unanimously in the Church for 
upwards of a thousand years, to the notion of a 
polity, or a succession of rulers of a polity, that 
polity being the Church of Rome. The hitherto 
received opinion now vanishes, and does not 
appear again until the excesses and extrava- 
gances of the new opinion produced a reaction 
against itself. 

2. The Waldenses did not deny that an indi- 
Tidual and personal Antichrist was to be expected 
in the future, but they recognised many Anti- 
«hrists, and by the end of the 14th century they 
had learnt to identify Antichrist, Babylon, the 
Fourth Beast, the Harlot, and the Man of Sin, 
with the system of Popery.' In 1383 Wickliffe 
wrote his treatise On Christ and His Adversary 
Antichrist (Xte ChrMo et mo adversaria Anti- 
christo), in which he identifies the Pope with 
Antichrist for twelve reasons, most of which are 
applicable not only to the individual Pope with 
whom he was at strife, but to the Pope as 
such. They are as follows : — 1. Christ is the 
Truth, the Pope is the principle of Falsehood ; 
S. Christ was poor, the Pope is rolling in 

>> "E easer mot avisa, cant venre 1' Antexrlst. 
Que DOS non crean, nl a son fait, ni a son dlt : 
Car, segont r eacrlptura, son ara fait motl Antexrlst ; 
Car Antexrlst son tult aqollh qnc coDtraitan a Xrlst." 
— Id iVoWo L«3K«m, 1. 466. It was long thought that this 
ireatlse was of the 12th century, owing to Its containing 
two lines which seemed to run as follows : — 
" Ben ba mil e cent an compU entleramcnt 
Que fo scripta lora. Car son al derler temp." 
" A thousand and a hundred years are already quite nm 
Since these words were written, ' It is the last time.' " 
Mr. Bradshaw, late Librarian of the Cambridge Uni- 
versity Library, discovered by help of a magnlfylng-glaaa 
that the right reading was '* a thousand and four hundred 

wealth ; 3. Christ was meek, the Pope it preod ; 
4. Christ forbade adding to His Law, the Fojie 
adds cruel laws ; 5. Christ commanded to go 
about and preach, the Pope sits in hit palue; 
6. Christ despised secular power, the Pope seeks 
it; 7. Christ submitted to Caesar, the Pope 
has stolen away half the Roman Empire': 

8. Christ had twelve simple disciples, the Fo|<i.' 
has more than twelve ambitious cardiuls; 

9. Christ forbade to strike with the sToid, the 
Pope gets up wars ; 10. Christ confined HimKi: 
to Judaea, the Pope intrudes wherever gsin 
calls him; 11. Christ was humble, the Popeii 
full of pomp; 12. Christ sought not fame cr 
gold, the Pope seeks both. Huss {Dc Antichvh 
it memhrorum ejiu anatomia, and Sermaia i: 
Antichriato) held similar language. Lord Cobhsn 
declared at his trial that the Pope was Anti- 
christ's head. Walter Brute, brought before the 
Bishop's Court at Hereford at the end of the 
14th century, pronounced the Antichrist to be 
" the high Bishop of Rome calling himself God's 
servant and Christ's chief vicar in this world" 
(Foie, iii. p. 131 ; Lend. 1844). Thus we lescli 
the Reformation. Walter Brute (a.d. 1393), 
BuUinger (1504), Chytraeus (1571), Aretios 
(1573), Foxe(1586X Napicr(1593),Mede(1632), 
Jurieu (1685), Bp. Newton (1750), Cunninghsiw 
(1813), Faber (1814), Woodhouse (1828), Hsber- 
shon (1843), identify the False Prophet, or Second 
Apocalyptic Beast, with Antichrist and with 
the Papacy ; Marlorat (A.D. 1574), King Jsmesl. 
(1603), Daubuz (1720), Galloway (1802X the 
First Apocalyptic Beast ; Brightman (X.D. 1600), 
Parens (1615), Vitringa (1705), Gill (1775), 
Bachmair (1778), Fraser (1795), Crolv (1828). 
Fysh (1837), Elliott (1844), both the Beat-. 
That the Pope and his system are Antiihri.4, 
was taught by Luther, Calrin, Zwingle, Melstt- 
thon, Bucer, Beza, Caliitns, Bengel, Michatlh. 
and by almost all Protestant writers on the 
Continent. Nor was there any hesitation oa the 
part of English theologians to seize the sane 
weapon of offence, Bp. Bale (A.D. 1491), lite 
Luther, Bucer, and Melancthon, prononnctt the 
Pope in Europe and Mahomet in Africa to he 
Antichrist. The Pope is Antichrist, say Craainei 
{Works, vol. ii. p. 46; Camb. 1844), Latiiwi 
(Works, voL i. p. 149; Camb. 1844), Ridley 
(Woris, p. 53; Camb. 1841), Hooper (HVt. 
voL ii. p. 44; Camb. 1852), Hutchinson (ITorfc. 
p. 304; Camb. 1842), Tyndale {Works, voL i 
p. 147; Camb. 1848), Sandys {Works, p. l\- 
Camb. 1841), Philpot {Works, p. 152; Omb. 
1842), Jewell {Works, vol. i. p. 109;Cimb 
1845), Rogers ( Works, p. 182 ; Camb. 1854). 
Fulke {Works, vol. ii. p. 269; Camb. 184«). 
Bradford ( Works, p. 435 ; Camb. 1848). Kor is 
the opinion confined to these 16th ceotorr 
divines, who may be supposed to have bcea 
specially incensed against Popery. King Jame> 
held it {Apol. pro Juram. Fidel. ; Lond. 1609)>-- 
strongly as Queen Elizabeth (see Jewell, letter 
to Bullmg. May 22, 1559, Zurich Letters, First 
Series, p. 33, Camb. 1842); and the theologian- 
of the 17th century did not repudiate it, though 
they less and less dwelt upon it as their stnigjif 
came to be with Puritanism in place of PopeiV' 
Bp. Andrewes maintains it as a probable cos- 
elusion from the Epistle to the Thessalonisi" 
{Sesp. ad Bellarm. p. 304; Oxon. 1851); but be 
carefully explains that King James, whom be 

Digitized by 



m defending, had expressed his private 
epinion, not the belief of the Church, on the 
tubjtct (S>. p. 23). Brunhall introduces limita- 
tions ud distinctions ( Works, iii. p. 520 ; Oxf. 
1S4S); significantly suggests that there are 
osrlcs of Antichrist which apply to the General 
jlis«nibly of the Kirk of Scotland as much as to 
the Pope or to the Turk (*. iii. 287); and 
declines to make the Church of England respon- 
sible for what individual preachers or writers 
had laid on the subject in moments of exaspera- 
tion (S). ii. 582). From this time forward the 
Papal-Antichrist theory is seldom found in 
theologians of name in the English Church, nor 
indeed in the 16th century does it seem to have 
taken root in England. Hard names were 
bsodied about; and the hardest of all being 
Antichrist, it was not neglected. But the idea 
of the Pope being Antichrist was not the main 
idea of the English Heformation, nor was it 
erer applied to the Pope in his Patriarchal or 
Archiepiscopal, but solely in his distinctively 
Papal, character. But though the sober and 
learned divine* of the 17th century for the most 
part gave up this application of the term, it was 
insisted upon by a string of writen who added 
nothing to the interpretation of prophecy, but 
faund each the creation of his own brain in the 
sacred Book of the Revelation, grouping history 
in any arbitrary manner that they chose around 
the central figure of the Papal Antichrist. 

3. A reaction followed. Some returned to 
the ancient idea of a future individual Anti- 
christ, as Ribera (a.i>. 1592), Lacunza or 
Beneira (a.d. 1810), De Burgh, Samuel Mait- 
land, Newman (2>ac/s for the Times, No. 83), 
and Charles Maitland {Prophetic Interpretation). 
<>thers preferred looking upon him ai long past, 
and fixed upon one or another persecutor or 
heresiarch as the man in whom the predictions 
as to Antichrist found their fulfilment. There 
seems to be no trace of this idea for more than 
1600 yean in the Church. But it has been 
taken up by two opposite classes of expounders, 
— br those who were anxious to avert the 
application of the Apocalyptic prophecies from 
the Papacy, by showing that they were fulfilled 
before the Papal power had come into being; 
and by others, who were disposed, not 
indeed to deny the prophetic import of the 
Apocalypse, but to confine the seer's ken within 
the closest and narrowest limits that were 
poiiible. Alcasar, a Spanish Jesuit, taking a 
hint from Victorinus, seems to have been the 
first (A.D. 1634) to hare suggested that the 
Apocalyptic prophecies did not extend further 
tiuu to the overthrow of Paganism by Constan- 
tine. This view, with variations by Grotius, is 
Laken up and expounded by Bossuet, Calmet, De 
3aeT, Eicbhom, Hug, Herder, Ewald, De Wette, 
Bleek, Moi>es Stuart, Davidson, Renan, Renss, tec. 
The general view of the school is that the Apo- 
'lolrpae describes the triumph of Christianity 
'ver Judaism in the first, and over Heathenism 
la the third and fourth centuries. Mariana sees 
.Vatichrist in Nero ; Bossuet in Diocletian and 
is Jolian; Grotius in Caligula; Wetstein in 
Titss; Hammond in Simon Magus (Wor^, vol. iii. 
^. 62i3 ; Lond. 1631) ; Whitby in the Jews (Comm. 
r.A. ii. p. 431 ; Lond. 1760); Le Clerc in Simon, 
"A of Giora, a leader of the rebel Jews ; SchStt- 
gea in the Pharisees; Kfissett and Krause in 



the Jewish zealots ; Hardonin in the High Priest 
Ananias; F. D. Maurice in Vitellius (On the 
Apocalypse, Camb. 1860), Renan and Reuss 
(adopting the Nero fable) in Nero. 

4. The same spirit that refuses to regard 
Satan as an individual, naturally looks upon 
the Antichrist as an evil principle not embodied 
either in a person or in a polity. Thus Koppe, 
Storr, Nitzsch, and Pelt (see Alford, Ok. Test. 
iii. 69). Westcott also considers that "the 
term expresses the embodiment of a principle, 
and is not to be confined to one person " {The 
Epistles of S. John, ii. 22) ; " the personification 
of the principle shown in different Antichrists " 
(ibid. ii. 13). 

We do not gain much by a review of the 
opinions of the commentators. In the case of 
prophecy, partially at least unfulfilled, little is 
to be expected. Of the four opinions which we 
have exhibited, the last is in accordance neither 
with St. Paul nor St. John, for St. Paul dis- 
tinctly describes the Adversary as being a man ; 
St. John speaks of the coming of Antichrist in 
terms similar to those used for the coming of 
Christ, and describes Antichristianism as ri roi 
iantxplvrov, thereby showing that Antichris- 
tianism is Antichristianism because it is the 
spirit of the concrete Antichrist. The third 
opinion is plainly refuted by the fact that the 
persons fixed upon as the Antichrist have seve- 
rally passed away, but Christ's glorious Presence, 
which is immediately to succeed the fall of 
Antichrist, has not yet been vouchsafed. The 
majority of those who maintain the second 
opinion are shown to be in the wrong because 
they represent as a polity what St. Paul dis- 
tinctly describes as a man. The majority of 
those who hold the first opinion are in like 
manner shown to be in the wrong, because they 
represent as an individual what the Apocalypse 
demonstrably pictures as a polity. We are 
unable to follow any one interpreter or any one 
school of interpreters. The opinions of the last 
two of the four schools we regard as erroneous : 
the first two appear to contain the truth be- 
tween them, but so divided as to be untrue in 
the mouth of almost any individual expositor who 
has entered into details. We return to Scripture. 
St. Paul says (2 Thess. ii. 3) that there are 
two things which are to precede the Day of 
Christ, the iirooratrfa and the revelation of 
the Adversary ; he does not say that these 
two things are contemporary: but, on the 
contrary, seems to imply that there was to 
be a succession of events. First, it appears 
that an unnamed and to us unknown obstacle 
has to be removed : then was to follow the 
" Apostasy ; " after this, the Adversary was to 
arise, and then was to come his destruction. 
We need hardly say that the word " apostasy," 
as ordiiuirily used, does not give the exact mean- 
ing of i) iwoffraala. The A. V. has most cor- 
rectly rendered the original by " falling away," 
having only failed of entire exactness by 
omitting to give the value of the article, 
which is supplied in the R. V. — " the falling 
away."' An open and unblushing denial 
and rejection of all belief, which is implied 
in our "apostasy," is not implied in iiro- 

• For the force of the article, see Bp. Uiddleton ad fur. 
(Gk. Art. p. 382; Camb. 1833). 

Digitized by 





araata. It means one of two things : (1) 
Political defectiou (Gen. xiv. 4 ; 2 Chron. xiii. 6 ; 
Acts V. 37) ; (2) Religious defection (Acts xxi. 
21 ; 1 Tim. iv. 1 ; Heb. lii. 12). The first is the 
common classical use of the word. The second 
is more usual in the N. T. Cyril of Jerusalem 
seems to understand the word rightly when he 
saya in reference to this passage : Nv» Si iarlv 
■il ij-offraffio • hticrrjiray yiip ol ivBpantoi t5j 
cp9ris ultntias . . . dTeffTTjcov yiip ol &v6pcffTrot 
awi rris iA7j8«iai . . . AStjj toU'vi' i<rru' ri 
iroirraaia- koI iidWft wpoirSoiAaBat i (x^ff 
<Cyril. CaUch. it. 9, Op. p. 228; Paris, 
1720). And St. Ambrose, "A vcril religione 
plerique lapsi errore desciscent " (Comm. in Luc, 
XI. 20). This " falling away " implies persons 
who fall away ; the i-roa-raala consists of i.v6- 
(rrarat. Supposing the existence of an organized 
religious body, some of whom shonld fall away 
from the true faith, the persons so falling away 
would be air(!(rTaTai, though still formally un- 
severed from the religious body to which they 
belonged ; and the religious body itself, while 
from one side and in respect to its faithful mem- 
faei-s it would retain its character and name as a 
religious body, might yet from another side and 
in respect to its other members be designated 
an ixoiTTaaia. It is such a corrupted religious 
body as this that St. Paul seems to mean by the 
iitoaTaata which he foretells in the Epistle to 
the Thessalonians.' In the Epistles to Timothy 
he describes this religious defection by some of 
its peculiar characteristics. "In the latter 
times some shall depart from the faith (iwo- 
vrhatnirci rivts -nit rlarfas), giving heed to 
seducing spirits and doctrines of devils ; speaking 
lies in hypocrisy ; having their conscience seared 
with a hot iron ; forbidding to marry, and com- 
manding to abstain from meats " (1 I'im. ir. 1-3, 
A. v.). " In the last days perilous times shall 
oome. For men shall be lovers of their own 
selves, . . . having a form of godliness, but 
denying the power thereof. . . , Evil men and 
seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving 
and being deceived " (2 Tim. iii. 1-13, A. V.).* 
It has been usual, as we have seen, to identify 
the First Beast of the Apocalypse with St. 
Paul's Man of Sin. It is impossible, as we 
have said, to do so. But it is possible, and 
more than possible, to identify the Beast and 
the ^otrraala. Can we find anything which 

<■ " It is an * apostasy ' indeed, but the same Greek 
word is used In Heb. Hi. 12 and in 1 Tim. Iv. 1, in 
neither of which cases will It salt the context to under- 
stand the word of an outward leaving of the Christian 
Church. The persons must at any rate liave been 
Christians, or they could not be apostates. And the 
apostasy Is all the more terrible If, while the form of 
the Church is Icept to, there Is adepartnte from the 
inward spirit. And in this case several points seem to 
indicate an apostasy within the Church " (Mason, Ex- 
eurnu on 1 Then, li, 3-12, in Ellicotfs .V. T. Cbmtii.). 

• The R. V. of these extracts is as follows :— 

1 Tim. It. 1, Sc 
"In later times some 
shall fall away from the 
faith, i^iving heed to sednc- 
ing Hpirlts and doctrines of 
deTlls, through the hypo- 
crisy of men that speak 
lies, branded in their own 
conscience as with a liut 
Iron," 4c. 

2 Tim. ill. 1, &c. 
" In the last days griev- 
ous times shall come. For 
men shall be lovers of self, 
. . . holding a form of god- 
Ibess. but having denied 
the power thereof. . . . £vU 
I men and impostunt," &c. 

will serve as the antitype of both ? In order 
to be the antitype of St. John's Beast it most 
be a polity, arising, not immediately, but 
shortly, after the dissolution of the Boman 
Empire, gaining great influence in the world, 
and getting the mastery over a certain number 
of those nationalities which like itself grew ont 
of that empire (Dan. vii. 24). It must last 
three and a half times ; i.e. nearly twice as long 
as the empire of Assyria, of Persia, or Grecia, 
to which only two times seem to be allotted 
(Dan. vii. 12). It must blaspheme against God ; 
i.e. it must arrogate to itself or claim for 
creatures the honour dne to God alone.' It 
must be an object of wonder and worship to the 
world (Rev. xiii. 6). It most put forward un- 
blushing claims on behalf of itself, and be full of 
its own perfections (Rev. xiii. 5). At a certain 
period in its history it must put itself tmder 
the guidance of Rome (Rev. xviii. 3), and remoia 
ruled by her until the destruction of the Utt«t 
(Rev. iviii. 2) ; its own existence being stilt 
prolonged until the coming of Christ in glory 
(Rev. xix. 20). To satisfy the requirements of 
St. Paul's description, its essential featnxes 
must be a falling away from the true <aith 
(2 Thcss. ii. 3 ; 1 Tim. iv. 1), and it must be 
further characterized by the specific qualities 
already transcribed from the Epistles tC' 

The antitype may be found, it has been held, 
in the corrupted Church of Christ, in so &r as 
it was corrupted. According to this view the 
same body, in so far as it maintained the faith 
and love, was the bride and the spouse, and, u 
so far as it " fell away " irom God, was the 
ietoa^curia, just as Jerusalem of old was at once 
Sion the beloved city, and Sodom the bloody 
city — the Chiurch of God and the Synagogue of 
Satan. On this theory the three and a iulf 
times of the Beast's continuance (Rev. xiii. 5). 
and of the Bride's suffering in the wilderness 
(Rev. xii. 6% would necessarily be conterminous, 
for the persecuted and the persecutors would be 
the faithful and the unfaithful members of the 
same body. These times would have commenced 
when the Church lapsed from her purity anl 
from her first love into unfaithfulness to God, 
exhibited especially in idolatry and creature- 
worship. It is of the nature of a religions 
defection to grow up by degrees ; we should 
not therefore be able to lay the finger on any 
special moment at which it commenced. Cyril of 
Jerusalem considered that it was already exist- 
ing in his time. Having quoted 2 Theas. it 
3-10, he continues : " Thus wrote Paul, and 
turn is the ' falling away ' (iaroarairiay, for 
men fell away (jkniantaaii) from the right 
faith. . . . This then is the iwom-offta, and tiif 
Enemy has soon to be looked for; already ha 

' The word " blasphemy " has come to bear a secoi^- 
ary meaning, which It does not bear in ScTf|«crp. 
Schlensner (in toe.) rightly explains it, Dietrr etyaa-r- 
quibut majatat Dei violatur. The Jews aocoaed o»ir 
Lord of blasphemy because He claimed divine power a&.l 
the divine attributes (Matt. ix. 2, xxvi. «4 ; Jotis i. 
33). There was nothing In our Lord's words wbids tlit< 
most bitter malignity could have called blaspbemoos ia 
the later sense which the word bos come to bear. It is 
of conrso in the scriptural, not in the modem, senac iboi 
St. Jolin attributes blasphemy to the Beast (see WcmU- 
worth. On tlu Afocatyfu, p. 628). 

Digitized by 



hu be^n to send his foreruDnen, that the 
fttj may be ready for him at his coming."' 
As time went on in the centuries succeeding 
Cyril, the ivovriurta manifested itself still 
moK clearly, until at length the number of 
the iriirtar a t who had fallen away surpassed 
tht Dumber of those who were faithful to the 
primitire faith. When this had occurred, St. 
faol'i " falling away " had come, and St. John's 
Fint Beast bad emerged from the sea. On 
tile same principle of interpretation the after 
acqajescenee of the Church in the Hildebran- 
iliue theory of the Roman Supremacy is typi- 
fied by the Beast taking the woman, Babylon, 
vho represents the seren-hilled city, on its 
back as its guide and director. From the 12th 
to the 16t^ century, and partially to the 
present day, this Uildebraudine idea has reigned 
orer and has been the goreming spirit of the 
cornipted Chnrch. The fall of Babylon, rich 
with its spiritual wares, is according to this 
Tiev in part past, in psirt future. After that 
iall has been fully accomplished, the corrupted 
Chnrch will still subsist down to the day of the 
coming of Christ, when the three and a half 
times — the period of the suffering of the faithful 
Church — wilt come to an end with and by the 
destruction of the apostate Church.'* 

Vn. l%e Apocalyptic Fai»e iVopM.— There 
is a second Apocalyptic Beast : the Beast from 
the Earth (Rev. xlii. 11), or the False Prophet 
(BeT. xix. 20). Can we identify this Beast 
eitiier with the individual Adreraary predicted 
by St. Paul, or with a corrupt polity such as has 
teen described ? We were compelled to regard 
the First Beast as a polity by its being identical 
vith that which clearly is a polity, the Little 
Horn of Daniel. There is no such necessity here, 
and there is no reason for regarding the Second 
Beast as a polity, beyond the fact of its being 
described under a similar figure to that by which 
a polity had been jnst prerionsly described. 
This presumption is more than counterbalanced 
by the indiridualizing title of the False Prophet 
which he bears (Rer. ivi. 13; zii. 20). His 
characteristics are — (1) "doing great wonders 
[R. V. "signs"], so that he maketh fire to 
cotne down from heaven on the earth in the 
sight of men " (Rer. xiii. 13). This power of 
miracle-working, we should note, is not attri- 
bntcd by St. John to the First Beast ; but it is 
one of the chief signs of St. Paul's Adversary, 
" whose coming Is with all power and signs and 
lying wonders '^ (2 Thess. ii 9). (2) " He de- 
ceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the 
means of thoee miracles which be had power to 
do [R. y. " by reason of the signs which it was 
firai him to' do "] in the sight of the Beast " 
(Rer. liii. 14). " He wronght miracles [R. V. 

• GiiKk. XT. 9. Tbis 1ectm« of Cyril's contains a 
i«7 dear statement of tlM Patristic view of the Antl- 

' Tte only other interpretatioD of the First Beast and 
Bi^loa that deserves notice here is that which ia maln- 
t^sed with ccnsiderable learning by the late Archdeacon 
1^ who oonaideis the First Beast to represent the 
'Wvld^iower, the constant adversary of the Church, and 
^>>:rl«> to npreatnt the World<lty, whether that be 
^sMn <x Book, or any other city wlilch ccncentrAtes 
^ itKtf the power of the world at Any particular period 
* kakiry l^^taluft Ommattary : Sao n$t., vol. iv, 




" the signs "] with which he deceived them that 
had received the mark of the Beast and them 
that worshipped his image " (Rev. xix. 20). In 
like manner, no special power of beguiling is 
attributed to the First Beast ; but the Adver- 
sary described by St. Paul is possessed of " all 
deceivableness [R. V. " deceit '^ of unrighteous- 
ness in them that perish [R. V. "for them 
that are perishing "], because they received 
not the love of the truth that they might 
be saved " (2 Thess. ii. 10). (3) He has horns 
like a lamb, i.e. he bears an outward resem- 
blance to the Messiah (Rev. xiii. 11) ; and the 
Adversary sits in the Temple of God show- 
ing himself that he is God (2 Thess. ii. 4). 
(4) His title ia The False Prophet, i Vtvimpo- 
(fi^rnis (Rev. ivi. 13; xix. 20); a^ our Lord, 
Whom Antichrist counterfeits, is emphatically 
i npo^ifnis. The VtvSowpo^Toi of Matt. xxiv. 
24 are the forerunners of d YtuSovpo^^mt, as 
John the Baptist of the True Prophet. On the 
whole, it would seem that if the Antichrist 
appears at all in the Book of the Revelation it 
is by this Second Beast or the False Prophet 
that he is represented. If this be so, it follows 
that he is an individual person who will at 
some future time arise, who will ally himself 
with the corrupted Church, represent himself 
as her minister and vindicator (Rev. xiii. 12), 
compel men by violence to pay reverence to her 
(xiii. 14), breathe a new life into her decaying 
frame by his use of the secular arm in her 
behalf (xiii. 15), forbidding civil rights to those 
who renounce her authority and reject her 
symbob (xiii. 17), and putting them to death 
by the sword (xiii. 15), while personally he is 
an atheistical blasphemer (1 John ii. 22), and 
sums up in himself the evil spirit of unbelief 
which has been working in the world from St. 
Paul's days to his (2 Thess. ii. 7). That it is 
possible for a professed unbeliever and atheist to 
make himself the champion of a corrupt system 
of religion, and to become on political grounds 
as violent a persecutor in its behalf as the most 
fanatical bigot could be, has been proved by 
events which have already occurred, and which 
might again occur on a more gigantic and 
terrible scale. The Antichrist would thus com- 
bine the forces, generally and happily antago- 
nistic, of Infidelity and Superstition. In this 
would consist the special horror of the reign of 
the Antichrist. Hence also the special suffer- 
ings of the faithful believers until Christ Him- 
self once again appeared to vindicate the cause 
of Truth and Liberty and Religion.' 

The sum of Scripture-teaching with regard to 
the Antichrist, then, appears to be as follows. 
Already in the times of the Apostles there was 
the mystery of iniquity, the spirit of Antichrist, 
at work. It embodied itself in various shapes — 
in the Gnostic heretics of St. John's days, in 

1 Archdeacon Lee, in accordance with his system of 
interpretation, understands the onsancUfled intellect of 
the world to be symbolized by the Second Beast. ** The 
First BesAt Is a material political world-power; the 
Second Beast is a spiritual world-power — the power of 
learning and knowledge, of ideas, of inleUectnal cultiva- 
tion. Both are ftom below, both are beasts, and there- 
fore they are in close alliance. The worldly antlchristlan 
wisdom stands In the service of the worldly antichrist ian 
power " (^xoJcer's Cbmawittary ; JVeic Tat., vol. iv., 

Digitized by 




the Jewish impostoTs who preceded the fall of 
Jerusalem, in all heresiarchs and nnbeUeven, 
especialljr those whose heresies had a tendency 
to deny the Incarnation of Christ, and in the 
great persecnton who from time to time afflicted 
the Church. Bnt this Antichristian Spirit was 
then, and is still, difiiued. It had not, and it 
has not yet, gathered itself into the one person 
in whom it will be one day completely and fnlly 
manifested. There was something which pre- 
vented the open manifestation of the Antichrist 
in the Apostles' days which they spoke of by 
word of month, bnt were unwilling to name iA 
letters. What this obstacle was, or is, we can- 
not now know for certain. The general state- 
ment of the early writers and fathers is that it 
was the power of secular law existing in the 
Roman Empire. The Roman Empire fell, and 
upon its fall, and in consequence of its fall, 
there arose a secularization and corruption of 
the Church, which would not hare been so 
secularized and corrupted had it been kept in 
check by the jealousy of the imperial power. 
The secularization and corruption increasing, 
the Church, which from one point of view and 
in respect to some of its members was considered 
as the Church of Christ, from another point of 
riew and in respect to others of its members 
came to be regarded as no better than an iro- 
(rrcurla. Time passing on, the corrupt element, 
getting still more the mastery, gave itself 
up to be directed from the city of the seven 
hills, indicated by the mystical Babylon. So 
far of the past. It would appear further 
that there is to be evolved from the corrupt 
Church an individual Antichrist, who, being 
himself a scoffer and contemner of all religion, 
will yet act as the Patron and Defender 
of the corrupt Church, and compel men to 
submit to her sway by the force of the secular 
arm and by means of bloody persecutions. He 
will unite the old foes Superstition and Unbelief 
in a combined attack on Liberty and Religion. 
He will have, finally, a power of performing 
lying miracles and beguiling souls, being the 
embodiment of Satanic as distinct from brutal 
wickedness. How long his power will last we 
are wholly ignorant, as the three and a half 
times do not refer to his reign (as is usually 
imagined), bnt to the continuance of the iwo- 
irraata. We only know that his continuance 
will be short. At last he will be destroyed 
together with the corrupt Church, in so far as 
it is corrupt, at the glorious appearance of 
Christ, which will usher in themillennial triumph 
of the faithful and hitherto persecuted members 
of the Church. 

(B.) There ore points which require farther 
elucidation : — 

1. The meaning of the name Antichrist. Mr. 
Greswell argues at some length that the only 
correct reading of the word is Counterfeit-Christ 
or Pro-Chriato, and denies that the idea of 
Adversary to Christ is involved in the word. 
Mr. Greswell's authority is great ; but he has 
been in this case too hasty in drawing his con- 
clusion from the instances which he has cited. 
It is true that " iwrl is not synonomous with 
Kari," but it is impossible to resist the evidence 
which any Greek Leiicon supplies, that the 
word ianl, both in composition and by itself, 
and still more in composition than alone, will 


bear the sense of "opponent to." It is 
probable that the word Antichrist combines 
both senses, like the word Antipope, which is 
very exact in its resemblance, bnt the primary 
notion which it conveys would seem rather to 
be that of antagonism than rivalry (see Gres- 
well, Exposition of the Parables, vol. L p. 372 
sq. ; Wordsworth, On the Apocalypse, p. 512). 
"It describes one who assuming the guise of 
Christ opposes Christ " (Westcott, On the First 
Epistle of S. John, ii. 12). 

2. The meaning of ri Korixor. What is that 
thing which withholdeth (2 Thess. ii. 6, R. V. 
" restraineth ") ? and why is it apparently de- 
scribed in the fallowing verse as a person (i 
Korixm', A. V. "he who now letteth," R. V. 
" there is one that restraineth now ") ? There 
is a remarkable unanimity among the early 
Christian writers on this point. They explab 
the obstacle, known to the Thessalonians but 
unknown to us, to be the Roman Empire. Thus 
Tertullian, De Resur. Cam. c. 24, and Ap i. c 32 ; 
St. Chrysostom and Theophylact on 2 Thess. ii ; 
Hippolytns, De Antichristo, c. 49 ; St. Jeromt 
on Dan. vii. ; St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei, xx. 19; 
Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. iv. 6 (see Dr. H. 
More's Works, bk. ii. c 19, p. 690 ; Mede, bt 
iii. c. xiii. p. 656; Alford, Gk. Test. iii. 57: 
Wordsworth, On the Apocalypse, p. 520). Theo- 
doret and Theodore of Mopsnestia hold it to it 
the determination of God. Theodoret's view it 
embraced by Pelt ; the Patristic interpretati<n 
is accepted by Wordsworth. EUicott and Alford 
so far modify the Patristic interpretation as t> 
explain the obstacle to be the restraining power 
of human law (rb Karixo") wielded by the 
Empire of Rome (t Korix'"') ■■> tl>< *■""* °t the 
Apostles, but now by the several governments 
of the civilized world. The explanation cf 
Theodoret is untenable on account of St. Paul's 
further words, " nntil he be taken out of the 
way," which are applied by him to the obctade- 
There is much to be said for the Patristic inter- 
pretation in its plainest acceptation. Hav 
should the idea of the Roman Empire being the 
obstacle to the revelation of .\nticbrist have 
originated ? There was nothing to lead the 
early Christian writers to such a beliefl Thtrr 
regarded the Roman Empire as idolatrous aij 
abominable, and would have been more disposed 
to consider it as the precursor of than as the ob- 
stacle to the Wicked One. Whatever the obstacle 
was, St. Paul says that he told the Thessalonians 
what it was. Those to whom he had preached 
knew; and every time that his Epistle w» 
publicly read (1 Thess. v. 27), questions vooM 
have been asked by those who did not kncTr. 
and thus the recollection must hare been kept 
up. It is very ditHcult to see whence tfa^ 
tradition could have arisen except from S:. 
Paul's own teaching. It may be asked, Wl.v 
then did he not express it in writing as well a< 
by word of mouth? St. Jerome's answer is 
sufficient : " If he had openly and unreservedlr 
said, 'Antichrist will not come unless tiir 
Roman Empire be first destroyed,' the infant 
Church would have been exposed in conseqnecc- 
to persecution " (Ad Algas. Qu. xi. vol. it. 
p. 209 ; Paris, 1706). Remigius gives the sar.i.- 
reason, " He spoke obscurely for fear a Romnn 
should perhaps read the E|)istle, and mLse a per- 
secution against him and the other Christians,: 

Digitized by 




f«r thej held that thef were to rale for ever in 
lie world " (Bib. Pair. Max. Tiii. 1018 ; nee 
Wordsworth, On the Apocalypte, p. 343). It 
vosld appear then that the obstacle was pro- 
iiiblj the Roman Empire, whose very existence 
Sfrred it an obatmction to the development of 
the iwxrrojrla : and on its being taken oat of 
ti» my, that ia, when the Byzantine Empire 
could 00 longer ezerciae a dominant sway in the 
West, ita place being taken by the novel 
creation of Charlemagne, which, owing to the 
vice of its origin, had not the restraining and 
withholding force of the old Empire, there did 
occur the " felling away ; " Zion the beloved 
dty became Sodom the bloody city — still Zion 
tbongh Sodom, still Sodom though Zion. 
.According to the riew given above, this would 
be the description of the Church in her present 
estate, and this will continue to be her estate 
until the time, times, and half time, during 
vhich the evil element ia allowed to remain 
vithia her, shall have come to their end.' 

3. What it the Apocalyptic Dabiilon't There 
ii not a doobt that by Babylon is figured Rome. 
The "seven mountains on which the woman 
sitteth " (Eev. xvii. 9), and the plain declara- 
tion, "the woman which thou sawest is that 
great city which reigneth " (i.e. in St. John's 
days) " over the kings of the earth " (Rev. xvii. 
16), are too strong evidence to be gainsaid. 
Tkere is no commentator of note, ancient or 
■aodem, Romanist or Protestant, who does not 
acknowledge so much. But irAai Rome is it 
that is thus figured? There are four chief 
cpinions: — (1) I^nae Pagan; (2) Rome Papal; 
(o) Borne having hereafter become infidel ; 
(4) Rome as a type of the world. That it is old 
Pagan Rome ii the Tiew ably contended for by 
Bossnet and held in general by the praeterist 
school of isterpreten. That it is Rome Papal 
vas held by the Protestants of the 16th century, 
and by those who preceded and have followed 
them in their line of interpretation. That it is 



' The latest view on this mysterious BubJect Is one 
pit loftb with great abntty by BUhop Hirold Brovne. 
^CBsideiiDg Antichrlatianiam to be an approaching out- 
tom «( the *■ volcanic Are of communistic anarchy, 
Joised in ckae afflnlty witb agnosticism and atheism, 
l<ii« Uddn, or scarcely hidden, beneath all govem- 
ncos, and waiting to subvert and submerge all," he 
SMlXs the PatilBtic ezpositlan of the to Kartx"' ■■ 'or 
"Uk tj»tm at law which had Its origin in the Roman 
Ec^abUc, which developed In the Boman Empire, and 
vUdi was Inally stamped, sealed, and codilled in the 
^riattu ftnpire, may well have been esteemed a power 
•tie to restrain lawleeenesa of life and even atheism In 
i^on;" but he regards the Roman Empire as not, 
e^o foraaDy, dlsRolved till 180S, and lasting in ita law- 
al-idiBg effecta to tfae present time, whereas " It would 
)»>o greet prodigy If thoae who witness the birth of the 
tnsHetb century after Christ were to see us bereft of 
tte power of social order and of Iron law tempered by 
^^^slKian faith, which has come down to us through 
''KOa centuries from Augustus, in whose reign the 
<^rt« was born, through Constaatine and Justinian and 
^^wies the Great, and of which even Napoleon coveted 
■^ iaherliaoce -. ' that which lettetb ' is apparently In 
^ process of being * taken out of the way,' and a spirit 
is Sowing np, silently gaining strength and ascendency, 
'I'iA has well-oigb every characteristic of St. Paul's 
Via of abi and of 8t. John's Antichrist" (Jkt AtUi- 
•'r**— « Samtm prtadud at the Reading CkurcA 
Cmpat.OA.i, 1B83). 

Rome having lapsed into infidelity is the view of 
some of the futurists. That it is Rome as the 
type of the world is suggested or maintained by 
Tichonius, Primasius, Albert the Great, and in 
our own days by Dr. Arnold (On the Interpreta- 
tion of Prophecy) and Dr. Newman (Tracts for 
the Times, Xo. 83). That it must be an un- 
faithful Church is argued by Bishop Words- 
worth, from the uniform use of the word wiptni 
(e.g, "Bow is the faithful city become a 
harlot 1" Is. i. 21) in Scripture (On the Apo- 
calypse, p. 376), and it is no less decisively 
maintained by Isaac Williams (7%« Apocalypse, 
p. 335). A close consideration of the language 
and import of St. John's prophecy appears, says 
Mr. Williams, to leave no room fbr doubt on 
this point. If this be so, the conclusion seems 
almost necessarily to follow that the Babylon of 
the Apocalypse is Papal Rome which gradually 
raised and enthroned herself on the corrupted 
Church represented by the First Beast. A very 
noticeable conclusion follows from hence, which 
has been little marked by many who have been 
most anxious to identify Babylon and Rome, 
viz., that it is impossible that the Pope can be 
the Antichrist, for Babylon the great, who is 
seated on the Beast, and the Antichrist are 
wholly distinct. After Babylon is fallen and 
destroyed (Rev. xviii.) the Antichrist is still 
found (Rev. xix.). Indeed there are but few 
features in the Papal system which recall the 
portrait of Antichrist as drawn by St. John, 
however close may be its resemblance to the 
Apocalyptic Babylon. 

4. What are tee to understand by the ttco Wit- 
nesses ? The usual interpretation given in the 
carl^ Church is that they are Enoch and Elijah, 
who are to appear in the days of Antichrist, 
and by him to be killed. St. Hilary of Poitiers 
substitutes Moses for Enoch ; Victorinus, Jere- 
miah. Joachim would suggest Moses and Elijah 
taken figuratively for some persons, or, perhaps, 
orders, actuated by their spirit. BulUnger, Bale, 
Chytraens, Parent, Mede, Vitringa, and New- 
ton understand by them the line of Antipapal 
remonstrants. Faze takes them to be Huss and 
Jerome of Prague ; Bossuet, the early Christian 
martyrs; Herder and Eiuhhom, the chief priests 
Ananus and Jesus slain by the Zealots ; Maurice, 
the priest Jeshua and the judge Zembbabel as 
representing Law and Sacrifice ; Tichonius and 
Bede among the more ancient writers. Bishops 
Andrewes and Wordsworth among the more 
modem, understand the two Testaments ; others 
the two Sacraments. Archdeacon Lee suggests 
that one of the witnesses symbolises the Church's 
outward organization and polity, the other her 
spiritual and evangelical teaching. Ziillig (Die 
Ofenbarung Johannis, 1834), Stern (Comtnentar 
aber die Offenbarung, 1854), Bleek ( Vorletungen 
eber die Apocalypse, 1 862), Reuss (L' Apocalypse, 
1878), and Professor Sanday (Authorship of the 
Fourth Gospel) return to the idea of Moses 
and Elijah. Bishop Carpenter (New Testament 
Commentary) regards them as "typical repre- 
sentatives of those who in the strength of God 
have through the long ages borne witness for 
Christ against all wrong and falsehood, against 
a world in arms, or a Church in arms, or against 
a nominal Christianity in danger of becoming ns 
corrupt and as cruel as heathenism." All that 
we are able to say is this. The time of their 

Digitized by 




witnessing is 1260 days, or s time, times, and 
half a time. This is the same period as that 
during which the iwomavia and the power 
of the Beast continue. They would seem there- 
fore to represent all those who in the midst of 
the faithless are found faithfnl throughout that 
time. Their being described as " candlesticks " 
would lead as to regard them perhaps as 
Churches. The place of their temporary death, 
"the great city, which spiritually is called 
Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was 
crucified," would appear to be Jerusalem, as 
typifying the corrupted Church. The Beast 
that kills them is not Antichrist, but the faith- 
less Church. 

5. The Number of the Beast. Nothing what- 
ever is known about it. No conjecture that has 
been made is worth mentioning on the ground 
■>t' its being likely even to approximate to the 
truth. The usual method of seeking the solution 
of the difficulty is to select the name of an 
individual and to count the numerical values of 
its constituent letters. The extravagant con- 
clusions which have been made to result from 
this system have naturally brought it into 
■lisrcpnte, but it is certain that it was much 
more usual, at the time that St. John wrote, to 
make calculations in this manner than most 
persons are now aware. On this principle 
Slercury or Ilnuth was invoked under the name 
of 1218, Jupiter under that of 717, the Sun 
of 608 or XH ; and our Lord's name, Jesus, in 
Greek letters forms 888. Mr. Elliott quotes an 
enigma from the Sibylline verses in some way 
expressing the Name of God, strikingly illustra- 
tive of the challenge pat forth by St. John, and 
perhaps farmed in part on its model : 

At Tpclf at irpwrou 8vo ypo/ifiar' «xov(nf fciumj. 
*H Aouri^ a rd Aotvel * Kai t'uriif a^va ri v^cre. 
Tov muT^ 8* ipiBfiM iicaTOtn&Sn cto-l Si^ hxrit 
Koi rpctf rpurdffKo^rv, (rvv -y' ^>rTB ' yvt^ ^ Tct tifU, 
OvK afun/TOt Srg tfcii}( wop* ^M^ 7« 011^^. 

^OiyU. Onicp. Ill; Paris, 1699. 

supposed by Mr. Clarke to be Btbs ffurlip. The 
conjecture made on this principle with respect 
to the number of the Beast, most worthy of 
mention, is one which dates as early as the time 
of Irenaeus, and has held its ground down to the 
time of Dean Alford and Bishop Wordsworth. 
Irenaeus suggests, though he does not adopt, 
the word Aaroros. Bishop Wordsworth 
(1860) thinks it possible, and Dean Alford 
(IStil) has "the strongest persuasion that no 
other can be foimd approaching so near to a 
complete solution." Of other names the chief 
favourities have been Teirav (Irenaeus), 
'Apyov/tt (Hippolytus), Aa^rcrii, 'Atrre- 
^0 1 (Tichonius), reviriipiKot (Rupertus), 
KaKOt 'OSiiyos, 'A\ii$iis Bkafftpos, 
IlaAai BaiTKayos, 'A/troi iSiK as 
(Arethas), ObKwtos (Grotius), Ma o/itris, 
'Air Off T arris, fi Aar lyrt Bao-iAcia 
(Clarke), DiocLES AcGirarns (Bossuet): Ewald 
constructs " the Roman Caesar " in Hebrew j 
Benary, Hitzig, Reuss, Renan, "the Caesar 
Nero in the same language. Any one who 
wishes to know the many attempts that have 
been made to solve the difficulty — attempts 
seldom even relieved by ingenuity — may consult 
Wolfios, Calmet, Clarke, Wrangham, and Thorn. 


Men hare looked for Antichrist among tkcir 
foes, and have tortured the name of the {enoi 
fixed upon into being of the value of 666 is 
Greek, Hebrew, or Latin. Hence Latinos under 
the Roman Emperors, Mahomet at the time cf 
the Saracenic successes, Luther at the Reforma- 
tion, Napoleon at the French Revolntioi. The 
name to be found is not that of Antichrist, bat 
the name of the Beast, which, as we hare 
argued, is not the same as Antichrist— a 
point in favour of Aarnvot. A difierent method 
of interpretation is adopted by Mr. Isaac 
Williams, Bishop Wordsworth, Mr. Msnrice, 
Lange (in Herzog's Scal-EncyklopSdie), and 
Bishop Carpenter (iV. T. Commentary). There 
is clearly a symbolical meaning in the anmberi 
used in the Apocalypse ; and thev wonid ei- 
plain the three sizes as a threefold declension 
from the holiness and perfection symbolised br 
the number seven. ' Similarly Dean Vaughia 
hazards a conjecture that the threefold reitera- 
tion of half twelve may be "the symbol of the 
world, as the full and perfect Twelve is of the 
Church " (2a<; Revelation of St. John). We irill 
add an ingenious suggestion by an anonymous 
writer, and will leave the subject in the sane 
darkness in which it is probably destined to 
remain: "At his first appearance," sayi this 
writer, " he will be bailed with acclamations ani 
hosannahs as the Redeemer of Israel, another 
Judas Maccabaeus : and cither from the inittaU 
of his name, or from the initial letter of some 
scriptural motto adopted by him, an arti£cial 
name will be farmed, a cipher of his real name. 
And that abbreviated name or cipher will be 
ostentatiously displayed as their badge, their 
watchword, their shibboleth, their 'Maccihi,' 
by all his adherents. This artificial name, this 
mark or symbol of the real name, will be eqiul 
by Gematria to 666 " (Jewish Missimary, p. 52, 

(C.) Jetcish and Mohammedan traHiMS n- 
specting Antichrist. The name given by the 

Jews to Antichrist U W^*pT{(l (Armillm") 
There are several Rabbinical books in which a 
circumstantial account is given of him, snch as 
the " Book of Zerubbabel," and others printed 
at Constantinople. Buxtorf gives so abridg- 
ment of their contents in his Lexicon, under the 
head " Armillus," and in the fiftieth chapter of 
his Synagoga Judaica (p. 717 ; cp. also relF. in 
Levy, Chald. WMerbuch, and Jastrow's Mmiic 
Diet. 8. n.). The name is derived from the 
Targum of Isaiah xi. 4, which gives " Bj the 
word of his month the wicked Armillos ihall 
die," for " with the breath of his lips shall he 
slay the wicked." There will, say the Jews, 
be ten signs connected with the coming of the 
Messiah : — 1. The appearance of three apostate 
kings who have fallen away from the fsitb, bot 
in the sight of men appear to be worshippers «' 
the true God. 2. A terrible heat of the sun- 
3. A dew of blood (Joel ii. 30). 4. A healing 

1 An argument for this explanation of the thiMSl^ 
may be drawn Irom the (act already mentioned, thai the 
name 'Iigtroik forms 888 (iij = 18, <r = MO, o = "• 
V = 400, ; = MO), whldi Is at the same distance >)"«' 
777 that 666 is below It. 

o Explained as equivalent to Bomulns or iirimw, 
or In other ways (see Dalmao, Dcr leidende u. i i**'- 
hende Mtniai, flSSSJ p. 14. 

Digitized by 





dev for the pioos. 5. A darkneas will be cut 
upon the sun (Joel ii. 31) for thirty days 
(b. HIT. 23). 6. God will give universal power 
lo the Romuis for nine montha, daring which 
UuM the Boman chieftain will afflict the 
Unelites ; at the end of the nine months God 
(ill ruse up the Messiah Ben-Joseph, that is, 
tiw Messiah of the tribe of Joseph, named 
Xehemish, who will defeat the Roman chieftain 
ud slay him. 7. Then there will arise Armillns, 
vhcm the Gentiles or Christians call Antichrist. 
He will be bom of a marble statue in one of the 
churches in Rome. He will go to the Romans 
ud will profes himself to be their Messiah and 
their God. At once the Romans will beliere in 
him and accept him for their king, and will 
\in him and cling to him. Having made the 
vhole world subject to him, he will say to the 
Idninieani (ie. Christians), " Bring me the law 
which I hare given you." They will bring 
it with their book of prayers ; and he will accept 
it ss his ova, and will exhort them to persevere 
in th«ir belief of him. Then he will send to 
Nehemiah, and command the Jewish Law to be 
breoght him, and proof to be given from it that 
he ii God. Nehemiah will go before him, 
parded by 30,000 warriors of the tribe of 
Ephrann, and will read, "I am the Lord thy 
God: tboa shalt have none other gods but Me. 
Armillns will say that there are no such words 
in the Lav, and will command the Jews to con- 
fess him to be God as the other nations had con- 
tested him. Bat Nehemiah will give orders to 
liii foUoven to seize and bind him. Then 
Armillns in rage and fury will gather all his 
people in a deep valley to fight with Israel, and 
10 that battle the Messiah Ben-Joseph will fall, 
and the Angels wUl bear away his body and 
carry him to the resting-place of the Patriarchs. 
Then the Jews will be cast out by all nations, 
and suffer afflictions such aa have not been from 
the beginning of the world, and the residue of 
them Til] fly into the desert, and will remain 
then forty uid five days, daring which time all 
the Israelites who are not worthy to see the 
KedemptioB shall die. 6. Then the great Angel 
Uichael will rise and blow three mighty blasts 
oS a tnimpet. At the first blast there shall 
appear the tme Messiah Ben-David and the 
prophet Elijah, and they will manifest them- 
Klns to the Jews in the desert, and all the 
Jevs Uironghoat the world shall hear the soond 
<•( the trmap, and those that have been carried 
uptive into Assyria shall be gathered together ; 
ud with great gladness they shall come to 
Jerualem. Then Armillns will raise a great 
inny of Christiaoa and lead them to Jerusalem 
>« omqaer the new king. But God shall say to 
Messiah, "Sit thoa on My right hand," and to 
the Isiielite*, " Stand still and see what God 
•ill work for you to-day." Then God will pour 
lovn sulphur and fire from heaven (Ezek. 
uiriii. 22), and the impious Armillns shall die, 
ud the impiouB Idnmaeans (i^. Christians), 
■ho hare destroyed the house of our God and 
iuTe led os away into captivity, shall perish in 
noery, and the Jews shall avenge themselves 
npoo them, as it is written: "The house of 
liaib shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a 
''me. and the house of Esau (i>. the Christians) 
^ itabble, and they shall kindle in them and 
dertnir them : there shall not be any remaining 

of the honse of Esan, for the Lord hath spoken 
it " (Obad. 18). 9. On the second blast of the 
trumpet the tombs shall be opened, and Messiah 
Ben-David shall raise Messiah Ben-Joseph from 
the dead. 10. The ten tribes shall be led to 
Paradise, and shall celebrate the wedding-feast 
of the Messiah. And the Messiah shall choose a 
bride amongst the fairest of the daughters of 
Israel, and children and children's children shall 
be bom to him, and then he shall die like other 
men, and his sons shall reign over Israel after 
him, as it is written, " He shall prolong his 
days " (Is. liii. 10), which Rambam explains to 
mean, " He shall live long, but he too shall die 
in great glory, and bis son shall reign in his 
stead, and his sons' sons in succession " (Buxtorf, 
Synagoga Judaioa, p. 717 ; Basil. 1661). 

The Mohammedan traditions are an adap- 
tation of Christian prophecy and Jewish legend 
without any originality or any beauty of their 
own. They, too, have their signs which are to 
precede the final consummation. They are 
divided into the greater and lesser signs. Of 
the greater signs the first is the rising of the 
sun from the West (cf. Matt. ixiv. 29). The 
next is the appearance of a Beast from the 
earth, sixty cubits high, bearing the staff of 
Moses and the seal of Solomon, with which he 
will inscribe the word " Believer " on the face 
of the faithful, and " Unbeliever " on all who 
have not accepted Islam (comp. Rev. liii.). The 
third sign is the capture of Constantinople; 
while the spoil of which is being divided, news 
will come of the appearance of Antichrist (Al 
Dajjal), and every man will return to his own 
home. Antichrist will be blind of one eye and 
deaf of one ear, and will have the name of 
Unbeliever written on his forehead (Rev. xiii.). 
It is be that the Jews call Messiah Ben-David, 
and say that he will come in the last times and 
reign over sea and land, and restore to them 
the kingdom. He will continue forty days, one 
of these days being equal to a year, another to 
a month, another to a week, the rest being days 
of ordinary length. He will devastate all other 
places, hue will not be allowed to enter Mecca 
and Medina, which will be guarded by Angels. 
Lastly, he will be killed by Jesus at the gate of 
Lud. For when news is received of the appear- 
ance of Antichrist, Jesus will come down to 
earth, alighting on the white tower at the east 
of Damascus, and will slay him : Jesus will 
then embrace the Mahometan religion, inarry a 
wife, and leave children after him, having 
reigned in perfect peace and security, after the 
death of Antichrist, for forty years (see 
Fococke, Porta Moris, p. 258, Oxon. 1655 ; and 
Sale, Koran, Preliminary Discourse). 

Literature. — On the subject of the Antichrist 
and of the Apocalyptic visions the following 
is a condensed list of the writers most deserving 
of attention : — Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. iv. 
p. 220; Paris, 1720: S. Jerome, Explan. m 
Daniel, r. 617 ; Veron. 1734. These two writeu 
are expounders of the Patristic view. Andreas, 
Comm. in Apoc., BibK ° Patr. Max. v. 590 ; 
Arethas, Comm. in Apoc., Bibl. Patr. Max. ix. 
741 ; Abbas Joachim (founder of the Antipapal 
school), Exp. Apoc., Venet. 1519; Wicklilfe, 
De Chritto et suo advenario Antichristo, Works, 
vol. ii. Lond. 1883; Ribera (founder of the 
later school of Futurists), Comm. in Apoc, 

Digitized by 




Salam. 1591 ; Alcasar (founder of the Prae- 
terist school), Veatigatio Arcani Sen$^ in 
Apoc., AntT. 1614; Pareus, Comm. in Apoc., 
Heidelb. 1618; Cornelius a Lapidc, Comm. in 
Apoc. AntT. 1627; Mede, Clavis Apocalypt., 
Cantab. 1632 ; Bossnet, Z'Apocalypse, avec 
nne Explication, (Eurres, vol. iii. Paris, 1819 ; 
Vitringa, Anaoisis Apocalyps., Amst. 1719; 
Daubnz, Comm. on Sev., Lond. 1720; Hug, 
Einteitung in die Schriften des Nmen Test., 
Stuttg. 1821 ; Bengel, ErklSrte Offenbarung 
yoAonnij, Stuttg. 1834; Herder, /oAannis Offen- 
barung, Werke, lii. Stuttg. 1827; Eichhorn, 
Comm. in Apoc., Getting. 1791 ; Ewald, Comm. 
in Apoc., Lips. 1828; Liicke, Vollstandige Ein- 
teitung in die Offenlxmtng und die Apocalypt. 
Literatur, Comm., iv., Bonn. 1834 ; Tracts for 
the Times, v. No. 83, Lond. 1839; Greswell, 
Exposition of the Parables, vol. i. Oxf. 1834; 
Moses Stuart, Comm. on the Apoc., Edinb. 1847 ; 
Wordsworth, On the Apocalypse, Lond. 1849, 
and Gk. Test., Lond. 1860; Elliott, Horae 
Apocalypticae, Lond. 1862; Clissold, Apoca- 
lyptical Interpretation (Swedcnborgian), Lond. 
1843; C. Maitland, Prophetic Interpretation, 
Lond. 1849 ; Williams, The Apocalypse, Lond. 
1852; S. R. Maitland, .4tt«ni/)t to elucidate the 
Prophecies concerning Antichrist, Lond. 1853; 
Alford, Greek Test. (Proleg. in Thess. et in 
Apoc.), Und. 1866; ElUcott, Comm. in Thcss., 
Lond. 1862 ; Dusterdieck, Handbuch iiber die 
Offenbarung Johannis, 1859 ; Renan, L' Anti- 
christ, Paris, 1873 ; Gebhardt, The Doctrine of 
the Apocalypse (Eng. tr., Edinb.), 1873 ; Reuss, 
V Apocalypse, 1878; Mason, Notes and Ex- 
cursus on the Interpretation of the Prophecy 
2 Thess. ii. 3-12, in EUicott's Xeta Testament 
Commentary, Lond. (without date) ; Carpenter, 
Notes and Excursus B. on the Revelation, in the 
same ; Alexander, Note on the Man of Sin, 
2 Thess. ii. 3, in the Speaker's Commentary, 
lond. 1881 ; Lee, The Revelation of St. John 
tlie Divine, in the same; Harold Browne, The 
Antichrist, Lond. 1883. See also article on 


this Dictionary, and AuTlCHEisr in the Dic- 
tionary of Christian Biography. [F. M.] 

ANTILIB'ANUS ChntXi^ayos ; Antili- 
banus). Only occurs in Judith i. 7. The eastern- 
most of the two parallel ranges which enclose 
Coele-Syria ; elsewhere (Josh. liii. 5) described 
as "all Lebanon, toward the sunrising." 
[Lebanos.] [W.] 

ANTIOCH CA»THix«'»)- !• In Stria. The 
capital of the Greek kings of Syria, and after- 
wards the residence of the Roman governors of 
the province which bore the same name. This 
metropolis was situated where the chain of 
Lebanon, running northwards, and the chain cf 
Amanus, running southwards from the Taurus, 
are brought to aa abrupt meeting. Here the 
Orontes breaks through the mountains; and 
Antiocb was placed at a bend of the river, 
partly on an island, partly on the level which 
forms the left bank, and partly on the steep 
and craggy ascent of Mount Silpius, which rose 
abruptly on the south. In the immediate